Is there a peer-reviewed publication? I have spent about 40 years working in the field, and I have seen many "revolutionary" concepts come and go. They all look good in the beginning. We need it, and I wish them well, but the path to fusion energy is littered with the corpses of failed, new concepts.
True, he did not specifically say what the potential energy in/energy out ratio could be, but given that he pointed it out as a problem faced (and getting closer to being overcome) with fusion, I'm pretty sure that means the planned devices will put out more than they take in. It's only a 15 minute presentation, there's only so detailed you can get in that time.
it's called skunkworks because they're dealing with unproven technologies. they're still trying to prove it in the lab. if all goes well (huge if), they might get to prototype. but more likely, something will crop up that converts a simple approach into a massively complex approach. but, good on lockheed for investing in this kind of pure research.
This presentation (for brevity's sake, I guess), left out the Stellarator reactor principle. It's currently evaluated as a fusion solution with the Wendelstein 7-X project, and the design avoids relying on the plasma current generating magnetic fields, by having coils which directly produce the necessary fields. The snippets of the presented technology in this video sound similar to a Stellarator, so is it using a similar principle?
Stellerators are the future, but it will be a Tokamak in which break-even fusion is achieved. it might only produce a single watt, but then Stellerators will pick it up.
The first really viable alternative to conventional nuclear- and coal power energy generation.What an excellent suppliment to solar, wind- thermal- and wave motion alternatives.The eventual cutting out of ugly additional transmission lines will be a wonderful environmental bonus for generations to come.Go for it and support this innovative project to improve our world.
The confinement here does look an aweful lot like a polywell. The ignition seems to be different though, induction heating here vs. particle beam over at Bussard's.
thats a very simple practical thing to fix, but a extremely difficult political problem. If the US stopped buying and misusing the weapons Lockheed supplies, Skunkworks would be a great place to invest. even better if it was funded by everyone, but that's an even bigger political and economic problem ^-^
@@xymaryai8283 "Even better if it was funded by everyone" They can are are involved in the stock market. If "by everyone" you mean the state, the fact that there is tax dollars involved hinders progress. The market demands results. The problem is the state making it hard to fund venture projects. Good ideas don't need stolen wealth.
Philo Farnsworth invented compact fusion reactors that he described as Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Fusion. His devices were popularly called fusors. The Lockheed design is similar, electromagnets form a confinement field that is shaped by the grid that Farnsworth describes in his patents from the 1960s. Bombarded by electron guns, the deuterium gases form into plasma until conditions allow the disassociated particles to fuse. Lockheed has a high probability of success... and financing.
they built the most important part of it [which nobody was able to do before] - specific magnetic trap to control plasma. It's like building an engine. The car itself will follow later.
This may seem like a pretty broad analysis but I can almost see exactly how this will work. I know it will because my mind is gaining a tangible picture on a successful result.
You can place the uranium inside the reactor and convert it to plutonium. _Any_ nuclear reaction that releases a neutron can be used to breed plutonium.
what about the problem of breeding tritium? One of the key problems with fusion machines based on deuterium + tritium reaction is indeed that the wall surface to place lithium compounds to breed tritium is rather small, so bigger is better. Of course, no information is given by Lockheed Martin about the tritium self-sufficiency of such concept... We will see in 3 years from now the status of their research again :)
Wouldn't the surface area needed be proportional to some factor related to the minimum amount of tritium needed by the reaction ? (given that this is a smaller reactor than a tokamak, the size might not be a big issue)
What I want to know is how much could this be sped up with more funding and wider scientific effort? Could we cut that 10 year timeframe to 7 or 8 years?
Because talk is all it is at the moment. I'm totally rooting for Lockheed Martin, but they need to prove they can do it before everyone should get excited.
Surely they'd be fast neutrons doing the contaminating/activating? If I recall correctly, D-T neutrons are even harder spectrum than unmoderated neutrons from fission.
The only thing I really have to note is that there is VERY little information about this right now. Yes, if it were up to me, I would tear down everything related to Tokomak fusion and replace it will 100 different approaches for small modular fusion moonshots. The basis for this is that we have several groups doing this kind of thing, Trialpha, General Atomics, IEC, Focus Fusion. We can't say anything about this approach because there's no real design info here. It appears to be stealth.
Basically we are looking for a type of combustion to occur and be contained and controlled between the plasma and magnetic structures. All we need to do is look at how any combustion engine works any mimic the same movements with the use of pistons and gears to change placement of these materials when and where it is most likely to become unstable to regain the control needed to utilize the energy created.
You are right in every way, To understand that we are all brothers and sisters living on a tiny blue planet in a vast ocean of wonders. The choice is yours to make, you can let humanity continue to suffer, or you can see the truth. You can realize war, greed, and corruption are no way for a species to survive, they are not the ideas of the future for humanity. The planet needs to reconsider the ways we let our governments spend our money. For Earth and the future of humanity.
There's a fundamental difference between current nuclear (fission) technology and what Mr. Chase is proposing here (fusion). Fission is splitting apart an atom and creates nuclear waste, where fusion is the joining of two atoms and creates only (in this case) helium and a spare neutron.
He (I'm assuming you mean the video) says that the lithium to breed the tritium is plentiful, which is true. What he doesn't mention is that this breeding takes place in a specialized nuclear reactor and isn't easy. He didn't say anything about it being cheap to manufacture. Again, its not insurmountable but its definitely not cheap or easy.
Well, he discusses generating Tritium from Lithium, so they'll probably use Lithium in the reactor to regenerate some fuel, but more likely they'll use water, like in fission reactors, since it's such a big part of the whole process and is pretty good at slowing neutrons. In fission, it's typically the gammas and spent fuel radioactivity that are tough.
Very impressive sounding. And of course coming from Skunkworks adds quite a bit of legitimate weight to this. And to the person who mentioned about area 51 and having this already....we can only wish that could be true! Would be they already worked out the bugs,and are just selling it to the general populace now!
I think his point about not being part of a consortia is actually significant. Skunkworks at Lockheed is a very well funded group, so if they have something viable they can get almost limitless funds from their masters. They will be more agile with fewer committees and fewer meetings, they can just get on with the science.
My thoughts exactly. But he did give his blueprints to the wider community before he died, and I guess it is quite positive that more than one "team" is working at the same principles.
A working fusion reactor by 2017, 4 years from now, really? That would be an amazing achievement, huge! Up there with a working warp drive and a cure for old age. If Charles Chase is lying he should be held to account and not be allowed to pass responsibility onto someone else. You can’t go around promising the Earth and then hoping everyone forgets. He’s rubbishing the ITER project in France and that's quite outrageous, so he better deliver on his promise of a working fusion reactor in 4 years!
*coughs* i mean, we have fusion now... but it's just a less energy consuming science experiment, not a viable energy source... I'm hopeful, but as they say... fusion is just 10 years away... just 10 years away... just 10 yearssnnooorree... I'll give it a 70% chance we go green on fusion by 2027. in a non-commercial test reactor, not hooked up to the grid.
That wager was lost, though part of is because of a price spike in 1980. The price of copper throughout 2006 to 2012 was at any time except 2009 higher than at any year between 1982 and 2005 (corrected for inflation). The main problem though is that to mine the same amount of copper as in 1980, vastly more ore has to be processed today, meaning much larger investment in energy, mining area, environmental impact,... - similar to tar sands compared to Texan well oil.
I think the main problem we face is that we confuse money for mind power. Funding is not the answer. Just good old fashioned thinking would be ideal here. I think the missing component in this equation may be simpler than thought possible.
Well that's weird cuz when I click on the gear it shows me 720p, 480p and 360p. If I click on the empty space below 360, it does nothing. Does Google tailor the options to your internet speed?
What killed the electric car is us still being decades away from energy density even remotely close to chemical fuels, let alone negligible charging times. As for the conspiracy about oil being the driving force behind LMC chase after fusion (which they really gave very little away other than that they were working on it), the military is already interested in alternative fuels. Much of the Navy runs on nuclear power, not oil, and would give anything for an energy source that runs on seawater.
Dense plasma focus fusion is already ahead of tokamak and did it in a fraction of the time. Dense beta and dense plasma focus fusion are the way to do it. Either way, I'm against using anti-government to force research in any direction, which is what was done with the tokamak.
This is just ridiculous. If it is that easy, Lockeed should put a team of 100 people working on it and finish the project in one year. And then make billions in revenues. The guy running the project has one publication (an abstract of a conference), if he is a genius I would expect more scientific contributions from his side. The magnetic fields needed for confining a plasma are so huge, that the simple apparatus shown on this movie will never be able to produce.
There are several reasons why this isn't credible, but I'll just mention a couple. Even if they solved the confinement a heating problems in such a small device, they'd still need to develop the wall facing materials which prevented tritium retention and neutron activation. They would also need to develop the tritium breeding and heat exchange blanket, and in order to do so they'd need a strong 14 MeV neutron source, namely a burning plasma device. Then, nobody knows how a burning plasma, in which the heating source is mostly the alpha particles, will behave. Even if they were on the right track, four years isn't credible.
***** Concerning fusion research we have 60+ years of experience with thousands of people working hard on the problem. It's hard to find a concept that hasn't been tried by someone before with some level of success or failure. We're pretty sure about what people are capable of.
But still you don't know everything they are doing there. What was presented is just a piece of information they could reveal. 2017 is a very close date and Lockheed Martin is a serious company. There were too many embarrassments in the past for them to risk another one.
They said once something made of metal cannot fly :-) Science and imagination can create miracles. I would think they have something to go on, or they would not make this public.
Thanks for your input on the reality. Let them try to make it happen. We'll see if it can work. I'm still in the Integral Fast Reactor camp, which has the same beneficial characteristics already demonstrated...can't melt down, unlimited fuel, no waste, amenable to mass production, and can't be made into a bomb...even as GE and Hitachi are in preparation to build their two module, 1,200 MW, S-PRISM design commercially.
They do not seem to have solved the issue of how to capture the energy from the plasma and how to capture about 100% of the neutrons coming out of the reaction, which is needed to produce the tritium from lithium (he mentions that briefly at the beginning). Those are major issues - more problematic than magnetic fields. Also the radiation, mostly neutrons, from fusion destroy the materials of the reactor relatively fast. He should adress this or his 4-year plan is unrealistic.
Whoa, I need a LOT more detail on how this is supposed to work. I don't think he spent more than about 30 seconds explaining it... something about using RF radiation to heat a deuterium gas? That's great, but HOW? At what scale? What sort of containment is used? How is the heat energy harvested? What is the working temperature? Etc.??? Hm.. googling "skunkworks fusion"... this talk appears to be the first announcement of this project. Given the reputation of Skunkworks, this is VERY intriguing.
Do you mean this Focardi Rossi: psiram.com/en/index.php/Focardi-Rossi_Energy-Catalyzer ? He is nuts. And he talks about cold fusion (not usable for energy production), but Charles Chase talks about hot fusion (sound physik concept for energy production).
Eventually (if not already), big oil is going to be a threat to the stability of the military industrial complex and the government. Oil is only going to get more scarce and more expensive in the future. A conflict between the two is inevitable. It is going to be fascinating watching the two clash.
At the end of the presentation, out of sight, the face of Charles Chase turns blue, shows a wide, evil grin, grows a small French mustache with sinister eyes, and on that moment his thought is: I LIED !! All the other Lockheed personnel present start expressing a trollface.
The reality here, is not that they have cracked it.. more that they have cracked the biggest problem with the current approach. I really hope they get this done with zero government money.
I'd bet it was the same as a Tokamak - that's how you get the energy out . The neutrons are captured by a lithium blanket and deposit their energy as heat.
So I didn't catch the part about how you maintain this "high beta configuration" while extracting useful energy. You mention using RF induction to heat a plasma, I assume in a field-reversed configuration, how will this lead to scalable fusion? You don't actually show the configuration, all I can see is a strange purple picture beside the team. We have no way of knowing how your design differs from others, which leaves me skeptical, especially with the optimistic timeframe you're claiming...
Skunk Works is infamous for back-engineering advanced technology of time/space faring civilizations. This is an unnecessary baby step at great environmental cost, appeasing owners of trillion dollar oil fields and their petroleum infrastructure... not to mention placating Wall Street & Bankers. I listened to an old interview of an inventor last night discussing his rocket fueled by this same technology. The inventor was later shown a captured engine of the same principle, but more advanced.
You have a valid point, but innovation still needs money. Poor innovators can't do very much competing, can they? Plus in a market like this where there really aren't all too many products yet it's not so much about competition as it is about cooperation. In the cell phone markets there actually were cell phones that people could prefer. Not too many people are out there saying "Well, I prefer A's artificial fusion generator to B's. I find it's more worth the cost." So yeah, throw money at them.
