200
submitted 13 hours ago by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/science@mander.xyz
top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 20 points 10 hours ago

While neat, this is not self-sustaining


it's taking more energy to power it than you're getting out of it. (You can build a fusion device on your garage if you're so inclined, though obviously this is much neater than that!)

One viewpoint is that we'll never get clean energy from these devices, not because they won't work, but because you get a lot of neutrons out of these devices. And what do we do with neutrons? We either bash them into lead and heat stuff up (boring and not a lot of energy), or we use them to breed fissile material, which is a lot more energetically favorable. So basically, the economically sound thing to do is to use your fusion reactor to power your relatively conventional fission reactor. Which is still way better than fossil fuels IMHO, so that's something.

[-] DaTingGoBrrr@lemm.ee 1 points 1 hour ago

Helion has an interesting take on fusion reactors that generate power using electro magnetism and Copenhagen Atomics are trying to create Thorium reactors. I hope they will work better than the boiling they use in tocamac reactors

[-] zurohki@aussie.zone 4 points 6 hours ago

It seems like it's probably too late.

Even if we crack fusion power today, I can't see it being deployed cheaply enough and quickly enough to compete with solar/wind+batteries. By the time we could get production fusion plants up and ready to feed power into the grid, it'd be 2050 and nobody would be interested in buying electricity from it.

[-] monogram@feddit.nl 1 points 30 minutes ago

With what infrastructure are we even going to use all this electricity?

[-] Quadhammer@lemmy.world 4 points 6 hours ago

What I would like fusion to do is power space ships

[-] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 36 points 11 hours ago

That is one technology that I don't care if China steals secrets to make it happen faster.

[-] pennomi@lemmy.world 41 points 11 hours ago

No need!

The data gathered by EAST will support the development of other reactors, both in China and internationally. China is part of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) program, which involves dozens of countries, including the U.S., U.K. Japan, South Korea and Russia.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 18 points 10 hours ago

If we were a smarter society, we’d end our stupid cold war with them and cooperate.

[-] blackluster117@sh.itjust.works 15 points 10 hours ago

If they were a more humane society, we likely would.

[-] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 16 points 10 hours ago

More humane like Nazi-America, or more humane like Warcrimes-Russia? Description unclear, please clarify.

[-] thefartographer@lemm.ee 14 points 10 hours ago

More humane like the best of us wish to be and the majority of us never will be

[-] guy@piefed.social 3 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

More humane as in respecting human rights I suppose

[-] xnx@slrpnk.net 0 points 10 hours ago

Yeah more humane like Israel… America has been installing dictators all around the world for decades what are you talking about? You think America cares about humanity? You cant even birth a child without a $10,000+ bill.

America cares about moneyyyyy and nothing more

[-] Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 9 points 10 hours ago

im pretty sure almost unilaterally, every country would like the solution to near infinite energy regardless. its extremely vital if as a species, ever want to start a colony outside of earth.

the only people against it would be those in the pocket of other forms of energy monetary wise.

[-] Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee 6 points 10 hours ago

Post-scarcity society def scares capitalists.

[-] hmonkey@lemy.lol 42 points 12 hours ago

Tony Stark was able to build this in a cave!

[-] DaMonsterKnees@lemmy.world 20 points 12 hours ago
[-] Rhaedas@fedia.io 11 points 10 hours ago

We're not Tony Stark, sir.

[-] thefartographer@lemm.ee 7 points 10 hours ago

Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

[-] Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee 2 points 10 hours ago

Yeah, but Hawk could ride those pipes way better.

[-] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 5 points 9 hours ago

Can't wait for my Trumper boss to bring this up at work again as "Did you hear China secretly replaced the sun?"

[-] Empricorn@feddit.nl 2 points 8 hours ago

That's fucked up. I don't even know my boss's politics, (as it should be). Do you have an HR department? This is a huge liability for your company...

[-] evujumenuk@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

IIUC the end goal, for any fusion reactor, is to heat up water and drive a steam turbine.

Imagine you could drive a steam turbine at zero cost. What happens if just keeping that turbine running costs more in upkeep than e.g. solar panels do overall?

Is there really much of an economic case for infinite energy on demand (and that is if fusion can be made to work in not just the base load case) if we have infinite energy at home already?

[-] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 8 points 9 hours ago

Even if not a single residential property gets hooked up to a fusion generator, there will still be an economic case for fusion, especially as you move away from the equator. Industrial applications require an enormous amount of energy, and with solar power having a hard limit on the amount of energy you can get from a square meter, you'd have to have square miles of panels and batteries to keep one plant going.

this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2025
200 points (96.3% liked)

Science

3291 readers
523 users here now

General discussions about "science" itself

Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:

https://lemmy.ml/c/science

https://beehaw.org/c/science

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS