Breakthrough in Nuclear Fusion Energy Explained
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 дек 2022
- For the first time in history, net energy has been released from a controlled nuclear fusion reaction on Earth. This was achieved by the National Ignition Facility on the 5th of December 2022 using Inertial Confinement Fusion. This video will show you how they did it and what it really means.
Animations courtesy of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory:
@LivermoreLab
Sources:
www.iop.org/sites/default/fil...
www.nature.com/articles/239139a0
• The Beamline to Ignition
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...
JB_Fusion/status/...
Thanks to the Fusion community on Reddit for the help!
r/Fusion
#fusion #energy #breakthrough 
Наука
Really well-made video. You made the science of all this sound interesting and more accessible. Normally a lot of people when discussing things just say opinions but here you actually supported what you were saying from actual research. Keep it up man!
Thanks for the kind words!
I think what Helion is doing is more promising. The NIF setup simply proves what we already knew - that fusion on earth is possible and that done correctly you can get a net gain in energy.
What this facility will never do is repeat this several times per second and sustain a chain reaction so we can actually use that net gain in any meaningful way. The ITER plant is in the same boat in my opinion and I think we should be starting backwards as Helion are doing and focusing on how to use the energy we gain
ITER is being designed in a way that they can swap out and test lots and lots of designs for heat transfer and fuel breeding.
There are a lot of unknowns within the engineering context. These systems all add to the overall knowledge.
I agree with both of you here, Helion is much more promising for energy generation than NIF (they are more focused on nuclear weapons testing I think), however ITER is still highly valuable for answering the research questions needed for commercial tokamaks
Great video - thank you for such an accessible breakdown of this!
Does this consider the energy required to produce the pellets and other apparatus that are needed?
And a electrical generating fusion power plant is still 20 years away,,,,,,and always will be. Thanks for this level headed video.
Glad you found it useful! Video on electricity generation in the works which I think you might find interesting! :D
@@ZirothTech Would absolutely love a video like that! Will you talk about project pacer? 100 pellets per second is really unnecessary, like you said the fuel pellet could be scaled in size. Energy production should definately focus on this instead of scaling the number of individual fusion reactions. That way, once the burnrate problem gets improved the reaction could sustain itself indefinately, so laser efficiency wouldnt even matter at that point.
The quip is more accurately _"Fusion power is 20 years away, and always will be."_
Another good quip is that _"The impossible is always one generation behind that thing's creation."_
Just made that one up, but looking at history it doesn't feel far off.
Fantastic video, great explanation!
Thank you for the video!
My pleasure!
Really like what you are doing. Please keep up the great work and please keep it honest. Thank you
So basically it took us like 60 years to achieve 1.5 Qsci now we need 10-20 times that for it to be economical….
It took us 150 years to get to space... like... we know stuff but we don't do it... a few make a lot of effort... if many made a little we would be far more advanced but we (humans) are not really much smarter than the next less intelligent species on this planet.
Great video! It is interesting to know that we do not need to be too optimistic yet.
I am fascinated by this bleeding edge stuff. I find you easy to listen to. I love these expensive toys, sadly I'm no longer involved with big budget projects and genius people. Keep up the good work. Also, did I mention you speak well 😎
finally somebody fully explained it. thanks for that
Great video. I was following the helion project as well. I suppose we are on the cusp of commercial fusion energy viability.
I have been doing a lot of research into them for a few months and am excited by what I see! I expect I will do a video about them when I think there is something unique I can add to the conversation!
Excellent job!!
Young man, your voice is perfect for media as is your appearance. You make understanding complicated science easy. God Bless you.
Glass lasers can only be fired infrequenly or they overheat and self- destruct. LANL's KrF (248nm) Aurora Fusion Laser reached breakeven in July 1991 - LANL's Laser Fusion funding evaporated exactly one month later.
This was quite well explained without losing to much detail and doing too much simplification. However, I don't think we will see fusion reactors based on this method, as it is really difficult to up-scale this specific setup, and getting a good efficiency. And I think, generating power is actually not even the original intention of the facility.
