Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

More Evidence for Tabletop Fusion

Posted by Zonk on from the my-favorite-atomic-reaction dept.

heptapod writes "Researchers at Purdue University have statistically significant evidence that their tabletop fusion experiments were successful. Yiban Xu's experiment different from an earlier Oak Ridge experiment using a different and cheaper source of neutrons than Oak Ridge's pulse neutron generator. Surpassing break-even point still eludes the grasp of science."

3 of 244 comments (clear)

  1. break-even by rbanffy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Are they counting break-even as getting back more energy than needed to operate the ultrasound source ou they did count also the expense of producing the deuterated acetone and their expendable neutron source?

    It reminds me of when people say hydrogen burning cars will solve all emition problems because they produce water. They don't count the emissions that may be needed to produce, compress and ship the hydrogen to the nearest gas station.

    --
    http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
  2. break-even isn't always the only concern... by mcc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It reminds me of when people say hydrogen burning cars will solve all emition problems because they produce water. They don't count the emissions that may be needed to produce, compress and ship the hydrogen to the nearest gas station.

    The trick with this one is in the may.

    Maybe someday we'll find a technology that's clean-burning and energy-efficient to the point where oil is no longer the most cost-effective way to make energy. Say, maybe nuclear fusion. Or maybe oil will eventually get so expensive that other energy technologies start to look not so bad by comparison. But if we ever reach this point, because of the massive installed base and economies of scale of oil systems, especially the ones in cars, we and our economies will still be dependent on oil. So it won't matter that the newer technology is better, we'll keep using oil anyway. That's bad.

    Hydrogen may at first be ultimately dependent on "dirty" oil and coal to make the hydrogen in the first place, but because it decouples energy production from energy use, in the long run it gives us the capacity to move on to better energy sources. It's like a nicotine patch, okay, it technically doesn't address the addiction but the thing is eventually you get to take the nicotine patch off.

    On top of this, there are situations where if you can't eliminate emissions, moving the emissions is a desirable second best thing. Like, of course we're not making advances in our contribution to global CO2 levels if all these cars in the city burning oil are replaced with a bunch of cars burning hydrogen [PLUS] one huge smoke-belching oil-burning hydrogen plant. But, well, if the city is Los Angeles, and the city is basically one huge smog-trapping bowl surrounded by mountains, and the smoke-belching hydrogen plant is on the other side of the mountains, then never mind the global CO2 levels, you've still made Los Angeles a significantly more pleasant place to live.

    --
    Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
    1. Re:break-even isn't always the only concern... by The_Dougster · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The moment something better and cheaper* appears we'll jump in with both feet.

      There is no doubt about that. Noble goals of reducing emissions and all that are great, but the sad fact is that companies are basically controlled by very greedy individuals. If they can be convinced that the company can "break into a new market segment" and have "tremendous growth potential" then they will throw money at whatever it is without much hesitation.

      Actually, the oil industry is writing its own epitaph by failing to keep prices down. At the current price levels, oil is only just slightly cheaper than some alternate fuels. I've heard an estimate that if gasoline were $4 per gallon then hydrogen becomes competitive. If oil prices go up much more then suddenly some other fuel will become more attractive and the fuel wars will begin in earnest.

      The thing is, oil is a finite resource and its price can ultimately only increase. Alternative fuels are typically synthesized and their price will eventually drop as better technology improves their production process. Because the alternatives are created from raw materials which are essentially unlimited, their price is primarily dependant on the process used to synthesize them.

      The question is: when will the two lines on the graph intersect. They are already drawing near enough that we are seeing things like biodiesel companies emerge. There will always be a niche market for fossil fuels, but decoupling cars and trucks from it would tremendously reduce consumption.

      --
      Clickety Click ...