Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Has Fusion Energy Finally Arrived?
Lockheed Martin has claimed that their famed Skunk Works division made a major breakthrough in developing a nuclear fusion reactor. Their plan is to create several 100-megawatt reactors small enough to fit on the backs of trucks.
As a former submarine reactor operator, I wondered if I would ever see economical nuclear fusion in my lifetime. Fusion has long been a holy grail to nuclear engineers, with research institutions pouring billions into models that produced little energy at exorbitant cost. Many charlatans and cranks have latched onto fusion as a sort of perpetual motion machine, sullying the field for real scientists.
The fact that a respectable organization like Lockheed has claimed a breakthrough — not some unknown professor or LaRouchian zealot — has caused the energy world to take notice.
Put simply, nuclear fusion is the photo negative of current nuclear fission technology. In fission, a relatively large atom (such as Uranium with an atomic mass of 236) is split into two smaller atoms, releasing a large amount of energy. Nuclear fusion forces two tiny atoms (Hydrogen, atomic mass 1) into one larger atom (Helium, atomic mass 4), releasing an enormous amount of energy. (Aerospace Weekly delivers the technical details of the project here.)
We all know the drawbacks of fission reactors: massive facilities, storing radioactive waste, and the fears of a meltdown. But with a fusion reactor, there is minimal waste and zero potential of a meltdown. If successful, fusion will revolutionize power development, creating cheap, sustainable energy at low cost and with minimal environmental impact.
In a statement, the company, the Pentagon’s largest supplier, said it would build and test a compact fusion reactor in less than a year, and build a prototype in five years…
If it proves feasible, Lockheed’s work would mark a key breakthrough in a field that scientists have long eyed as promising, but which has not yet yielded viable power systems. The effort seeks to harness the energy released during nuclear fusion, when atoms combine into more stable forms.
”We can make a big difference on the energy front,” McGuire said, noting Lockheed’s 60 years of research on nuclear fusion as a potential energy source that is safer and more efficient than current reactors based on nuclear fission.
I’ve been very skeptical when past nuclear fusion claims were made (cold fusion, anyone?), but Lockheed’s proposal looks very promising to this retired reactor op. If it works, the technology will upend not only the energy sector, but also the politically charged debates surrounding foreign policy, the environment and more.
Published in General
I mentioned “minimal waste” in my post. Their is some waste but vastly less than that of fission reactors. No need for a cavernous Yucca Mountain-type facility.
Are you sure?
We can’t be too safe.
It’s for the children.
Don’t worry, the neo-Luddites will have dozens more reasons, just like these.
Seawriter
Is this neutron flux useful for weaponizing any otherwise-benign elements?
No I am referring to the skepticism toward the announcement. It seems that an announcement like this would make people happy. The “this is for the stock price” line of reasoning is something I would expect to find of the Daily Kos not here.
Actually Yucca mountain is still moving forward. This is one of the best example of checks and balances (and federalism) I have seen in the last few years. The courts told the executive branch they couldn’t just willy-nilly shut the project down. The Republicans in the House have defeated every attempt to defund the site, and states like Washington are suing because they want the material moved out to a safe storage location.
Just needs a little rebranding.
Call it an “arc reactor” instead of a “nuclear reactor.” It worked for Hollywood.
http://marvel.wikia.com/Arc_Reactor
http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/36098/how-does-iron-mans-arc-reactor-work
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/quora/what-is-the-theoryconcept_b_3456241.html
Minimal waste? “Minimal” is in the eye of the beholder. The atmosphere is 0.039% CO2, and a small increase in that amount, possibly caused by human activity, is the premise of wordwide horror and fear mongering amongst many people. Less than FOUR ONE-HUNDREDTHS OF A PERCENT creates panic, nuclear fusion is easily more dangerous for the morons.
At least in part the cynicism is due to having seen these types of claims in the past.
When I was in college mumble-mumble years ago there was a company in my home town (Ann Arbor) that was about ready to bring fusion energy to market. Never happened. It was a legit attempt, too. Respected engineer/scientist was running the company, and the project ended when he keeled over with a heart attack. The process died with him.
Twenty years later came cold fusion. That turned out to be bad science combined with the triumph of hope over experience on the part of the developers. (Yeah, I do believe it was more over-eagerness than fraud.)
Plus all of the other false dawns in between. And conservatives tend to be pessimists anyway. (Pessimists are never disappointed, and occasionally get pleasantly surprised.)
I would make a bet most of those saying “this is for the stock price” hope in their heart of hearts it is real, but are afraid saying so might jinx it. Kind of like actors saying “break a leg” because saying good luck will bring bad luck.
Seawriter
Right I agree with everything you say, but that should breed skepticism. I guess I feel sorry for anyone who sees an announcement like this and immediately assumes the source is lying to pump up their stock prices.
I remember sitting in study hall reading the fusion issue of Omni. The wonders were around the corner. In 1980…..
Is this a long- to medium-term structural integrity problem, gradually turning your steel into a manganese alloy?
The subtle humor if this sentence is vastly underappreciated.
Speaking for myself, I was merely playing devil’s advocate, which is why I put faux-HTML tags around my cynical post. My skepticism is real, however.