Agreed, was thinking the same as I was watching. Ziroth's point that this should drive more funding seems very cogent to me though.
It's not, the only point to this facility is creating fusion and getting a positive energy output.
A well made video. I had thought that the news of the NIF achievement might mean that we are just 19 years away from fusion power and will be so for the next 19 years. However I'm now convinced that we are 40 years away from commercial fusion power and will be so for the next 40 years. ITER and Helion notwithstanding.
Knew you'd on it to cover this!
Not much more than a miniature copy of the second stage of a thermonuclear weapon, but without any fission materials. Exactly what the lab was set up to study, to get around the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
Good explanation
What about direct energy conversion, would that be the most efficient way of getting the most power out of it?
There is one problem no one is talking about. Inercial confinement systems have a huge problem - heat removal. Although the idea of making steam makes sence, how exactly this is to be done - not yet known. Rather rapid pulsations from fusion reactions (the "explosions") will have a dramatic effect on the vessel, and an exact method of removing heat from such a process is still unclear. Rather sceptical despite modern lasers etc. This should be looked into!
So, nuclear fusion is finally only 29 years away.
No, the breakthrough means commercial nuclear fusion is only 15 years away and will always be 15 years away.
The lasers 2 Mj hit a target that released 3.5 Mj of energy. To do the test they have used 400 Mj of energy in total. We are 30 years from generating nuclear fusion energy...and always will be LOL
Great breakdown
Thank you!
Great explanation without the "eureka hype" thnx
Thanks for watching!
@@ZirothTech thanks for creating!
In essence, yall found a way to increase light waves. Incredible!
No...
Liked the clip. I am not a Physicist. But I have followed along and the information sounds remarkably similar to previous presentations describing the previous experiments. From the last set of experiments, I gather that there might have been a change in the target. The change might have been in terms of the Bethe notion of how thing might work. The carbon-carbon-cycle?
That was very educative. Thanks.
Glad it was helpful!
Basically this breakthrough is the most inefficient way possible
How much energy was used to power the lasers to cause the reaction is the question I have. I think more went in versus what we actually got in return.
400 times as much as was produced
They got only 1 % of the total that went in
I simply cannot see how this can be made to scale either in size, event cycle or heat collection. Boiling water with concomitant losses through turbines is a fairly crude energy capture process. This looks like a dead-end technology proving that fusion works - but we already knew that. I see no possible future route to a commercial application. It is time to wind this up as it is a money-furnace.
Can't wait to trade my fusion powered car for a horse!
"More energy was released by the reaction, than went into the fuel" is an impressive success, but not quite as conclusive as it sounds. I take it that the correctly measured energy of the fusion products was half as much higher than the energy supplied by the lasers causing the fusion.
But that's a long way from having a working reactor. Most of the energy is in the speed of the neutrons, and that's quite difficult to extract. In a water-moderated reactor, neutrons with a small fraction of the energy of this experiment interact with enough protons to make water into a very high pressure gas called "steam", which is nothing like the stuff we see in the kitchen. In a "Molten Salt" fission reactor, the fission products themselves heat the solvent they are dissolved in, very efficiently indeed. This energy is passed in stages by very hot fluids to the steam turbine stage.
The difficult part is to get the energy efficiently enough back to power those lasers
Great video but what exactly is the burn wave?
Thanks for the comment. The burn wave is the spreading of ignited (burning) fusion fuel from the centre of the fuel pellet outwards. It is called a burn wave as it is similar to how when you ignite gas, for example, the flame spreads across it like a wave. Hope this helps :D
@ZirothTech Okey thank but at what speed does the wave propagate. Can some fusion fuel escape the wave or how does some material not get fused?
@@zanpodlesnik4337 I am not actually sure on the exact speeds, but yes exactly, some of the fuel explodes out faster than the burn wave, so it doesn't get fused! Trying to design a pellet that allows more of the fuel to fuse is definitely a big priority.
@ZirothTech Aaa thank you very much for the clarification!
