Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

pete_68 t1_j0ulqci wrote

I've been hearing fusion is "right around the corner" for most of my 54 years. I'd caution against being too certain that fusion is right around the corner. It isn't. The recent announcement is an advancement, but we're still AT LEAST 30 years away from feasible fusion, unless there's some really astounding breakthrough coming soon.

6

turbmanny t1_j0unv2b wrote

Totally agree. We lack materials, fuel (for tritium based concepts), a high enough gain factor and... A pilot plant with a competitive price 😅

3

nosmelc t1_j0up4pj wrote

I don't know. We seem to be making more progress now than in the past, so it might not be 30 years away. I predict Helion will be the first to get a working fusion power plant going in less than 10 years.

https://www.youtube.com/@HelionEnergy

2

pete_68 t1_j0urovg wrote

Boy, that doesn't sound familiar at all.

"Scientists Achieve Fusion Reaction By Firing an Electron Beam at Fuel" - New York Times, June 11, 1977

"Breakthrough in Nuclear Fusion Offers Hope for Power of Future" - New York Times, Nov 11, 1991

"Fusion proponents, he notes, also estimate that commercial applications of their work are at least 20 years off. And it will be 30 years beyond then before fusion power has significant impact." - Los Angeles Times, April 19, 1989

"Actually, fusion research has made remarkable progress in recent years. There is no longer any question of its scientific feasibility." - Scientific American, October 21, 1999.

Color me.... skeptical...

2

turbmanny t1_j0v89e9 wrote

Why Helion and not toroidal devices?

1

nosmelc t1_j0v9ta4 wrote

Helion's approach of getting electricity directly from the energy created by the fusion reaction seems intuitively to be the way to go. Other approaches rely on getting enough excess heat energy from the reaction to power steam turbines.

1

its_a_gibibyte t1_j0utyi1 wrote

We've been able to produce net positive fusion energy since 1952 with the Ivy Mike thermonuclear test. We've just never figured out how to harness it for anything other than blowing stuff up.

2

mcscrufferson t1_j0w14j8 wrote

Oil and gas will be used up within the next 40 years. Necessity is the mother of invention.

1

pete_68 t1_j0w4w6n wrote

40 years from now will only be 80+ years too late... And that assumes we won't come up with a way to squeeze out more. Or turn something else into oil. And we've got 350 years of coal left to dig up.

1

mcscrufferson t1_j0w8axo wrote

I’m not sure which model you’re looking at but the one I use for reference shows us running out of coal in the year 2117. Also, we’re more likely to leave wells half full than “squeeze out more.” The return on investment makes drilling non-profitable about half way through a well so we actually probably have less time than the model predicts.

1

pete_68 t1_j0w9gry wrote

There's this, and this.

Others have completely different numbers. This one from Stanford says 90 years.

Either way, it's more than enough.

1