• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Lockheed claims they can build a small fusion reactor in 10 years.

Related to the topic, University of Washington researchers claim to have found a promising reactor design:

If the UW’s calculations are correct, a Dynomak reactor would cost a tenth of ITER and produce five times as much energy at an efficiency of 40 percent. that means that a one gigawatt Dynomak power plant would have a total cost of US$2.7 billion against the US$2.8 billion needed to build a coal plant

The UW team says that the current Dynomak is only ten percent of the size and power of a practical reactor, which years away in terms of development. However, they say that the test reactor has so far demonstrated its ability to sustain a plasma and they plan to increase the temperature and power output of the unit.

"Right now, this design has the greatest potential of producing economical fusion power of any current concept," says Jarboe.
Click to expand...

http://www.gizmag.com/dynomak-fusion-reactor-university-washington/34174/

Both this and the Lockheed designs are in the very early stages. It wouldn't be at all surprising if there are insurmountable challenges with each of these approaches. It's good that there are still fresh ideas that are getting people excited. One of them may just hit the jackpot.

Edit: hmmm, that Lockheed Martin link is now saying page not found. I wonder why they took it down?

Here's an article that goes into much more detail:

http://aviationweek.com/technology/skunk-works-reveals-compact-fusion-reactor-details
 
Just have to wait to see if the testing works out.
 
Axulus said:
Related to the topic, University of Washington researchers claim to have found a promising reactor design:

If the UW’s calculations are correct, a Dynomak reactor would cost a tenth of ITER and produce five times as much energy at an efficiency of 40 percent. that means that a one gigawatt Dynomak power plant would have a total cost of US$2.7 billion against the US$2.8 billion needed to build a coal plant

The UW team says that the current Dynomak is only ten percent of the size and power of a practical reactor, which years away in terms of development. However, they say that the test reactor has so far demonstrated its ability to sustain a plasma and they plan to increase the temperature and power output of the unit.

"Right now, this design has the greatest potential of producing economical fusion power of any current concept," says Jarboe.
Click to expand...

http://www.gizmag.com/dynomak-fusion-reactor-university-washington/34174/

Both this and the Lockheed designs are in the very early stages. It wouldn't be at all surprising if there are insurmountable challenges with each of these approaches. It's good that there are still fresh ideas that are getting people excited. One of them may just hit the jackpot.

Edit: hmmm, that Lockheed Martin link is now saying page not found. I wonder why they took it down?

Here's an article that goes into much more detail:

http://aviationweek.com/technology/skunk-works-reveals-compact-fusion-reactor-details
Click to expand...

This story is all over teh intarwebz; Lockheed Martin probably didn't so much take the site down as have it brought down by millions of people all trying to hit their server at the same time.

If they really have made a breakthrough on the scale suggested, then this is huge news; no wonder people are interested. That said, it is a huge leap forward if the reports I have seen are to be believed - which is usually an indication that the reports are not to be believed.

I hope they can do what the news reports suggest, on the time-scales being bandied about; but I am going to remain doubtful at least until some more details are available.
 
Axulus said:
Related to the topic, University of Washington researchers claim to have found a promising reactor design:

If the UW’s calculations are correct, a Dynomak reactor would cost a tenth of ITER and produce five times as much energy at an efficiency of 40 percent. that means that a one gigawatt Dynomak power plant would have a total cost of US$2.7 billion against the US$2.8 billion needed to build a coal plant

The UW team says that the current Dynomak is only ten percent of the size and power of a practical reactor, which years away in terms of development. However, they say that the test reactor has so far demonstrated its ability to sustain a plasma and they plan to increase the temperature and power output of the unit.

"Right now, this design has the greatest potential of producing economical fusion power of any current concept," says Jarboe.
Click to expand...

http://www.gizmag.com/dynomak-fusion-reactor-university-washington/34174/

Both this and the Lockheed designs are in the very early stages. It wouldn't be at all surprising if there are insurmountable challenges with each of these approaches. It's good that there are still fresh ideas that are getting people excited. One of them may just hit the jackpot.

Edit: hmmm, that Lockheed Martin link is now saying page not found. I wonder why they took it down?

Here's an article that goes into much more detail:

http://aviationweek.com/technology/skunk-works-reveals-compact-fusion-reactor-details
Click to expand...
The way I read that, it is a great advance over the efficiency of other designs but still far from producing more power than required to contain the plasma. A 40% efficiency would mean that 40KW of power is produced for every 100KW used to contain the plasma.

It is a great advance and I hope they can soon be able to reach over unity.
 
Sounds like marketing hype to me. If someone builds a fusion reactor of any kind that produces more energy than it consumes, it will be all over the news.
 
attachment.php


http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=1868
 
Gravitational confinement is an excellent method; all we need to do is collect about 2 million trillion trillion kilograms of hydrogen together about 150 million kilometres away, and then sit back and collect the energy as it pours past us.

A few of these could do that job:

index.php


Fusion power today.
 
Scientists Are Bashing Lockheed Martin's Nuclear Fusion 'Breakthrough'

While Zarnstorff remains optimistic, others are not ready to believe the hype.