What is the type of energy released is it the kinetic energy in the neutrons or is it xrays
Kinetic energy, these are then caught by a blanket on the outside of the reactor and the kinetic energy is captured as heat in a cooling fluid. Hope that helps!
@@ZirothTech thank you
@@ZirothTech
Um, the US experiment plans to retain the heat for continued fusion and uses the magnetic field to turn the generator, not steam.
What the hell sort of plastic is that fuel pellet made of... It's resistance to hear is insane...
I am more intrested how are they going to EXTRACT the energy from this pebble.
I am working on another video with details about how electricity is generated from the reactions, as it was too much of a divergence from the main topic for this video
How does the red frequencies get bumped up to u.v??
How is that net energy that is release goin to be absorbed as stored energy for later use?
There would be a shielding blanket around the reactor walls that absorbs the neutrons, heating up and transferring the heat to a water to steam loop. They might be able to use liquid metal as the shield or shield cooling material enabling a higher temperature and efficiency in the electricity output. I think up to 55% is possible, but the liquid metal is a pain for corrosion so it's not a clear win
@@Canucklug why not mix the liquid metal with anti seize over the copper as the shielding blanket to absorb the heat and transfer the heat through connected copper water vapor chambers. Also aluminum or stainless steel fins can help regulate over heating around the shielding with fans 😂
@@xXBobbyXx86 😅
World's most expensive microwave 🤔
Based on the thumb nail I thought this was about some cool almost magical new wrench that I can buy for maybe 20 bucks?
They did not achieve fusion. They didn't even account for the energy of the power plant that was used to create the experiment. Truly suspect to leave that out. Hmm
They did achieve fusion. Humans have been achieving fusion since Rutherford and Oliphant in 1934. Even kids do it in their garage these days. They didn't achieve system break-even. If you watch the actual press conference you will see that they are very open about this - they make the clear distinction between the Q at the Hohlraum and the Q of the whole plant. It is the journalists that run away with the sensationalist part and gloss over or completely leave out the other details. Nothing suspect there. They were even particularly up-front about this primarily being a weapons research facility, and that energy generation research is just a tiny part of their work.
👌🏼
Don't fall for the hype. A working fusion reactor is still many years away. There's a huge difference between this small 'bench test' and a Gigawatt power plant. And there is the problem of the critical fuel component, Tritium, one of the rarest of elements. Only a few kilograms exist, reserved for such testing and development. The reactors used to produce Tritium supply are being shut in. No Tritium ... No Fusion.
If we ever have the possibility to make nuclear fussion energg, we might be getting closer to being a type 1 civilization.
In summary, it is safe to say that fusion energy is still 30 years away. The rule has not been broken. Note that even if you achieved the Q required, the technology still have to achieve economic viability. Solar & wind energy are matured green energy but they are not economical viable as they require too much land to supply all the energy we need. Even if you ignore the nuclear waste issue in fission technology, it is still too expensive compared to fossil fuel. Greenhouse effect from fossil fuel can be mitigate by carbon captured technology. Fossil fuel is expected to last at least till the end of this century. Until then, I don't see a future for fusion technology. Even if the require Q is achieved, it still has to compete economically with other forms of energy.
Except that our carbon capture technology is pathetic, and even if it wasn't nobody is really trying all too hard to get it done. Furthermore, there are vast areas of land that have no realistic value going on around there. The issue with Solar is that it would require serious cooperation between countries. For example, Chihuahuan desert has a shitton of land that nobody is using.
O
Each type of solution viability really depends on the economy. Before China entered the market, nobody thinks the solar solution is economically viable. China has her geopolitical issue. Solar heating solution in Sahara desert is obviously viable, but the Saudi is not pumping money into it apart from buying up the land. When oil is depleted in Middle East, they will build solar in the desert and sell the electricity across the Gibraltar strait to Europe. So each technology will has its chance when the economic makes sense. As for fusion, it is beyond the end of the line we can see for now.
@Valdimir Nobody is putting money into carbon capture because the leftist is using global warming as a reason to ditch fossil energy. They don't want a solution to global warming that would keep us on fossil. They are idealists who wants cheap, clean, and limitless energy. Just as they want a utopian society with unlimited resources.
@@peterwan9076 Yeah, the instant you brought in "the leftists" your opinion became irrelevant. This is a story of actual science. None of this shit relates in any way which political party runs 'Murica or whatever other tribal divide you have in your mind.
Elon offered massive rewards for people who come up with good carbon capture solutions, and yet, we are still not even close to being as good as just planting trees, and even planting as many trees as possible wouldn't solve our pollution issue. But I mean, you are clearly politically driven, so talking to you is a waste of my time. enjoy your life.
Wish more people where aknowledging this. This should be funded asap. Could bring world peace
20 more years 😂
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Nothing will bring world peace...
If this technology gets funded then there won’t be any reason to throw billions into useless wind and solar technology nobody can afford. What’s wrong with you?
Fusion has had massive funding for years. This result probably came to an expense of leaving other groundbreaking prospects for later (or never).
Yes it's an achievement but the gargantuan mechanism that does it is probably the most impractical way of generating *sustained* fusion you could think of. The NIF might be useful for something scientifically or in the weapons industry, however in no conceivable way is it even pointing towards a practical fusion energy generator. And I don't think it takes a PhD in plasma physics to see that.
The total Net Energy output for this Fusion Reaction is Still only ~1%....!
Efficiencies are too low. We need another thirty years.
3:05 For my American friends, 220 miles per second = 792,000 miles per hour
my brother in christ it was already in miles
@@40watt53 said _"my brother in christ it was already in miles"_
1) miles per second, which most Americans can't imagine. Miles per hour, however, is how Americans drive.
2) I'm happily atheist, so I'd appreciate leaving me out of your proselytizing.
3) to many a Southerner what you said is almost as bad as 'Bless your heart' which effectively translates to 'you're so stupid I bet you might drown in the rain' and seen as downright harassment. So if you're a Southerner too, feel free to store that sentiment where the dog cleans after eating something nasty.
@@LabGecko
1. id say after a number gets large enough in mph it starts to get unintuitive and mps takes over, how do i know this? i am american and miles per second IS more intuitive
2. yeah me too its just a phrase man
3. what
They made a tiny neutron star.
Hohlraum --- although Raum means room it's pronounced with an "au" just like in "house" and "mouse"
I knew I would get this wrong ahaha
So we can finally fly my mercury cells!
I really do not think ITER is going to get the funding people though it would have a decade ago. With ignition already happening in ICF reactors I feel like these reactor designs can make stronger cases for funding. If ITER is going to stay alive in the long run it will need to produce ignition in a few years to keep up interests.
What about thorium
No its not, the total amount of imput is way higher than the output, still got some way to go but great all the same.
is it me or this guy looks just like a real life woody from toy story
that means the heat produced can sustain the chain therefore there may not need external beam after ignited but yet energy needed for producing magnet will be required.
Once the first bit of fusion starts, there shouldn't be a need for more external energy during that reaction - however, every time there is a new fuel pellet the reaction starts over, so another laser beam is needed! Hope this helps :D
20% Efficiency? i This test it took 400x's the energy to make the laser. than the energy released.. probable not going to get much further but its a start
Seems more like con-fusion to me.
Hello! Star drive!
so everybody is just trying to find a new way to heat water at this point?
so 10 years
So Doc Ock in spiderman 2 was right...
we will be powering 10000 watt generators with double A's that'll last 10 years eventually.
A wonderful SCIENTIFIC achievement - Optical Breakeven - from LLNL/NIF but not a very useful result from the TECHNICAL perspective of the topic.
Using Nd:Glass lasers with so low conversion efficiencies for electrical energy into optical laser beam energy means you need a thermonuclear output enegy several hundred times higher. There is no other laser types with the suitable frequencies and power stability; the hope we had in the mid 1990s for Semiconductor very high power lasers has never realized.
Besides there are a huge number of other overwhelming optical, material, electrical, thermal, even mechanical* engineering issues that have to be solved to get a practical, affordable and profitable Inertial Fusion reactor.
There are not enough brainpower employed in these problem anywhere, and ICF funding is mostly provided by the military budget of the DoE, so the predominantly foreign (~2/3) High Energy Density Physics graduating from UoRochester, UCDavis, UCSD, UNevada-Reno are usually excluded from ICF R&D.
In the USA, ICF is predominantly a military-oriented program - to research, test, homologate, validate R&D for Thermonuclear and Directed Enegy Weapons - so to avoid traditional Nuclear Testing.
Profitable Energy generation is not a priority - results like this ignition are predominantly budgetary PR and PC propaganda for DoE's Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos and Sandia National Labs.
The bad thing about all this brouhaha is that material, financial and BRAINPOWER resources are diverted from better latter Generation (7th? - it was 5th in the mid 2000s) Nuclear FISSION Reactor Technology (including Thorium-232 one) to pursue this Rube Goldberg-like nonsense.
* My last job at ICF in UCSD, after getting a Ph.D. in HED Physics at UoR.
I got into HED/ICF/Plasmas because I wanted to build Fusion/Plasma propelled Interplanetary Spaceships and retire in Tethys (a moon of Saturn) ...
Yes these are great points. I definitely don't think NIF's main concern is fusion energy generation (I should have mentioned that in the video!) - However, this achievement is great for the fusion community as a whole I think :D Thanks for your comment!
@@ZirothTech
I am quite excited and jealous at the same time for not being part of this achievement.
In 1997, I was offered to be trained as an Control Room operator in the UoR/LLE Improved Omega Laser (it was expected that the 60-beam Improved Omega would achieve Ignition in Direct Drive mode by the early 2010s!), to be transferred to LLNL/NIF later.
In my Ph.D. arrogance, I decided against taking that job. As a foreigner, I was elegantly kicked out first from ICF and later of the USA a few years later, as many of my fellow (non-Russian) HED students from UoR.
I had many offers to work in DEWs from the USN/NRL and the USAF/ABL, plus SAIC (!!!), Sandia and LANL. But no matter what exceptional was my resume, not having a Green Card at least ruined my HED career.
What are your thoughts on developments in Chirped Pulse Amplification laser systems? There are 2 or 3 private fusion start-ups pursuing this as a means to achieve ICF. At least 2 of them are not in the US.
@@MattNolanCustom
I did my thesis experiments in the first CPA laser in the world! It was designed and built by Gerard Mourou (apparantly not a very nice Nobelist ... !) in the Tabletop Terawatt (T³) Laser Group, Lab of Laser Energetics, UoRochester.
Also I was the grad in charge of all the High-Vacuum Pumps for the Spatial Beam Filters of the T³ Laser.
All LLNL/NIF lasers are CPA driven. The problems are two:
* they are all Nd:Glass lasers with very poor conversion efficiency of electrical into optical energy (< 1%). The wasted energy is huge (~100 MJ) a d it overheats the Nd:Glass amplifier discs so much that the UoR/LLE Omega ICF Laser could not be fired more than 9 times (newer 60 beam configuration) to
14 times (old 24 beam configuration) daily.
* the Nd:Glass laser operates at 1054 nm (IR) wavelength. It MUST be converted to 527 nm (green) and then to 352 nm (UV) light passing the beams through KDP crystals. Unless you have a very patient, neat, crafty and dedicated Grad/postdoc (preferably a nice Chinese or Indian girl, instead of a n@sty Russian 508!) aligning the crystals, your conversion efficiency may drop very badly (I do not remember well - after 25+ years! -, but the T³ laser at it's best was ~60 % per pass.)*
So it us not what kind of amplification technique you use in your laser drivers. It is the wavelength - as SHORT as possible!! - and energy pulse stability what are the relevant factors for a suitable Laser-Plasma interaction with the fuel pellet (particularly in Direct Drive - no Hohlraum case - mode)
Nd:Glass lasers are OK for SCIENCE, but for a practical, profitable ICF reactor ... 💩!
In 1992, Jack Kelly - the chief designer of the LLNL/Shiva ICF reactor (the first ICF reactor ever built. It is shown in the 'Tron' movie from Disney) - was hopeful that by around 2010 the Semiconductor Diode Lasers may be built powerful and energetic enough (in the Gigajoule range) to operate in the proper wavelengths with electrical to optical energy conversion close to 90+ %! Unfortunately, this feat - that would be a really significant TECHNICAL breakthrough for Laser-driven ICF!!! - has not been realized.
* When (as a junior Grad) I was introducd to Dr. Craxton (a brilliant Brit theorist, who invented the KDP crystal IR to UV converter.) I was quite disgusted with him for some years. I told him that I got into Plasmas/ICF to develop Rocket Propulsion for Interplanetary Spaceships. Craxton implied it was a moronic hope, 'That is Science Fiction, not Science! Years later I shared a plane seat with him to a APS Plasma conference; he was a really nice guy then. I found that academic HED/ICF physicists are quite hostile to R&D for Space Propulsion & Power applications. Federal labs guys are pretty enthusiastic about Fusion rocketry in all its modes!! Unfortunately, I was born in the wrong country (and too much of a bachelor to marry for a Green Card ... ) to get the job I dreamed in LLNL/LANL/NRL 😥.
@@Tordogor thank you for all the details. I did read somewhere that some folks were looking at using laser diodes, but I don't recall now if that was actually happening or what was projected / hoped to be happening.
Brilliant Thank you much better than Bill Nye 😀
The lasers used are less efficient than the 1% which I had assumed. With modern lasers 'approaching 20% efficiency', let's assume that they're 16.7% efficient, for simple Maths. That would mean 1/6th of the input energy ends up as laser energy. So if they could be scaled up and were good enough to be used in that system, that would yield an overall energy conversion efficiency of ((1/6) x 1.5) = ¼, or 25% .
That estimate excludes the power lost by all of the ancillary equipment, such as the laser power supplies, which can never be 100% efficient, and will be peaking at maybe 90%. The magnetic fields have to be generated, presumably by superconducting magnets, whose coolants require quite a lot of energy to produce.
With today's technology, and using 'high efficiency' lasers, I would be surprised if the overall system efficiency bettered 20%.
So, what do you think? Do you agree that Fusion-derived electricity is about 10 to 20 years into our future?
Just out of interest, how much Tritium is available for use in these reactors each year? A few grams?
Yet, once again, China claimed the same thing, days later !
What about that it only excist 25kg of tritium on the planet?
Tritium can be made by irradiating lithium iirc. In theory once the reaction can be made efficient enough to be profitable, it can irradiate enough lithium to make it's own tritium. You just have to provide the deuterium and lithium, both of which are very common. (assuming I'm remembering this correctly)
@@cerebralm this isn't economically sound because you need a lot of energy for that process... ITER's "blanket" will try to generate some for it's own needs - but the concept is not even tested: From the ITER's original site: "the next step on the way to commercial fusion power, about 300g of tritium will be required per day to produce 800 MW of electrical power."
300g of tritium per day.... this alone is such a massive challenge.
So much effort for so exotic, unproven, not economical, and always 30 years in the future tech, yet fully working nuclear plants are closing (Germany) and so little effort for creation of better nuclear tech - like Thorium reactors...
@@LyubomirIko I agree, even current-gen fission would be such a huge step forward for humanity if it was funded properly. But there really IS a huge amount of political inertia against anything that would revolutionize energy. It's all suppressed, whether it's theoretical fringe over-unity physics, fusion, fission... hell, even the American alcohol prohibition was started in part to stop people making their own ethanol additives. The political/corruption problems are harder then the physics problems at this point.
They can use electricity directly
I don't see this being scalable at all, what is your opinion?
I definitely don't think the national ignition facility is scalable for useful energy production, and maybe even their reactor design would struggle to scale even at a modern plant - however I think inertial confinement fusion as a whole may have promise, and the findings from it are definitely going to be valuable for other more commercial scale systems!