You can find the PhD thesis of the 'Tom McGuire'-guy that he talks about if you Google 'Thomas McGuire Fusion'. PhD in aeronatical engineering. The reason Skunk Works is working on this initially is probably because they want to make fusion powered spaceships.
Engineer or not, most *people* aren't good public speakers. If you want to hear an exception, try Kirk Sorensen. He also happens to have a concept for modular reactors that's much less likely to be vapourware than anything involving fusion.
Paul Ehrlich was somewhat right saying that, though I would not say that this applies to mankind in general, but to that part of humanity that cannot deal properly with Jevons Paradox (which means that the more energy produced and the cheaper it is the more energy is used instead of conserved, at the expense of those who feel the impact of this. Nature. Poor people. etc)
Here it is: "Solution: A 100MW compact fusion reactor that runs on plentiful and cheap deuterium and tritium (isotopes of hydrogen)." Now who would support that?
there's a lot of things wrong with our decision, it's all base on who has the most control on energy now. i wouldn't think that theyll be happy with their bottom line be reduced.
After several decades in fusion research, and after looking seriously into several "alternative concepts (to the tokamak or stellerator)," I look at this naïve video with sympathy and tenderness. I can't agree more with Chase about the inconvenience of putting all the eggs in the Iter basket, although he clearly misunderstands its drawbacks (not MHD, but transport). The idea he presents here is a version of the old mirror programme, and is a dead end.
Robert Bussard said at his Google Tech Talk, not long before he passed away, that's he convinced the Russians gave the design to the Tokamak to make sure that no one ever succeeds at fusion.
Cool video, but frustratingly short on technical detail. He talks about magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) stability, but doesn't discuss turbulent energy transport at all. If MHD stability were all that mattered, we would have a tokamak-based fusion reactor decades ago! It's the turbulence that kills you. It wouldn't be appropriate to have these plasma physics details in a talk to a non-specialist audience, but it would be good if he ended his talk with a link to a paper with all the gory detail.
Well that was disappointing. After a 6hr wait I managed to queue it and could watch it in one go. So this sounds exactly like Murray Gell-Mann was proposing with his cleverly wound cube (creating a magnetic field that was most intense on the edges and least intense on the inside, forcing plasma oscillating back and forth through the device to have a greater chance of creating fusion events. He too was advocating D + T fusion. Hope someone can make that work, but I'm not holding my breath
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
Congrats on the success guys. Really. Way to go!
Is there a peer-reviewed publication? I have spent about 40 years working in the field, and I have seen many "revolutionary" concepts come and go. They all look good in the beginning. We need it, and I wish them well, but the path to fusion energy is littered with the corpses of failed, new concepts.
True, he did not specifically say what the potential energy in/energy out ratio could be, but given that he pointed it out as a problem faced (and getting closer to being overcome) with fusion, I'm pretty sure that means the planned devices will put out more than they take in. It's only a 15 minute presentation, there's only so detailed you can get in that time.
it's called skunkworks because they're dealing with unproven technologies. they're still trying to prove it in the lab. if all goes well (huge if), they might get to prototype. but more likely, something will crop up that converts a simple approach into a massively complex approach.
but, good on lockheed for investing in this kind of pure research.
This presentation (for brevity's sake, I guess), left out the Stellarator reactor principle. It's currently evaluated as a fusion solution with the Wendelstein 7-X project, and the design avoids relying on the plasma current generating magnetic fields, by having coils which directly produce the necessary fields. The snippets of the presented technology in this video sound similar to a Stellarator, so is it using a similar principle?
Stellerators are the future, but it will be a Tokamak in which break-even fusion is achieved. it might only produce a single watt, but then Stellerators will pick it up.
The first really viable alternative to conventional nuclear- and coal power energy generation.What an excellent suppliment to solar, wind- thermal- and wave motion alternatives.The eventual cutting out of ugly additional transmission lines will be a wonderful environmental bonus for generations to come.Go for it and support this innovative project to improve our world.
The confinement here does look an aweful lot like a polywell. The ignition seems to be different though, induction heating here vs. particle beam over at Bussard's.
Between this and the water-filtration system Skunkwerks is saving the Earth. Officially one of my favorite companies, outside those bad-ass jets too.
I wish Lockheed had a separate business from their military side, so that I wouldn't be ethically compromised to invest in them.
thats a very simple practical thing to fix, but a extremely difficult political problem. If the US stopped buying and misusing the weapons Lockheed supplies, Skunkworks would be a great place to invest.
even better if it was funded by everyone, but that's an even bigger political and economic problem ^-^
@@xymaryai8283 "Even better if it was funded by everyone"
They can are are involved in the stock market. If "by everyone" you mean the state, the fact that there is tax dollars involved hinders progress. The market demands results. The problem is the state making it hard to fund venture projects.
Good ideas don't need stolen wealth.
The catch is that this helps the poor and developing nations and the rich run the media, so they aren't very concerned about energy.
I am skeptical if they can pull this off, but if they can pull this off my hats off to them.
Skunk works is a national treasure.
Most of their work is unknown.
This is a major sideways movement that came from nowhere.
They will make it happen.
Philo Farnsworth invented compact fusion reactors that he described as Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Fusion.
His devices were popularly called fusors. The Lockheed design is similar, electromagnets form a confinement field that is shaped by the grid that Farnsworth describes in his patents from the 1960s. Bombarded by electron guns, the deuterium gases form into plasma until conditions allow the disassociated particles to fuse.
Lockheed has a high probability of success... and financing.
they built the most important part of it [which nobody was able to do before] - specific magnetic trap to control plasma. It's like building an engine. The car itself will follow later.
This may seem like a pretty broad analysis but I can almost see exactly how this will work. I know it will because my mind is gaining a tangible picture on a successful result.
tritum is an isotopye of hydrogen which is very plentiful in the environment and easy to to manufacture.
You can place the uranium inside the reactor and convert it to plutonium. _Any_ nuclear reaction that releases a neutron can be used to breed plutonium.
There isn't any Plutonium involved...it's a Tritium/Deuterium reaction.
what about the problem of breeding tritium? One of the key problems with fusion machines based on deuterium + tritium reaction is indeed that the wall surface to place lithium compounds to breed tritium is rather small, so bigger is better. Of course, no information is given by Lockheed Martin about the tritium self-sufficiency of such concept... We will see in 3 years from now the status of their research again :)
Wouldn't the surface area needed be proportional to some factor related to the minimum amount of tritium needed by the reaction ? (given that this is a smaller reactor than a tokamak, the size might not be a big issue)
What I want to know is how much could this be sped up with more funding and wider scientific effort? Could we cut that 10 year timeframe to 7 or 8 years?
Thermal neutron contamination is NOT "zero emission."
Because talk is all it is at the moment. I'm totally rooting for Lockheed Martin, but they need to prove they can do it before everyone should get excited.
Surely they'd be fast neutrons doing the contaminating/activating?
If I recall correctly, D-T neutrons are even harder spectrum than unmoderated neutrons from fission.
Got to admire the subtle irony of showing a photo of nuclear-free Wellington @ 13:12. Now that would be a marketing coup to get one installed there!
The only thing I really have to note is that there is VERY little information about this right now. Yes, if it were up to me, I would tear down everything related to Tokomak fusion and replace it will 100 different approaches for small modular fusion moonshots. The basis for this is that we have several groups doing this kind of thing, Trialpha, General Atomics, IEC, Focus Fusion.
We can't say anything about this approach because there's no real design info here. It appears to be stealth.
Basically we are looking for a type of combustion to occur and be contained and controlled between the plasma and magnetic structures. All we need to do is look at how any combustion engine works any mimic the same movements with the use of pistons and gears to change placement of these materials when and where it is most likely to become unstable to regain the control needed to utilize the energy created.
You are right in every way, To understand that we are all brothers and sisters living on a tiny blue planet in a vast ocean of wonders. The choice is yours to make, you can let humanity continue to suffer, or you can see the truth. You can realize war, greed, and corruption are no way for a species to survive, they are not the ideas of the future for humanity. The planet needs to reconsider the ways we let our governments spend our money.
For Earth and the future of humanity.
There's a fundamental difference between current nuclear (fission) technology and what Mr. Chase is proposing here (fusion). Fission is splitting apart an atom and creates nuclear waste, where fusion is the joining of two atoms and creates only (in this case) helium and a spare neutron.
He (I'm assuming you mean the video) says that the lithium to breed the tritium is plentiful, which is true. What he doesn't mention is that this breeding takes place in a specialized nuclear reactor and isn't easy. He didn't say anything about it being cheap to manufacture. Again, its not insurmountable but its definitely not cheap or easy.
Well, he discusses generating Tritium from Lithium, so they'll probably use Lithium in the reactor to regenerate some fuel, but more likely they'll use water, like in fission reactors, since it's such a big part of the whole process and is pretty good at slowing neutrons. In fission, it's typically the gammas and spent fuel radioactivity that are tough.
I need visulation of magnetic field of his stuff. He skipped the most important explanation; How magnetic field of cylinder works. BTW, it's awesome.
Streaming at 720p with no lag/disruptions what so ever.
woah, that's amazing! the system you have to do it must be amazing, I can only do 2160p 60fps on my passively cooled touchscreen radio device.
@@xymaryai8283 I can't even remember what I was commenting on, though it must've been of absolute importance for you to comment on it 8 years later.
Very impressive sounding. And of course coming from Skunkworks adds quite a bit of legitimate weight to this. And to the person who mentioned about area 51 and having this already....we can only wish that could be true! Would be they already worked out the bugs,and are just selling it to the general populace now!
Looks and sounds like an FRC reactor? Wish there were some more technical details.
I think his point about not being part of a consortia is actually significant. Skunkworks at Lockheed is a very well funded group, so if they have something viable they can get almost limitless funds from their masters. They will be more agile with fewer committees and fewer meetings, they can just get on with the science.
My thoughts exactly. But he did give his blueprints to the wider community before he died, and I guess it is quite positive that more than one "team" is working at the same principles.
Please, say, what will you do with neutron radiation, produced by fusion reaction?
would have liked to see questions asked at the end
Military industrial complex (Lockheed Martin) v. Big oil. I can't wait for that showdown. /popcorn
oh i wish, boy do i wish...
If we don't do this, there is something seriously wrong with us.
A working fusion reactor by 2017, 4 years from now, really? That would be an amazing achievement, huge! Up there with a working warp drive and a cure for old age. If Charles Chase is lying he should be held to account and not be allowed to pass responsibility onto someone else. You can’t go around promising the Earth and then hoping everyone forgets. He’s rubbishing the ITER project in France and that's quite outrageous, so he better deliver on his promise of a working fusion reactor in 4 years!
*coughs* i mean, we have fusion now... but it's just a less energy consuming science experiment, not a viable energy source... I'm hopeful, but as they say... fusion is just 10 years away... just 10 years away... just 10 yearssnnooorree...
I'll give it a 70% chance we go green on fusion by 2027. in a non-commercial test reactor, not hooked up to the grid.
where does he say that? at 12:12 the chart clearly shows that a working prototype is 5 years out...
Can we use something else like....thorium?
I'm wondering how Lockheed's system compares with Bussard's emc2 wiffleball system.
Sounds like they've used some ideas from Philo Farnsworth's Fusor which was developed in 1964. Back To The Future, indeed.
This guy is clearly really nervous. No need to be nervous, guy, you're presenting on something really cool.
That wager was lost, though part of is because of a price spike in 1980. The price of copper throughout 2006 to 2012 was at any time except 2009 higher than at any year between 1982 and 2005 (corrected for inflation). The main problem though is that to mine the same amount of copper as in 1980, vastly more ore has to be processed today, meaning much larger investment in energy, mining area, environmental impact,... - similar to tar sands compared to Texan well oil.
By the way, how much did you pay for your latest deuterium bottle? Was it cheap?
I think the main problem we face is that we confuse money for mind power. Funding is not the answer. Just good old fashioned thinking would be ideal here. I think the missing component in this equation may be simpler than thought possible.
Skunk works is very secret in its workings. they have developed gen 5 planes. you really think fusion is too hard for them?
Is this something we had to technology to do 50 years ago? What recent technological advances is just making this possible now?
Well that's weird cuz when I click on the gear it shows me 720p, 480p and 360p. If I click on the empty space below 360, it does nothing. Does Google tailor the options to your internet speed?
What killed the electric car is us still being decades away from energy density even remotely close to chemical fuels, let alone negligible charging times. As for the conspiracy about oil being the driving force behind LMC chase after fusion (which they really gave very little away other than that they were working on it), the military is already interested in alternative fuels. Much of the Navy runs on nuclear power, not oil, and would give anything for an energy source that runs on seawater.
Dense plasma focus fusion is already ahead of tokamak and did it in a fraction of the time. Dense beta and dense plasma focus fusion are the way to do it. Either way, I'm against using anti-government to force research in any direction, which is what was done with the tokamak.
This is just ridiculous. If it is that easy, Lockeed should put a team of 100 people working on it and finish the project in one year. And then make billions in revenues. The guy running the project has one publication (an abstract of a conference), if he is a genius I would expect more scientific contributions from his side. The magnetic fields needed for confining a plasma are so huge, that the simple apparatus shown on this movie will never be able to produce.
This should be open sourced if it is true. The earth is too important to be gambled on market ideology.
Maybe some rogue LM scientist will put the plans on the web so the NW Odor cannot stop
10.18 isn't that a positve feedback loop ?
Tritium is extremely rare, needs to be manufactured. Not insurmountable in theory but a bit of a bottleneck.
There are several reasons why this isn't credible, but I'll just mention a couple. Even if they solved the confinement a heating problems in such a small device, they'd still need to develop the wall facing materials which prevented tritium retention and neutron activation. They would also need to develop the tritium breeding and heat exchange blanket, and in order to do so they'd need a strong 14 MeV neutron source, namely a burning plasma device. Then, nobody knows how a burning plasma, in which the heating source is mostly the alpha particles, will behave. Even if they were on the right track, four years isn't credible.
*****
Concerning fusion research we have 60+ years of experience with thousands of people working hard on the problem. It's hard to find a concept that hasn't been tried by someone before with some level of success or failure. We're pretty sure about what people are capable of.
But still you don't know everything they are doing there. What was presented is just a piece of information they could reveal. 2017 is a very close date and Lockheed Martin is a serious company. There were too many embarrassments in the past for them to risk another one.
They said once something made of metal cannot fly :-) Science and imagination can create miracles. I would think they have something to go on, or they would not make this public.
Thanks for your input on the reality. Let them try to make it happen. We'll see if it can work. I'm still in the Integral Fast Reactor camp, which has the same beneficial characteristics already demonstrated...can't melt down, unlimited fuel, no waste, amenable to mass production, and can't be made into a bomb...even as GE and Hitachi are in preparation to build their two module, 1,200 MW, S-PRISM design commercially.
skunkworks sounds like a company that makes bongs.
seriously though. this is exciting stuff.
They do not seem to have solved the issue of how to capture the energy from the plasma and how to capture about 100% of the neutrons coming out of the reaction, which is needed to produce the tritium from lithium (he mentions that briefly at the beginning). Those are major issues - more problematic than magnetic fields. Also the radiation, mostly neutrons, from fusion destroy the materials of the reactor relatively fast. He should adress this or his 4-year plan is unrealistic.
Whoa, I need a LOT more detail on how this is supposed to work. I don't think he spent more than about 30 seconds explaining it... something about using RF radiation to heat a deuterium gas? That's great, but HOW? At what scale? What sort of containment is used? How is the heat energy harvested? What is the working temperature? Etc.???
Hm.. googling "skunkworks fusion"... this talk appears to be the first announcement of this project. Given the reputation of Skunkworks, this is VERY intriguing.
Wait till the Market hears about this !
Do you mean this Focardi Rossi: psiram.com/en/index.php/Focardi-Rossi_Energy-Catalyzer ?
He is nuts. And he talks about cold fusion (not usable for energy production), but Charles Chase talks about hot fusion (sound physik concept for energy production).
Until there's a reasonable prototype, this is foo-foo dust. I can't get the video to run, so I can't tell if they have one.
What are the technical hurdles?
Lockheed Martin should also hedge their bets by building a Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor. Check out "Thorium Remix 2011" on RUclips.
Cat Videos stream effortlessly in full HD and this can't even keep the stream going at 240. Sad Google, very very sad.
Eventually (if not already), big oil is going to be a threat to the stability of the military industrial complex and the government. Oil is only going to get more scarce and more expensive in the future. A conflict between the two is inevitable.
It is going to be fascinating watching the two clash.
At the end of the presentation, out of sight, the face of Charles Chase turns blue, shows a wide, evil grin, grows a small French mustache with sinister eyes, and on that moment his thought is: I LIED !!
All the other Lockheed personnel present start expressing a trollface.
The reality here, is not that they have cracked it.. more that they have cracked the biggest problem with the current approach.
I really hope they get this done with zero government money.
Nothing is completely zero emission, but this is probably the closest we've come to in a very long time.
How is this different than dense plasma focus fusion?
I'd bet it was the same as a Tokamak - that's how you get the energy out . The neutrons are captured by a lithium blanket and deposit their energy as heat.
