China's "artificial sun"-------ot
Close
Login to Your Account
Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    western washington state
    Posts
    3,431
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2093
    Likes (Received)
    3281

    Default China's "artificial sun"-------ot

    China's tokamak has been operational since 2006

    it recently birthed plasma of 100 million degrees C

    YouTube


    China's 'artificial sun' reaches 100 million degrees Celsius marking milestone for nuclear fusion - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails aaa.jpg  

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Kansas
    Posts
    231
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    56
    Likes (Received)
    86

    Default

    PV=nRT says what? Wonder how long it takes them to ramp up to that and how do they control the P?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Kansas
    Posts
    231
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    56
    Likes (Received)
    86

    Default

    Ok so a 360tn reactor goes long way and the n has to be stupid small, but I bet the real story is the the supporting equipment. I have toured a 10Mw fission reactor and it was pretty unimpressive even with low thermal loading.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New Jersey
    Posts
    68
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    43
    Likes (Received)
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aejgx6 View Post
    PV=nRT says what? Wonder how long it takes them to ramp up to that and how do they control the P?
    Most experimental fusion reactors do 1-5 shots a day, but the biggest factor is cooling time for everything. Plasma facing components and electromagnets in particular.

    Also, P is actually very low, there's not a whole lot of fuel in the reactor, and everything starts at fairly low vacuum. I'm not sure what EAST runs off the top of my head, but probably in the low double digit MW range.

    EAST has set some pretty important records, the Chinese are putting serious effort into it.

  5. Likes JHOLLAND1 liked this post
  6. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Tennessee
    Posts
    454
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    234
    Likes (Received)
    349

    Default

    As said, very very little n, and the 3.5 Tesla field helps (a lot)

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Kansas
    Posts
    231
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    56
    Likes (Received)
    86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rewt View Post
    As said, very very little n, and the 3.5 Tesla field helps (a lot)
    forgive me I studied chem..
    Does the magnetic containment reduce the effect P on the vessel? Can you base a design around that, and how would that apply to a critical failure? Say you lose vacuum and super heat some fly shit left on a seal?

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,277
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3156
    Likes (Received)
    3335

    Default

    Currently being built in southern France with collaboration from 35 nations including China, ITER is set to be the first experimental fusion device to produce net energy, producing 10 times more energy than the power required to run it, according to the project website.

    If successful electric cars will be practical.

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Country
    CANADA
    State/Province
    British Columbia
    Posts
    153
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    27
    Likes (Received)
    102

    Default

    The ABC News article, like much of the media reporting, shows the ignorance of science and more hype than any realistic information. This is a piety, as the science behind plasma confining, heating and fusion is certainly exciting, but any usage of fusion as a source of energy is still many years in the future...if ever. The Tokamak type fusion systems experiments have been conducted since the 50s with dozens of facilities built (to the tune of many billions). Some interesting results were obtained and a lot of experience gained - mostly in other fields (superconducting magnets, lasers, RF heating, etc) that served the main experiments. However all the system use a huge amount of power to produce a very short lived fusion. We are still very far away from a system that will generate equal or more power than used to keep the fusion going.

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    East Yorkshire UK
    Posts
    327
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    765
    Likes (Received)
    267

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganbuck View Post
    Currently being built in southern France with collaboration from 35 nations including China, ITER is set to be the first experimental fusion device to produce net energy, producing 10 times more energy than the power required to run it, according to the project website.

    If successful electric cars will be practical.
    I think they were all intended to produce more power than they consumed, the fact that they all have so far failed to do so, and have cost an absolute fortune to build is an indication of what a blind alley nuclear fusion is. If all the fusion research money had gone into renewables such as wind, solar and tidal, we would have no need for ANY expensive nuclear stations.

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Washington
    Posts
    2,439
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    950
    Likes (Received)
    990

    Default

    Probably the problem with renewables funding is they can't be weaponized.

    michiganbuck, you got a link to that website?

  12. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,277
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3156
    Likes (Received)
    3335

    Default

    Had the web site a time ago ..let me look for it..

    Every energy is a give and take. it took so long to make all the coal and when it is gone, it is gone. Same with Gas, natural gas and fire wood.