I agree that this is a very important breakthrough but many more will be needed. We are still many years away from producing a commercially viable fusion power plant. Moreover, it won't necessarily be the Americans who build such a plant first. Keep an eye on the Chinese who excel at engineering. I'm putting my money on them.
I agree, this is a small part in the whole process. There are many great fusion projects that I keep seeing, definitely a lot of great work in China.
You are right, we are far from producing electricity from fusion, so I was wondering whats the point of making such a big fuzz about a laboratory result. The history of science is filled with situations where things worked great in a laboratory but were not feasible for large scale use or production.
Actually the company involved is talking an electric producing device 2024, per a 30min documentary with them saying.
They didn't though did they.
Sounds like you didn't watch the video haha
They did
monsterositylabs = E=mc(troll)
We need Elon and Jeff to invest💯
You're right... This is no big deal! The US is always trying to act better than everyone else smh
Lol, if you have any doubts about US research capabilities, just check where this platform was created, where you are bashing the USA.
Roblos core game real?!!1!1?//???
It's weird, I know, but I'm wondering if The Simpsons predicted this. 🤔 😄
They always do ahaha
Star Trek into Darkness!!!
Space age tech is coming to earth!
@@ZirothTech Scenes from Star Trek into Darkness were shot at the lawrence livermore national laboratory!
it takes zero energy to produce fusion. it takes two things 1. temperature and 2. a container that can maintain the temperature with a less than 5 percent loss of containment above critical temperature to undergo fusion. the fusion will increase the temperature as long as the energy does not go anywhere that is the minimum temperature to achieve fusion. the excess can be harnessed for power generation. designs are patent pending.
Why are we doing this energy fuel systems? This might be good for creating thrust for space crafts, but energy can be made free for all if we come out with better solar and wind promotions. I could have my house roof shingles made totally solar, and by doing such, plus have a few vortex wind power poles on my back yard, and I would be totally energy independent! If we would make our streets, roofs solar and place wind powered vortex poles on the side streets, we would have more than enough energy!
What we are doing with nuclear energy is cartoonishly crazy. Especially when we are messing about with atomic particles, which we don’t know all about. We don’t even know what they actually look like. The way we think stars work is just another theory. We scientist assume a lot. Sometimes something goes terribly wrong, and it changes the whole manner in which we look at reality.
Good luck making all the steel, nitrates (for fertilizer for food) and all the concrete we (apparently) need as a 21st Century Civilization with those solar panels on your shingles. Yes, homes can be quite self-sufficient if they are in the right climate, but humanity as a whole cannot.
@@MattNolanCustom I disagree, we have the ability to do the solar, wind energy project. Many are trying to create sun powered panels in out of space. So we have the means, but space is the wrong idea. This new atomic idea might just create really bad environmental outcomes. Another thing we need to do is realize that the larger our population grows the faster it will grow. We need to keep our population down. The more we leave this for later, the more serious of a problem it shall become, and the higher the unethical actions we will have to take. We are also not using geothermal energy to the fullest extent, in fact our geothermal technology is quite weak and not being use any where close to its fullest state.
@@samuelmiensinompe4902 the nub of this is that nuclear power provides around 10,000 more energy per fuel mass than anything else. It has the potential to be very resource lean. Solar, wind, battery storage are all very land and resource intensive, plus they and geothermal are geographically limited - they don't work everywhere, or all the time. We don't have the mining and refining infrastructure to support the whole world running on renewables, plus most of those resources are in politically unstable countries where the work force is highly exploited. Fission has major (though overblown and over-emotionalised) waste problems. Fusion much much less so. It would be unethical *not* to pursue trying to make fusion work. Ultimately, we will need a mix of energy sources. Diversity is strength. Solar, wind, tidal and geothermal will be part of that mix. My money is on fusion being a major player too. Before we get there, we need to do more with fission. Fusion makes fission a bridging technology rather than an end-game. That also makes it more appealing.