So I didn't catch the part about how you maintain this "high beta configuration" while extracting useful energy. You mention using RF induction to heat a plasma, I assume in a field-reversed configuration, how will this lead to scalable fusion? You don't actually show the configuration, all I can see is a strange purple picture beside the team. We have no way of knowing how your design differs from others, which leaves me skeptical, especially with the optimistic timeframe you're claiming...
I almost went to work for this guy because of this video.
Skunk Works is infamous for back-engineering advanced technology of time/space faring civilizations. This is an unnecessary baby step at great environmental cost, appeasing owners of trillion dollar oil fields and their petroleum infrastructure... not to mention placating Wall Street & Bankers. I listened to an old interview of an inventor last night discussing his rocket fueled by this same technology. The inventor was later shown a captured engine of the same principle, but more advanced.
You have a valid point, but innovation still needs money. Poor innovators can't do very much competing, can they? Plus in a market like this where there really aren't all too many products yet it's not so much about competition as it is about cooperation.
In the cell phone markets there actually were cell phones that people could prefer.
Not too many people are out there saying "Well, I prefer A's artificial fusion generator to B's. I find it's more worth the cost."
So yeah, throw money at them.
You can find the PhD thesis of the 'Tom McGuire'-guy that he talks about if you Google 'Thomas McGuire Fusion'. PhD in aeronatical engineering.
The reason Skunk Works is working on this initially is probably because they want to make fusion powered spaceships.
Yes, he's nervous but he did a good job.
maybe it's just supposed to be snow in the winter?
thank you lockheed
Engineer or not, most *people* aren't good public speakers.
If you want to hear an exception, try Kirk Sorensen. He also happens to have a concept for modular reactors that's much less likely to be vapourware than anything involving fusion.
This is kind of a big deal... why isnt there more news on the subject?
But most winters there is snow there. Snow is white, too.
Paul Ehrlich was somewhat right saying that, though I would not say that this applies to mankind in general, but to that part of humanity that cannot deal properly with Jevons Paradox (which means that the more energy produced and the cheaper it is the more energy is used instead of conserved, at the expense of those who feel the impact of this. Nature. Poor people. etc)
We expand into space. The sky really is the limit.
Sounds like warp core minus the dylithium crystals.
Here it is:
"Solution: A 100MW compact fusion reactor that runs on plentiful and cheap deuterium and tritium (isotopes of hydrogen)."
Now who would support that?
Probably because there isn't a global need for it. I don't think he would lie when he said it would be plentiful and cheap to manufacture.
there's a lot of things wrong with our decision, it's all base on who has the most control on energy now. i wouldn't think that theyll be happy with their bottom line be reduced.
This could be exactly what we need to solve the energy crisis.
After several decades in fusion research, and after looking seriously into several "alternative concepts (to the tokamak or stellerator)," I look at this naïve video with sympathy and tenderness. I can't agree more with Chase about the inconvenience of putting all the eggs in the Iter basket, although he clearly misunderstands its drawbacks (not MHD, but transport). The idea he presents here is a version of the old mirror programme, and is a dead end.
Robert Bussard said at his Google Tech Talk, not long before he passed away, that's he convinced the Russians gave the design to the Tokamak to make sure that no one ever succeeds at fusion.
Is that because Russia is an oil producer?
Cool video, but frustratingly short on technical detail. He talks about magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) stability, but doesn't discuss turbulent energy transport at all. If MHD stability were all that mattered, we would have a tokamak-based fusion reactor decades ago! It's the turbulence that kills you.
It wouldn't be appropriate to have these plasma physics details in a talk to a non-specialist audience, but it would be good if he ended his talk with a link to a paper with all the gory detail.
Please tell me too if you get the answer.
I love the part where he says "we could get to Mars in a month" 06:44
Did he mention the rainbow unicorns that live there’ll Mars 😜
Just the tech we need to make hover carriers possible.
Well that was disappointing. After a 6hr wait I managed to queue it and could watch it in one go. So this sounds exactly like Murray Gell-Mann was proposing with his cleverly wound cube (creating a magnetic field that was most intense on the edges and least intense on the inside, forcing plasma oscillating back and forth through the device to have a greater chance of creating fusion events. He too was advocating D + T fusion. Hope someone can make that work, but I'm not holding my breath
True, if anyone can do it Lockheeds Skunk Works can.