    Plants and trees make oxygen so with a solar panel taking sun that small bit of place for a plant to grow is lost. Same with side walks roads buildings and the like all take up space.

    I don’t know what is the giveaway is for nuclear energy, space for all the hot stuff and some water that must be off use for a thousand years perhaps.

    Or what for this new sun energy…

    No matter, likely we will blow up the planet having a stupid war before we run out of things.

    Found It:
    What is ITER? .....The energy project in France.

    ITER's First Plasma is scheduled for December 2025

    likely Russia does not/will not like losing top dog position in selling energy.

    Yes likely the world would be better off if we all still lived in a Tipi.

  13. Likes DavidScott liked this post
  14. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    10,083
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    58
    Likes (Received)
    5660

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganbuck View Post

    If successful electric cars will be practical.

  15. Likes DrHook, TeachMePlease liked this post
  16. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    10,083
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    58
    Likes (Received)
    5660

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aejgx6 View Post
    forgive me I studied chem..
    Does the magnetic containment reduce the effect P on the vessel? Can you base a design around that, and how would that apply to a critical failure? Say you lose vacuum and super heat some fly shit left on a seal?
    Yes.
    Because the working fluid is a plasma a magnetic field can be used to contain it rather than a physical bottle.
    Thus the P can be much higher.

  17. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    10,083
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    58
    Likes (Received)
    5660

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidScott View Post
    Probably the problem with renewables funding is they can't be weaponized.

    michiganbuck, you got a link to that website?
    Yep.
    Our nuclear designs are developed around making nuclear fuel for bombs.
    There are much safer and smaller systems, and have been for decades, but the don’t make weapons grade waste.

  18. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,277
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3156
    Likes (Received)
    3335

    Default

    QT: [If successful electric cars will be practical.]

    If it (ITER) makes 10% more energy than it uses then there might be energy for a lower price the fossil fuel so then making electric better/good/OK?

    but don't hold your breathe because many things that seem free/good are not.

    And it may cost so much to make or maintain that a profit or savings may never be made.
    Last edited by michiganbuck; 04-16-2019 at 11:37 AM.

  19. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New Jersey
    Posts
    68
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    43
    Likes (Received)
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hermetic View Post
    I think they were all intended to produce more power than they consumed
    TFTR was the last magnetic confinement reactor built with the expectation to reach break even (outside of mostly specious commercial attempts). Huge amounts of knowledge were gained about plasma stability that pushed research towards inertial confinement (the NIF facility at Lawrence Livermore was I believe planned to reach break even, but now they believe it's off by a factor of three or so). That technology is highly relevant to weapons (it's primarily used to study reactions
    to optimize fusion bombs) and has the budget to show for it. ITER is planned to hit something like 20% of break even (which is a huge stride in its own right).

    the fact that they all have so far failed to do so, and have cost an absolute fortune to build is an indication of what a blind alley nuclear fusion is.]
    More powerful superconducting magnets will hopefully shrink the size and related capital expenditures in the future, but as far as investments go there actually has not been a whole lot in fusion, and it's a whole lot harder than drilling and waiting for stuff to come up. $25B over more than three decades from six large countries and a conglomerate of most of the highest GDP countries behind the first six -- and that money puts to shame the amount that has been spent over the years.

    If all the fusion research money had gone into renewables such as wind, solar and tidal, we would have no need for ANY expensive nuclear stations.
    Wind, solar, and tidal all have environmental trade offs that nuclear fusion would not require, and the real application of fusion is in building space ships for long term travel.

    I've been wondering if I should write a book on the history of fusion research (I'm not sure I'm really an expert, but I do work at a fusion research lab), as it seems there is far more misinformation in the public space than properly communicated scientific findings. But more interesting/rewarding work seems to get in the way...by the time I retire I hope we have fusion (I definitely fall on the young end around here).

  20. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,277
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3156
    Likes (Received)
    3335

    Default

    QT: [I've been wondering if I should write a book on the history of fusion research ]

    Perhaps it would be difficult to write such a book on a level low enough that I might understand.

    Wind and solar considering the maintenance and other factors are more costly than most people think.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •