Current State of Nuclear Fusion Power

  • Thread starter hotvette
  • Start date

BWV

418
307

phyzguy

Science Advisor
4,121
1,131
Electricity from nuclear fusion is widely available now at about $1 / watt from a 174 petawatt reactor that has been operating for decades.
You're about a factor of a billion short on both the power output and the time of operation.
 

BWV

418
307
You're about a factor of a billion short on both the power output and the time of operation.
Well, decades is not incorrect as I did not specify a quantity. I think the power output is correct (meaning I think I googled it correctly ;) ) measured as what is delivered to the planet annually
 

TeethWhitener

Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,322
709

Astronuc

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
18,524
1,636
 

phyzguy

Science Advisor
4,121
1,131
That's so far the most developed (excess) power generating fusion reactor, I guess.
How did you conclude that? Where is a report that it is generating power at all? All the report says is what it could do if it works.
 

russ_watters

Mentor
18,524
4,753
If you are further interested in the Lockheed Martin compact fusion reactor, you have to research on your own.

<< Post edited by a Mentor >>
 
Last edited by a moderator:

phyzguy

Science Advisor
4,121
1,131
If you are further interested in the Lockheed Martin compact fusion reactor, you have to research on your own.

<< Post edited by a Mentor >>
I have researched it, and I've concluded that it is "vaporware". There is no evidence that the concept works at all. The claim that they can run at a beta ratio of 1 is particularly suspect. If instead of looking at the "projections" of what the concept could do, you look at what they have actually achieved, you quickly conclude that they are nowhere close to any kind of viable fusion reactor.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If (...) you look at what they have actually achieved, you quickly conclude that they are nowhere close to any kind of viable fusion reactor.
I can neither confirm nor deny this, as currently the necessary amount of proof in favour or against is missing. We simply do not know.
 

BWV

418
307
I can neither confirm nor deny this, as currently the necessary amount of proof in favour or against is missing. We simply do not know.
The burden of proof is on the claim, not on disproving it. If there is not the necessary amount of proof in favor then they have nothing until they can demonstrate otherwise
 

Astronuc

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
18,524
1,636
The World Nuclear Association has a good summary of program, both past and current.
Nuclear Fusion Power

From the Wikipedia article on JET
The main source of heating in JET is provided by two systems, neutral beam injection and ion cyclotron resonance heating. The former uses small particle accelerators to shoot fuel atoms into the plasma, where collisions cause the atoms to ionize and become trapped with the rest of the fuel. These collisions deposit the kinetic energy of the accelerators into the plasma. Ion cyclotron resonance heating is essentially the plasma equivalent of a microwave oven, using radio waves to pump energy into the ions directly by matching their cyclotron frequency. JET was designed so it would initially be built with a few megawatts of both sources, and then later be expanded to as much of 25 MW of neutral beams and 15 MW of cyclotron heating.[36]

JET's power requirements during the plasma pulse are around 500 MW[37] with peak in excess of 1000 MW.[38] Because power draw from the main grid is limited to 575 MW, two large flywheel generators were constructed to provide this necessary power.[38] Each 775-ton flywheel can spin up to 225 rpm and store 3.75 GJ.[39] Each flywheel uses 8.8 MW to spin up and can generate 400 MW (briefly).
Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_European_Torus

A practical fusion system must have a self-sustaining fusion-based plasma, and a net electrical energy production, not just breakeven. We're not there yet.

A rather negative and pessimistic assessment from a Forbes contributor.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2017/04/12/contained-nuclear-fusion-on-earth-isnt-just-possible-its-been-done-repeatedly/#40bcaef84cfd
 

phyzguy

Science Advisor
4,121
1,131
The burden of proof is on the claim, not on disproving it. If there is not the necessary amount of proof in favor then they have nothing until they can demonstrate otherwise
Exactly. if I claim that I have a working warp drive, and take weekend trips to Alpha Centauri, do you believe me because there is no proof that I'm wrong?
 

berkeman

Mentor
54,964
5,192
Thread is closed temporarily for Moderation and cleanup...
 
Last edited:

berkeman

Mentor
54,964
5,192
After some cleanup, thread is re-opened.
 
The burden of proof is on the claim, not on disproving it. If there is not the necessary amount of proof in favor then they have nothing until they can demonstrate otherwise
You are absolutely right - from the scientific point of view. Especially, as it would be magnitudes too much work to disprove any claimed theory.

However, the case of the Lockheed Martin compact fusion reactor is difficult. These guys are most probably working under militarily classified conditions. I guess, they would like to prove their fusion theory, but they might not be allowed to do so.

Thus, I cannot take the Lockheed Martin compact fusion reactor as a proven theory. However, I do not like to badmouth it either. Especially for the reason, that usually any scientific project turns out to be more difficult during its realization and I do not want to deprive those half-military researchers their follow-up funding options (by guessing from a bad information basis).
 
Last edited:

russ_watters

Mentor
18,524
4,753
However, the case of the Lockheed Martin compact fusion reactor is difficult. These guys are most probably working under militarily classified conditions.
I doubt that. If it were part of a classified project, they wouldn't be making public announcements about it. Most such projects you only hear about after they are over.
 

Want to reply to this thread?

"Current State of Nuclear Fusion Power" You must log in or register to reply here.

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving
Top