638
submitted 10 months ago by throwaway389430@lemmy.cafe to c/news@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 263 points 10 months ago

Excluding all the ancillary services, including the lasers that maintained the plasma, which was the principle part of this latest test.

Factoring everything in, they're at about 15% return.

This is still very good for this stage, but the publications are grossly misleading.

[-] Pelicanen@sopuli.xyz 97 points 10 months ago

I want to add that experimental reactors used for scientific research might never become net energy positive and that would be fine. Their purpose isn't to generate profit, it's to learn more about the physics, so it will be more valuable for them to be adaptable than efficient.

However, that doesn't mean that you can't take a configuration that has been shown to have potential and make a reactor that is more efficient than adaptable and use that to generate power for the electrical grid.

Basically, they have two different purposes.

[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 49 points 10 months ago

Absolutely. Also, the fact that the reactor was only running for a short time plays a part. Usually there is a significant energy cost in starting and stopping, which is offset by running for a long time. However, these reactors are not designed for continued running.

It's all a process of development, and even though the article is perhaps a little sensationalist, they're making good progress.

[-] protist@mander.xyz 47 points 10 months ago

but the publications are grossly misleading.

I think you're only referencing the headline, the article itself clearly states what you said

load more comments (17 replies)
[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 22 points 10 months ago

The publications are not misleading, just these headlines.

load more comments (19 replies)
[-] Rubanski@lemm.ee 175 points 10 months ago

Fusion reactor SLAMS surprised scientists with it's INCREDIBLE output

[-] frunch@lemmy.world 52 points 10 months ago

You'll never believe what they do next!

[-] Ultragramps@lemmy.blahaj.zone 25 points 10 months ago

What happens in the reaction at the 69th microsecond will shock you!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] jaemo@sh.itjust.works 21 points 10 months ago

Scientists RIP stubborn atoms for bad faith energy negotiation policy.

[-] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 134 points 10 months ago

Firstly, the energy output falls far short of what would be needed for a commercial reactor, barely creating enough to heat a bath. Worse than that, the ratio is calculated using the lasers’ output, but to create that 2.1 megajoules of energy, the lasers draw 500 trillion watts, which is more power than the output of the entire US national grid. So these experiments break even in a very narrow sense of the term.

It's so refreshing to see an article at least mention the way these tests are measured are based on the energy just in the laser itself and not the total energy used.

[-] FBJimmy@lemmus.org 55 points 10 months ago

I agree it's good that the article is not hyping up the idea that the world will now definitely be saved by fusion and so we can all therefore go on consuming all the energy we want.

There are still some sloppy things about the article that disappoint me though...

  1. They seem to be implying that 500 TW is obviously much larger than 2.1 MJ... but without knowing how long the 500 TW is required for, this comparison is meaningless.

  2. They imply that using more power than available from the grid is infeasible, but it evidently isn't as they've done it multiple times - presumably by charging up local energy storage and releasing it quickly. Scaling this up is obviously a challenge though.

  3. The weird mix of metric prefixes (mega) and standard numbers (trillions) in a single sentence is a bit triggering - that might just be me though.

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 30 points 10 months ago

Still, from an acorn grows a massive tree.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world 54 points 10 months ago

At some point we'll be able to say: ...and thus, humanity created its first star.

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 34 points 10 months ago

...and accidentally incinerated its home world, as the supply dependant lunar colony could only look on in horror.

✨The End✨

[-] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 28 points 10 months ago

I know you're joking, but nuclear fusion is inherently safe because if it breaks there is no way to sustain a chain reaction. And is only creates mildly radioactive byproducts. So you could blow it up and it wouldn't seriously contaminate the area.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 19 points 10 months ago

Not only are the radioactive byproducts not that dangerous (everything is relative of course). But also they have incredibly short half lives so they go away long before the firefighters turned up.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SparrowRanjitScaur@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Nah, the Earth doesn't have enough mass to become a star. If it did, it would already be one.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] echodot@feddit.uk 28 points 10 months ago

When they do they should come up with some original quote.

"The power of the sun in the palm of my hand", something like that.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] blazera@kbin.social 32 points 10 months ago

We already got plenty of nuclear fusion output with no energy input on our part. But folks dont want solar panels

[-] Zorque@kbin.social 59 points 10 months ago

What is with peoples insistence that we only ever use one kind of power generation?

Wind, solar, fusion, fission, hydro, they all have their uses. Why limit yourself like some kind of console fanboy?

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Assman@sh.itjust.works 29 points 10 months ago

*minus the energy needed to make, maintain, and replace solar panels.

I support more solar installations, just calling out it isn't free power.

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago

As more solar is installed, the less power input we need to provide. There will be a point where all solar power required to make a solar panel will be produced by solar panels

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 29 points 10 months ago

Maybe one day we will produce a civilization capable of using technology as it comes out instead of one that decided to call it quits decades ago. Oh sure we got cellphones but we are still burning coal. Because nuclear is scary.

[-] Theharpyeagle@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I think nuclear energy is a great idea in theory, but I have absolutely zero trust in companies handling nuclear waste responsibly. It's not like they have a great track record.

That being said, pretty excited about this if it's as safe as they say.

load more comments (37 replies)
load more comments (47 replies)
[-] buzz86us@lemmy.world 22 points 10 months ago

Awesome put a solar farm next to a nuclear fusion plant

[-] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 10 months ago

I believe the general principal is giving such a device “seed energy” to get it started, then just feeding the power it produces back into itself. The only time you’d ever need that solar farm is to get it started.

You could also pump that energy into other fusion reactors to get “unlimited energy” so to speak.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] wabafee@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

We'll probably be able to harvest solar power from space then beam it to Earth in a practical way first, than nuclear fusion becomes practical.

[-] tryptaminev@feddit.de 78 points 10 months ago

There is a very efficient way to beam solar power from space. It is called light.

[-] aidan@lemmy.world 27 points 10 months ago

It's not efficient, a huge amount of it gets diffused or absorbed

[-] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago

It doesn't need to be efficient. Capture all the light that hits earth for 5 minutes and that's the world energy demand for a year.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (31 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2024
638 points (96.2% liked)

News

23541 readers
4365 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS