So, just wanted to suggest reacting to some Plainly Difficult nuclear incident videos. He does some really incredible research and a fantastic job of dumbing down the complex topics into essentially MS Paint drawn figures and diagrams that convey relatively complex topics fairly simply. He has a bunch of orphan source videos, as well as videos on the more famous incidents like Chernobyl, Fukushima, Three Mile Island, etc. Biggest thing I learned from him is, don't EVER dissect unknown machines as a junkyard worker. And for heaven's sake, if the chunk of metal you found is just, warm like a campfire, DON'T SLEEP NEXT TO IT AS A WAY TO KEEP WARM OVER NIGHT. I learned a few more things from him as well, but those are rhe biggest things that come to mind! Would love to see a nuclear engineer's take on the topics he covers in the manor he covers them!
Until we can figure out p + p fusion … this is all silliness … I’ve always been a fission fan … we definitely can handle it safely and it definitely provides what we need … I want to see thermal nuclear rockets for interplanetary travel. They’re fast … and yes, eventually fusion will be the answer for interstellar flight, along with laser pushed star sails …
@@ElShogoso no, the physics works … look up Stephen Hawking’s suggestion under Project Starshot … an idea from another physicist…Robert L. Forward Ph.D. NASA is building a nuclear thermal rocket engine with Lockheed Martin to be tested in 2027 … project DRACO … small scale … but we stopped the original work in the mid 50s so have to resume work again …
@@sonicmastersword8080 I’m of the opinion that we shouldn’t be bothering with fusion at all… I know we can’t do p + p fusion. My point was we shouldn’t waste our time with these half assed and messy attempts at low energy fusion when fission is a perfectly good answer and we have experience with it…especially since we have experience with fission for decades and now have much safer designs…🤷♂️
So, just wanted to suggest reacting to some Plainly Difficult nuclear incident videos. He does some really incredible research and a fantastic job of dumbing down the complex topics into essentially MS Paint drawn figures and diagrams that convey relatively complex topics fairly simply. He has a bunch of orphan source videos, as well as videos on the more famous incidents like Chernobyl, Fukushima, Three Mile Island, etc. Biggest thing I learned from him is, don't EVER dissect unknown machines as a junkyard worker. And for heaven's sake, if the chunk of metal you found is just, warm like a campfire, DON'T SLEEP NEXT TO IT AS A WAY TO KEEP WARM OVER NIGHT. I learned a few more things from him as well, but those are rhe biggest things that come to mind! Would love to see a nuclear engineer's take on the topics he covers in the manor he covers them!
Do you think they will ever be able to shrink down the size of the reactors or will it most likely have to stay the size as a small country for every one that they end up building🤔🤔
I think it's a waste of resources which would be better spent of fission plants and existing renewable energy technologies. I don't see a scenario where it is cheaper than regular nuclear. Building something as complicated as the LHC, then attaching a regular steam turbine power plant to it doesn't seem as affordable as they claim. Not only do you need energy to drive the steam turbines, you need energy to sustain the reaction. I see efficiency leakages everywhere. We already have a big giant fusion reactor in the sky running on gravity and quantum tunnelling, we should just capture the energy from that. In fact apart from fission stations, and some geothermal plants, everything else is already powered by the sun. Not just solar, but also wind, hydro, coal, gas etc. We should just prioritise the clean and efficient ways to utilise that. With fission at the base.
Also to be nitpicky, they said its going to be both the hottest and coldest place in the known universe when it is turned on, but that's only because the LHC will be turned off by then. Currently the LHC is in its 3rd phase of testing, it too also has supercooled magnets just above absolute zero, and while its not a fusion reactor is does collide protons, and the temperature of those collisions are quite hot. In fact the temperature of the collisions are 5.5 trillion K. That's about 4 orders of magnitude hotter than ITER. Far too hot for fusion, it just obliterates the protons. Granted its not much mass and highly focused. But as a factoid perhaps more noteworthy.
@@artem-kt2gh yes. This is precisely why fusion occurs at a mere 15 million degrees in the sun's core, but to achieve it on earth it needs to be well in excess of 100 million degrees.
Thankyou, both very informative and somewhat dismaying when you realise the vast size, cost and complexity in building a relatively low energy fusion machine. I guess we have to give it a red hot go, but would like to see comparable effort put into advanced fission. A technology about which we can be far more assured. In particular I think we should be pursuing advanced heavy water reactors such as CANDU. CANDU has a great operational record. It is continuously fuelled with little downtime. The plants have a one hundred year through life operational plan. CANDUs also have potential to burn mixed fuels including thorium and plutonium, PWR waste as well as low enriched fuels. They are a bit more expensive to setup than once through PWRs but seem to have a lot of upsides. It would be grreat if at some stage you could review CANDU.
I have been following this project since 2011. It takes a long time, but it's amazing what they have done so far. Great science is happening there, even now, with the challenges it takes to build it. This is the world's leading scientific project superseding LHC by far. Hope it goes well.
There are 3D models of ITER and of the Stellarator available on Energy Encyclopedia. They also have models of LWRs and of the Super Phenix fast breeder, which is just so much more unsophisticated. Gives you a bit of a sense of what challenges fusion will face when it comes to economic competitiveness.
10 years to finish construction, 3 years bug fixes, 2 years training, and 5 years to optimize testing. Another 20 years. Then, they will have to adjust the facility to make it better for years if it's anything like the LHC.
What if, once the iter research effort is operational, the researchers realize Fusion would require two possible methods for commercial implementation: Build a Star or Build a Tokomak about 10 times larger ?
B1M is entertaining, but he never goes deep into technical details, just gives an overview of the facilities he visits. And he's always sponsored by the biggest scams on You Tube.
Fusion is really cool and may have it's uses, but ultimately the main flaws fission has fusion has even worse. The only real advantage in the end is the reduction, not even total removal of nuclear waste. I just don't think it's that worth it. It also has some extra issues of needing high power draw to start up. I really wonder how they'll deal with massive blackouts if it needs high power draw to start up.
As far as energy output is concerned M/AM Annihilation probably rules supreme, but well .. Antimatter is not exactly abundant in our neck of the woods 😅
I like fusion, but building megaprojects like this defies the logic of making this viable. There has got to be a better way than building machines that require liquid helium to operate.
I really enjoy your reaction videos. Having been fascinated with nuclear energy since the early 2000s, it's refreshing to be able to hear someone with your expertise speak as to the viability of these videos.
Tbf, I think they were speaking of fusion in general as "limitless power", not that specific reactor. That if the problem is solved, they can scale it up.
when they came to the idea to use fusion reactors, they put some equations together and left it, to return to it later when needed. the industry went with the reactor we know today ...for military reasons. when the scientists started to dig into it deeper and hoooo hoooly ...thats not just "two simple" equations . started to get complicated really fast. thats why its always 20y later. even if they have succesfull starts it will go next 25y in prototype mode as its a brand new and different tech .
Scientists are doing it all wrong! They try to convert the heat to steam energy!🤦 This way it will never become a power source for our homes! There are 3 ways you can extract energy from super heated fusion plasma. Turning heat into steam. Direct (electrical) energy extraction from the plasma. And Photon energy. They should first try to improve on direct energy extraction from plasma because it has a huge electrical charge. And they should also first try to make solar panels that can handle the extreme amount of photons and heat. And use all these types of energy extractions all at once in the same fusion reactor! Because right now way too much energy is lost in these experiments because it seems all they try to do is turn the intense heat into steam.
Plus the only way to make these reactors last long enough is to make them bigger so the surface area to volume ratio increases. But this just means you lose all the internal energy of the reactor whilst putting more in. I don't think high temperature solar or magnetic induction would work either, stellarators seem like the best bet. They can work in a steady state mode instead of pusled fusion, this means less stress and less energy needed to go between pulses. You have reduced plasma instability since the field is unchanging, so less injected power.
80% of the fusion energy gain of the D-T reaction is released in the form of neutrally charged neutrons. So direct energy conversion would be extremely inefficient. Same for photovoltaic, the heavy bombardement with neutrons would make swiss cheese out of the panels.
@skynet5828 Exactly, photovoltaics will only convert the small fraction of energy that comes out as EM waves and ontop of that be hit with around 5-10% efficiency as high temperature panels have poor efficiency. Using the thermal work is the best method we have, neutrons convert almost all their kinetic (heat) energy into hydrogen on water molecules which we use as the working fluid for fission too.
I'll wait to see if the video mentions that the entire global supply of that reactors fuel will run it for a month 🙄🙄 Nevermind the beryllium needed for the blanket. These (tokamak) reactors are an absolute waste !
So, just wanted to suggest reacting to some Plainly Difficult nuclear incident videos. He does some really incredible research and a fantastic job of dumbing down the complex topics into essentially MS Paint drawn figures and diagrams that convey relatively complex topics fairly simply.
He has a bunch of orphan source videos, as well as videos on the more famous incidents like Chernobyl, Fukushima, Three Mile Island, etc.
Biggest thing I learned from him is, don't EVER dissect unknown machines as a junkyard worker. And for heaven's sake, if the chunk of metal you found is just, warm like a campfire, DON'T SLEEP NEXT TO IT AS A WAY TO KEEP WARM OVER NIGHT.
I learned a few more things from him as well, but those are rhe biggest things that come to mind!
Would love to see a nuclear engineer's take on the topics he covers in the manor he covers them!
T.Folse has covered a couple of Plainly Difficult's videos.
Definitely could cover more tho.
Yes! Plainly Difficult is awesome! And so is Fascinating Horror!
Until we can figure out p + p fusion … this is all silliness … I’ve always been a fission fan … we definitely can handle it safely and it definitely provides what we need … I want to see thermal nuclear rockets for interplanetary travel. They’re fast … and yes, eventually fusion will be the answer for interstellar flight, along with laser pushed star sails …
You're reading too much sci-fi
@@ElShogoso no, the physics works … look up Stephen Hawking’s suggestion under Project Starshot … an idea from another physicist…Robert L. Forward Ph.D. NASA is building a nuclear thermal rocket engine with Lockheed Martin to be tested in 2027 … project DRACO … small scale … but we stopped the original work in the mid 50s so have to resume work again …
Major issue with p+p fusion is probability. Stars get away with it because they have enough mass and time to do so-mankind, not so much.
@@sonicmastersword8080 I’m of the opinion that we shouldn’t be bothering with fusion at all… I know we can’t do p + p fusion. My point was we shouldn’t waste our time with these half assed and messy attempts at low energy fusion when fission is a perfectly good answer and we have experience with it…especially since we have experience with fission for decades and now have much safer designs…🤷♂️
So, just wanted to suggest reacting to some Plainly Difficult nuclear incident videos. He does some really incredible research and a fantastic job of dumbing down the complex topics into essentially MS Paint drawn figures and diagrams that convey relatively complex topics fairly simply.
He has a bunch of orphan source videos, as well as videos on the more famous incidents like Chernobyl, Fukushima, Three Mile Island, etc.
Biggest thing I learned from him is, don't EVER dissect unknown machines as a junkyard worker. And for heaven's sake, if the chunk of metal you found is just, warm like a campfire, DON'T SLEEP NEXT TO IT AS A WAY TO KEEP WARM OVER NIGHT.
I learned a few more things from him as well, but those are rhe biggest things that come to mind!
Would love to see a nuclear engineer's take on the topics he covers in the manor he covers them!
Afterwards you can presumably change the specialised wide single road into a general purpose many lane (motor/high)way.
I don't think they can give up. Too much money and time has been invested, and with no pay off it would be a massive waste!
Do you think they will ever be able to shrink down the size of the reactors or will it most likely have to stay the size as a small country for every one that they end up building🤔🤔
Idk, the blue LED guy is getting into fusion. I've hope, lol. 11:30
(affordable) antimatter-matter reactions would be the holy grail for the realm of nuclear physics for use as a power source.
I’ve always thought about this. The obviously hard part would be creating or collecting the antimatter in the first place
I think it's a waste of resources which would be better spent of fission plants and existing renewable energy technologies. I don't see a scenario where it is cheaper than regular nuclear. Building something as complicated as the LHC, then attaching a regular steam turbine power plant to it doesn't seem as affordable as they claim. Not only do you need energy to drive the steam turbines, you need energy to sustain the reaction. I see efficiency leakages everywhere. We already have a big giant fusion reactor in the sky running on gravity and quantum tunnelling, we should just capture the energy from that. In fact apart from fission stations, and some geothermal plants, everything else is already powered by the sun. Not just solar, but also wind, hydro, coal, gas etc. We should just prioritise the clean and efficient ways to utilise that. With fission at the base.
I mean I wonder what the carbon footprint of a 35 year science project like this is.
Granted its cool
@@samuelsmith6804keyboard professor relax
Also to be nitpicky, they said its going to be both the hottest and coldest place in the known universe when it is turned on, but that's only because the LHC will be turned off by then. Currently the LHC is in its 3rd phase of testing, it too also has supercooled magnets just above absolute zero, and while its not a fusion reactor is does collide protons, and the temperature of those collisions are quite hot. In fact the temperature of the collisions are 5.5 trillion K. That's about 4 orders of magnitude hotter than ITER. Far too hot for fusion, it just obliterates the protons. Granted its not much mass and highly focused. But as a factoid perhaps more noteworthy.
"running on quantum tunnelling"
@@artem-kt2gh yes. This is precisely why fusion occurs at a mere 15 million degrees in the sun's core, but to achieve it on earth it needs to be well in excess of 100 million degrees.
Happy this went live, just lost a family member and needed a good and interesting distraction.
So sorry for your loss. Wish you and your family all the best
So sorry for your loss
Sorry for your loss buddy.
🎉
@@DAN-HRT I’m very sorry for your loss, glad I can help a teeny tiny bit by providing a distraction
The holy grail of energy has to be room temperature superconductors.
Impossible to room temperature so far I know, good one
Season finale should be you watching one of KREOSAN's adventures around and under Chernobyl
Thankyou, both very informative and somewhat dismaying when you realise the vast size, cost and complexity in building a relatively low energy fusion machine.
I guess we have to give it a red hot go, but would like to see comparable effort put into advanced fission. A technology about which we can be far more assured.
In particular I think we should be pursuing advanced heavy water reactors such as CANDU. CANDU has a great operational record. It is continuously fuelled with little downtime. The plants have a one hundred year through life operational plan.
CANDUs also have potential to burn mixed fuels including thorium and plutonium, PWR waste as well as low enriched fuels.
They are a bit more expensive to setup than once through PWRs but seem to have a lot of upsides.
It would be grreat if at some stage you could review CANDU.
I have been following this project since 2011. It takes a long time, but it's amazing what they have done so far. Great science is happening there, even now, with the challenges it takes to build it.
This is the world's leading scientific project superseding LHC by far.
Hope it goes well.
There are 3D models of ITER and of the Stellarator available on Energy Encyclopedia. They also have models of LWRs and of the Super Phenix fast breeder, which is just so much more unsophisticated. Gives you a bit of a sense of what challenges fusion will face when it comes to economic competitiveness.
10 years to finish construction, 3 years bug fixes, 2 years training, and 5 years to optimize testing. Another 20 years. Then, they will have to adjust the facility to make it better for years if it's anything like the LHC.
What if, once the iter research effort is operational, the researchers realize Fusion would require two possible methods for commercial implementation: Build a Star or Build a Tokomak about 10 times larger ?
B1M is entertaining, but he never goes deep into technical details, just gives an overview of the facilities he visits. And he's always sponsored by the biggest scams on You Tube.
Ever seen “Christmas at Ground Zero” by Weird Al? A very nuclear-positive song, and I would love a comment from you.
Fusion is really cool and may have it's uses, but ultimately the main flaws fission has fusion has even worse. The only real advantage in the end is the reduction, not even total removal of nuclear waste. I just don't think it's that worth it.
It also has some extra issues of needing high power draw to start up. I really wonder how they'll deal with massive blackouts if it needs high power draw to start up.
As far as energy output is concerned M/AM Annihilation probably rules supreme, but well .. Antimatter is not exactly abundant in our neck of the woods 😅
I like fusion, but building megaprojects like this defies the logic of making this viable. There has got to be a better way than building machines that require liquid helium to operate.
I really enjoy your reaction videos. Having been fascinated with nuclear energy since the early 2000s, it's refreshing to be able to hear someone with your expertise speak as to the viability of these videos.
I am amazed by the institution that stood up to ITER and said... yo, you have a problem here, stop everything you are doing and fix it.
Hi Tyler. If this works and they start on a full size power plant. How big will a full size fusion power plant be?
Are you retired? You post videos multiple times each day and each is edited with jump cuts which are time consuming to make.
Watching your channel warms my heart because it shows me that even in a godforsaken place like the US there is at least one nice intelligent person ❤
Nuclear fission reactor must have a huge mass , jupiter igniting may works 💪, or at least
Saturn
So far, fission reactor still a polished fantasy or something like Disney movie pg13
until they can deal with the neutrons i dont know how fusion would be practical even if cost was no object
I knew the real fusion reactor will be finalize by 2224 ,fact.
The Flowers Song for background music? 🤔
Looking for leaks with more sensitivity than a micron is wild
Beautiful to see what we can achieve when we work together. ✌🏽
Oh man, I miss Taco Mac.
3rd
Some number!
191st like
W VIDEO
im here
Tbf, I think they were speaking of fusion in general as "limitless power", not that specific reactor. That if the problem is solved, they can scale it up.
when they came to the idea to use fusion reactors, they put some equations together and left it, to return to it later when needed. the industry went with the reactor we know today ...for military reasons. when the scientists started to dig into it deeper and hoooo hoooly ...thats not just "two simple" equations . started to get complicated really fast. thats why its always 20y later. even if they have succesfull starts it will go next 25y in prototype mode as its a brand new and different tech .
Scientists are doing it all wrong!
They try to convert the heat to steam energy!🤦
This way it will never become a power source for our homes!
There are 3 ways you can extract energy from super heated fusion plasma.
Turning heat into steam.
Direct (electrical) energy extraction from the plasma.
And Photon energy.
They should first try to improve on direct energy extraction from plasma because it has a huge electrical charge.
And they should also first try to make solar panels that can handle the extreme amount of photons and heat.
And use all these types of energy extractions all at once in the same fusion reactor!
Because right now way too much energy is lost in these experiments because it seems all they try to do is turn the intense heat into steam.
Plus the only way to make these reactors last long enough is to make them bigger so the surface area to volume ratio increases. But this just means you lose all the internal energy of the reactor whilst putting more in. I don't think high temperature solar or magnetic induction would work either, stellarators seem like the best bet. They can work in a steady state mode instead of pusled fusion, this means less stress and less energy needed to go between pulses. You have reduced plasma instability since the field is unchanging, so less injected power.
80% of the fusion energy gain of the D-T reaction is released in the form of neutrally charged neutrons. So direct energy conversion would be extremely inefficient. Same for photovoltaic, the heavy bombardement with neutrons would make swiss cheese out of the panels.
@skynet5828 Exactly, photovoltaics will only convert the small fraction of energy that comes out as EM waves and ontop of that be hit with around 5-10% efficiency as high temperature panels have poor efficiency. Using the thermal work is the best method we have, neutrons convert almost all their kinetic (heat) energy into hydrogen on water molecules which we use as the working fluid for fission too.
I'll wait to see if the video mentions that the entire global supply of that reactors fuel will run it for a month 🙄🙄
Nevermind the beryllium needed for the blanket.
These (tokamak) reactors are an absolute waste !
It is Tritium.
first 1 minute