@@MattNolanCustom I think where we get our energy also has to do with the power of politics. Right now our food source would be so much ethical and environmental if it was plant based. But governments are still giving subsidies to the meat and dairy, not the agriculture industry.
@@samuelmiensinompe4902 well we can agree on the politics usually skewing what we should be doing for the best. Let's hope objectivity prevails eventually...
So a lot of PR stunts...why am I not surprised?
Hey investors this sounds too good to be true, so watch that you don't get scammed out of your money. Let's not forget what Elizabeth Holmes and Samuel Benjamin Bankman-Frieddid did with their investor’s money!
@7:54 (and also near the beginning) - will people making videos about Nuclear Fusion please stop using whatever this CGI computer game pseudo-machine footage is? It really doesn't help anybody's understanding, nor the video's credibility.
💽🎉🧵🚫🌡️🧧
This same process can be accomplished substituting lasers with low voltage high current arc energy. An engineer named Randy Mills is several steps ahead of LLN Lab. Randy uses a hot hydrogen plasma atmosphere in a reaction chamber and creates a sustained high current arc while introducing water vapor. The result is sustained over unity energy production at a much higher gain than LLN Lab. Check him out for more fantastic cutting edge physics. I love this stuff. The future of energy production is on the verge of a great disruptive change that will change the world and "Power" structure. Will this breakthrough be allowed to happen? BTW, it took 300 Mjoule of electrical energy to produce the 3Mjoule of laser output energy. They used the 3Mjoules to calculate their gain. The output was not overunity. But they are heading in the right direction. They needed funding for next year.
Wouldn’t be easier to freeze one or the other as the Deuterium and or the Tritium so they don’t fight each other? Think about that!🥵
lets say it this way : a fascinating toy for scientists, which should keep them busy for the next 50 years. and if they discover another toy in these 50 years, than this one was a dead born idea.
Why are you so anti science? This is a huge help. These people are working to improve our lives and you make this condescending comment about them, disgusting.
Hope I don't sound crazy which I am, but I being into all that ET stuff and them being so advanced I asked with psychic means what THEY use for nuclear fusion and I received a glimpse of an answer POLARITY from a dictionary. Maybe they polarize matter and antimatter and sequentially blend them, or perhaps they use alternating polarities of elements united or fuse by some sort of sophisticated MRNA STRANDS WHICH CARRY A CODED MESSAGE FOR ELEMENTS TO FUSE IN SOME SORT OF BIOFUSION REACTOR PROCESS. THE PROCESSES MUST BE RESTED AS AI IS INVOLVED AND THE EXPERTS IN SUCH FIELDS NOW THEORIZE THAT AI NEEDS TO REST OR IT FORGET CERTAIN PROCESSES. FUNNY CERTAIN OCCULT PHILOSOPHIES IN THE EAST STATE THAT SUN ITSELF ( A FUSION REACTOR) MUST SLEEP. IT IS CALLED PRALAYA!
A nice science experiment, but a gigantic waste of money. if all you want is plentiful CO2 free energy, there are many more methods that do the same work FAR Cheaper.
China's revival of Molten Salt reactors(invented in America) is a far more beneficial method.
A BS break through, nothing said about the cost of making energy pellets and the energy input to that process and I always wonder what are they going to do with 2million degrees of heat (or more) you only need 100 degrees to create steam and perhaps 300 degrees to create super steam even using oil as an expansion medium to drive the turbine to make the electricity doesn't need this amount of heat and claiming that it is sustainable meaning that it no longer needs huge energy inputs to maintain the plasma is just nonesence.
Fake. If this is true, the centre will explode immediately.
No such thing as free energy. Lololol
it aint free energy dude, burning coal isnt free energy but you still gain energy from the process
@@40watt53 shut up Carl
In a happy future movie, this would be where the us gave this technology to the world and sowed the seeds of utopia
It didn't.
Nope fake news, they only calculated the energy of the laser beam no the actuall MWh that went into the machiene, plenty of other physics chanels busted this long ago, you waaay late to the party, and this is not the first time this was achieved at all.