Swadesh M. Mahajan, a thermonuclear plasma physicist at the University of Texas, told Mother Jones reporter James West that there were many reasons to be skeptical of the announcement. Specifically, "we know of no materials that would be able to handle anywhere near that amount of heat," for a device as small as Lockheed is proposing.

As of now, Lockheed's results are purely theoretical so it's hard to know whether they will work in reality, Rose Reed, an assistant professor of physics at Wayne State University and researcher at the Large Hadron Collider, told Mother Jones.

When asked if the concept of Lockheed's new design is in any way unique or novel, Zarnstorff told Business Insider that it was too early to tell.

While headlines touted Lockheed's results as a "breakthrough" that could "change the world forever," the corporation used no such language in their press release. However, it appears that we will have to wait at least a little while longer before any reactor Lockheed envisions enters the market.
Click to expand...

http://www.businessinsider.com/scientists-bash-lockheed-on-nuclear-fusion-2014-10#ixzz3GI2d1oRp
 
Illustration does not correspond to description in the article. In fact it does not correspond to anything even remotely working. Desctiption creates impression of Polywell, on the picture they have pretty much simple solenoid.

Also:
This crucial difference means that for the same size, the CFR generates more power than a tokamak by a factor of 10. This in turn means, for the same power output, the CFR can be 10 times smaller
Click to expand...
Fusion does not and can not scale like that.
I think these people don't know what they are doing.
 
barbos said:
Illustration does not correspond to description in the article. In fact it does not correspond to anything even remotely working. Desctiption creates impression of Polywell, on the picture they have pretty much simple solenoid.

Also:
This crucial difference means that for the same size, the CFR generates more power than a tokamak by a factor of 10. This in turn means, for the same power output, the CFR can be 10 times smaller
Click to expand...
Fusion does not and can not scale like that.
I think these people don't know what they are doing.
Click to expand...

Or the reporters don't know what they are talking about.

Or both.
 
bilby said:
Gravitational confinement is an excellent method; all we need to do is collect about 2 million trillion trillion kilograms of hydrogen together about 150 million kilometres away, and then sit back and collect the energy as it pours past us.

A few of these could do that job:

index.php


Fusion power today.
Click to expand...

Yep.

Working on a fusion reactor is good in that we learn new things trying to do it, but we already have a functional fusion reactor. Solar is available now and it doesn't burn more energy than it produces.
 
I was going to post a question about how solar scales up in size/power. So I will ask that now.
 
bilby said:
barbos said:
Illustration does not correspond to description in the article. In fact it does not correspond to anything even remotely working. Desctiption creates impression of Polywell, on the picture they have pretty much simple solenoid.

Also:
Fusion does not and can not scale like that.
I think these people don't know what they are doing.
Click to expand...

Or the reporters don't know what they are talking about.

Or both.
Click to expand...

Or stupid PR stunt.
Reminded NASA and their lake Mono aliens.
 
I'm not certain how you can call anything a breakthrough if it hasn't been tested.


Bayer announces major breakthrough in Ebola vaccine. Tests to determine if it actually works are expected to start in one year. :confused:
 
Axulus said:
Scientists Are Bashing Lockheed Martin's Nuclear Fusion 'Breakthrough'

While Zarnstorff remains optimistic, others are not ready to believe the hype.

Swadesh M. Mahajan, a thermonuclear plasma physicist at the University of Texas, told Mother Jones reporter James West that there were many reasons to be skeptical of the announcement. Specifically, "we know of no materials that would be able to handle anywhere near that amount of heat," for a device as small as Lockheed is proposing.

As of now, Lockheed's results are purely theoretical so it's hard to know whether they will work in reality, Rose Reed, an assistant professor of physics at Wayne State University and researcher at the Large Hadron Collider, told Mother Jones.

When asked if the concept of Lockheed's new design is in any way unique or novel, Zarnstorff told Business Insider that it was too early to tell.

While headlines touted Lockheed's results as a "breakthrough" that could "change the world forever," the corporation used no such language in their press release. However, it appears that we will have to wait at least a little while longer before any reactor Lockheed envisions enters the market.
Click to expand...

http://www.businessinsider.com/scientists-bash-lockheed-on-nuclear-fusion-2014-10#ixzz3GI2d1oRp
Click to expand...

It is a "breakthrough" in that they have a more efficient design but it is still only 40% efficient. That is a long way from over unity (>100%) . We can and have done it (H-bombs) but have not yet been able to control it. It is still a question if control and containment is attainable.

We also have fission bombs but we can control fission so have fission reactors on line producing power.
 
Last edited:
Underseer said:
Sounds like marketing hype to me. If someone builds a fusion reactor of any kind that produces more energy than it consumes, it will be all over the news.
Click to expand...

Yup, hype to attract either government or high-risk investor's money. The reference to "high beta concept" with "high beta" meaning high risk in the investment world gives the game away.

Sadly, this isn't publicity isn't related to any scientific or engineering breakthrough, it's just an appeal for money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom