Slashdot Mirror


Nuclear Fusion Real Soon Now

Mr. A. Coward writes "Researchers at the National Ignition Facility are attempting to produce nuclear fusion. They'll focus 192 amplified lasers on a pellet of frozen hydrogen. 'NIF experiments will be the first to create fusion that gives off more energy than it takes in.' That will have to be quite a bit, since it will take 500 trillion watts to ignite the pellet in the first place. The facility has been plagued with delays, and so far only 4 of the 192 lasers have been completed. Researchers believe they will first achieve fusion sometime around 2014."

15 of 604 comments (clear)

  1. Real Soon Now... ? by KRYnosemg33 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Since when did Real Soon Now translate to 10yrs+ ... ?

  2. Break Even When? by expro · · Score: 3, Interesting

    At least cold fusion did not cost that much.

    So when was the break even point that they recover all the money that has been spent developing it?

  3. Re:stupid poster by Blethrow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, just using your numbers, it's about the same as running a standard lightbulb for an hour or so (100 watt hours).

  4. Re:Impossible! by cHiphead · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, once you've generated it and it puts out more than it received, you can recycle the process indefinitely. then its a matter of harnessing the output effeciently AND saving enough of the overage to eventually set a second chain of lasers firing, then in a few years the power output will grow exponentially and poof, free energy, mass space exploration, colonization, pure research civilization, galactic domination, intergalactic war with insect race, universal domination, peace and love and enlightenment, fin.

    its kinda like putting a million bucks in the bank and living off the interest, but also putting aside enough of the interest to increase your returns.

    --

    This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  5. Delayed, but progressing by NovaX · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I know a number of people working on NIF and hear of its progress every few months. It's been plagued with problems largely due to budgeting, as scandals have hit the lab and much of the money was funneled out. The LLNL management was largely replaced due to these activities and for a while the entire laboratory was on the brink of being shutdown.

    The four beams mentioned in the summary are really just a testbed. In the previous system, Nova, there was a smaller machine called Novet that had the same purpose. I always forget the newer machine's name, but this is standard practice versus a major delay. NIF is behind the original schedule, but that's due to problems (e.g. lens issues) and technical challenges always faced in such large R&D projects.

    From what I hear, things will be going pretty well from now on. Since this is an international effort (led by the US), other countries are building their own versions. France has similar system that was brought up last year with help from LLNL personnel and has allowed the lab to avoid many of the same pitfalls the French have faced.

    My main contribution to this thread is simply that NIF doesn't seem to be heading towards cancellation, like many government projects. The people behind it are extremely competent and far smarter than I am. The scandals are behind them and will be making steady progress. It's a really, really impressive effort.

    --

    "Open Source?" - Press any key to continue
  6. Yes... by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That's what my set of encyclopedias from 1968 say about the new "Stellarator" reactor they're building over at Stanford... "Within 10 or 20 years." But cynicism aside, there's no denying we've made great progress. From energy output/input ratios of .00001 to .3 and .4 since fusion research began.

    My thought is that if you want a way to get unbelievable energy intensities, use the big fusion reactor in the sky. Launch a gossamer thin sheet of aluminized mylar, spin it into a disk, and use a minimal amount of structure to form it into a parabolic mirror. If you use a 500 meter radius piece, that's a constant 740 megawatts focused on the pinhead-sized object of your choice. If you need more, just launch a bigger piece of aluminized mylar.

  7. Sim City 4 - very different design by iamr00t · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It is much more real - the availability of new power plants depends on combinations of:
    1) Mayor Rating
    2) Number of high-wealth residents
    3) Total power requirements
    4) Total number of high-tech industry
    5) Total energy demand

    Same is true for all other nice things you get in that game. However, it's impossible to do that in one city, it just stagnates. The interaction between bordering cities it crucial. You basicaly get a region where you develop tens of cities, and RCI demand in one city affects the neighbour. The "deals" thing is same as in SC 3000, i.e. they can sell each other services. It's neat to have one "garbage" city, because that's really the only thing you can not get rid of safely in this game - only two options - garbade dump or waste-to-energy plant, both affect neighbours. Of course you can still have garbage island :)

    Also, you can no longer build perfect city.

  8. These Fusion methods are an embarrassment... by NuWinter · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Billions of dollars have been squandered, decades wasted, careers devoted to a cause that even if successful would not be much better than nuclear fission, as radioactivity is generated in harmful amounts given the fuels used: Deuterium and Tritium. The only logical alternative is the Plasma Focus, a device that works with plasma, rather than attempting to control it via brute force techniques (i.e., intense magnetic fields or laser beams) and uses Hydrogen-Boron for fuel, and can generate electricity safely and directly without the need for power generation using steam and turbines.

    There has been much progress with the plasma focus fairly recently. Taken from the Focus Fusion website:

    In recently completed test experiments, the researchers were able to achieve temperatures that reached up to two billion degrees in some shots of the plasma focus device, well surpassing previous records of 520 million degrees achieved by the commonly used tokamak device. The much larger and more expensive tokamak has been cornerstone of the US fusion program for 25 years.

    The plasma focus functions in a fundamentally different way from other fusion devices. Tokamaks and most other fusion devices use powerful magnets to attempt to stabilize the plasma - the extremely hot, electrically conducting gas in which the fusion reactions occur. This task has been likened to lifting gelatin with rubber bands. Instead, the plasma focus takes advantage of the natural instabilities of the plasma, so that the plasma's own magnetic fields compress it and heat it. "The plasma focus works with the plasma, not against it," says Lerner.

    Perhaps someone with the foresight to see the best path for future power generation can fund this research fully and cease our pseudo problems concerning concerns about future energy sources. The solution is apparent.

  9. Re:this is interesting news by deglr6328 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's interesting that the NIF first full light is now pushed back to 2014. There's a small chance we may just beat them to ignigion.

    I work at the Omega Laser(still the most powerfull in the world at 60 Terawatts! ya!) and there is currently construction going on here to complete what is called Omega EP(extended performance) by ~2007. Omega EP will produce an astounding 2.6 PETAWATTS(million billion watts!!) of power for a around a picosecond (so about 2-3 Kilojoules per shot which is much less than the NIF's megajoule scale shots) making it, by far the worlds most powerfull laser when complete. The new laser will use what's called chirped pulse amplification to produce its incredibly high petawatt scale power.

    Using the current 60 beam 60 Terawatt (~30Kj) laser to compress a pellet of hydrogen fuel and then just before the moment of maximum inward compression and then stagnation; the EP petawatt beam will fire, producing an instant injection of Mev scale electrons directly into the center of the collapsing target and hopefully producing high fusion yeilds and perhaps even approaching ignition. The Gekko XII laser in Japan with its 500 terawatt scale CPA lser has validated this scheme, which is called "fast ignition", reporting that with the CPA laser used at maximum compression with their 12 beam 40 terrawat laser they've achieve an increase in neutron output(fusion yield) by 1 to 2 orders of magnitude...Can't wait till we can fire ours up!

    --
    - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
  10. Re:Why are we doing things the hard way? by rsborg · · Score: 3, Interesting
    If all the money that's been poured into fusion research so far had been poured into making those "cheap" solar arrays they keep telling us are "just around the corner" then we'd all have roofs made of the stuff that would make us energy self-sufficient and we'd even be driving electric cars that were powered by the sun.

    Perhaps all this "enviro-clean" stuff is just a boondoggle? I mean, what do you get when you've pushed the limits of phyisics to get you a powerful power source? Let's see:

    • General scientific advancment, which gives other possible uses, instead of just "clean energy"
    • Possibility for fast, reliable interplanetary space travel now that you have a powerplant? This is also a way to get at the vast resources that exist on our solar system.
    • Weapons... now here's the biggie. Sure, we can destroy the world 10x over using standard fission-fusion-fission warheads, but what if we could do it for real cheap, and get orbital lasers, etc.... I think this is the big reason the research is moving here, sad to say.
    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  11. Re:this is interesting news by deglr6328 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Oops I misspoke, I meant to say the Omega laser is actually the most ENERGETIC UV laser in the world at ~30Kilojoules/shot, Not the most powerfull, as there are a few other chirped pulse lasers with higher powers out there but not higher energies(most can only do a few hundred J per shot though this is still enough to do direct laser induced nuclear reactions).

    --
    - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
  12. PetaWATTS or PetaFLOPS? by wisebabo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm glad that progress is being made but I have to ask:

    How good are (computer) simulations at modeling this? I mean the NIF and presumably you are going to spend billions to essentially run experiments. I assume this means that simulations of the physics are not good enough to predict what is the best design. So, what's the problem? Is there a fundamental lack of knowledge (quantum/relativistic effects/high energy densities) at these regimes or are your equations good but you just don't have the computing power to solve them? Because we might see PetaFLOP computers before we see PetaWATT lasers!

    Also do you know if Magnetic confinement schemes also have simulation problems?

    (BTW I met the exec. dir. of the Max Planck inst. in Plasma phys. while on the TGV last year, he seemed quite optimistic that magnetic confinement was going to be producing results "real soon now";)

  13. Re:this is interesting news by deglr6328 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Essentially that's true, I suppose. NOVA was around 100 Terawatts per shot (I've heard it was capable of 100 Kilojoules per shot but I suspect it was actually less). NOVA only had 10 beams though and this ended up creating huge problems. When a pellet was imploded on NOVA the beam/beam instabilities and nonuniformity of the irradiation on target caused very large hydrodynamic instabilities as it imploded (Rayleigh-Taylor instability mostly) which spoiled the fusion reaction before it could really start.

    The Omega laser with its 60 beams produces much higher irradiation uniformity and even though it's lower power than NOVA(which was decomissioned in '99) it holds the record for neutron production in a shot at something like 5X10^13 neutrons, indicating a much 'cleaner' convergence and fusion burn. There were several lasers at LLNL before the NOVA laser with various names like Janus, Argus and Shiva, which all used the fundamental frequency of Nd:glass lasers at 1064 nanometers(infrared) and the great contribution in the early '80s to ICF laser fusion by the Omega guys was the idea to convert this IR to its third harmonic at ~351 nanometers in the UV. This greatly increased laser absorption efficiency on target and consequently increased target compression pressures/temperatures accordingly. Allmost all high power Nd:glass lasers use this technique today.

    --
    - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
  14. Blue Sky Research by turgid · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Scientific research does not in general have to be a precursor to an engineering development with a view to making financial gains. By pursuing all avenues of fusion research, whether by plasmas, inertial confinement (lasers), or even "cold fusion", we gain an increased understanding of the workings of nature. By approaching the problem from all angles, we often make new and surprising dicoveries that can lead to new theories, or further confirmation of existing ones.

    Unfortunately, politicians get in the way of scientific research, and in the last 25 years in particular here in the UK, blue-sky research has been cut in preference to that which looks promising from a commercial point of view. The accountants rule. Unfortunately, this reduces science to mere "refinement of engineering" at the expense of radical new and exciting discoveries and knowledge; and they wonder why no one wants to be a scientist any more.

  15. Re:What was that joke. by d_strand · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You're basically right but there's one more factor that comes into play when we're talking about pollution: Distribution of polluters.

    Even if we have to have powerplants to create our hydrogen fuel, it would be much better to have a bunch of such plants in each country than to have millions of polluting cars in each country. It's much easier to make sure the factories are as clean as possible than to make sure each car doesn't pollute.

    General rule in environmental issues: the less distributed the sources of pollution are, the better.