Energy From Nuclear Fusion Just Got A Little Bit More Feasible

[billvon]

7 hours ago, Vmedvil2 said:

It will eventually happen, technological progress goes at a snail's pace. 

That's the thing; it doesn't.

We first got cellphones about 40 years ago.  Within 10 years they fit in your pocket.  10 years after that we got the first real smartphones.  Then they went digital.  Then they got color screens.  Today we have small devices that will run for a day on a charge, that are small enough to lose on your desk, light enough you don't know you are carrying them, have more memory that most people will likely ever use, can access all the world's information, play movies, pay for things, store all the music you've ever owned etc.

In only 40 years.

Likewise, in 40 years we've gone from quantum computing as an interesting science fictional concept to IBM selling a quantum computer - one that has already achieved quantum supremacy.

In 20 years we've gone from quadrotor drones being remote controlled oddities to artificially intelligent autonomous vehicles that can explore the inside of a building without human assistance and report back to its operator.  And they are now so cheap that they are sold as toys.

In 20 years we have gone from EV's being underpowered golf carts that only geeks would ever own to the fastest cars on the road, and manufacturers can't keep up with demand.

In 20 years we've gone from lithium ion batteries being used only in expensive satellite phones where there were no other options, to a battery that is in almost every piece of electronics we own.  Small enough to power your bluetooth headset, powerful enough to drive EV's.

In 20 years we've gone from solar power being an expensive way to provide a few watts to power remote weather stations and outposts to a mainstream source of electricity that supplies 16% of California's power.

And over longer timescales it is nothing short of miraculous.  My grandmother was born before the first airplane.  Now we have spacecraft that use boosters that land themselves for reuse.

So no, technology doesn't usually move at a snail's pace.  But when it comes to fusion it has.  That's not because it's impossible, but because it's very, very hard.  We've made a lot of advances but we have a long way to go before it's a usable source of power.

[Vmedvil2]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

That's the thing; it doesn't.

We first got cellphones about 40 years ago.  Within 10 years they fit in your pocket.  10 years after that we got the first real smartphones.  Then they went digital.  Then they got color screens.  Today we have small devices that will run for a day on a charge, that are small enough to lose on your desk, light enough you don't know you are carrying them, have more memory that most people will likely ever use, can access all the world's information, play movies, pay for things, store all the music you've ever owned etc.

In only 40 years.

Likewise, in 40 years we've gone from quantum computing as an interesting science fictional concept to IBM selling a quantum computer - one that has already achieved quantum supremacy.

In 20 years we've gone from quadrotor drones being remote controlled oddities to artificially intelligent autonomous vehicles that can explore the inside of a building without human assistance and report back to its operator.  And they are now so cheap that they are sold as toys.

In 20 years we have gone from EV's being underpowered golf carts that only geeks would ever own to the fastest cars on the road, and manufacturers can't keep up with demand.

In 20 years we've gone from lithium ion batteries being used only in expensive satellite phones where there were no other options, to a battery that is in almost every piece of electronics we own.  Small enough to power your bluetooth headset, powerful enough to drive EV's.

In 20 years we've gone from solar power being an expensive way to provide a few watts to power remote weather stations and outposts to a mainstream source of electricity that supplies 16% of California's power.

And over longer timescales it is nothing short of miraculous.  My grandmother was born before the first airplane.  Now we have spacecraft that use boosters that land themselves for reuse.

So no, technology doesn't usually move at a snail's pace.  But when it comes to fusion it has.  That's not because it's impossible, but because it's very, very hard.  We've made a lot of advances but we have a long way to go before it's a usable source of power.

40 years is a long time for a person not for civilization which has been alive for 10,000 years and likewise it is absolutely insignificant the scales of the universe as things last for millions and billions of years. For you or I, 40 years is a long time as it is half a lifetime basically before anything "Cool" happens we will all be dead.

[billvon]

6 hours ago, Vmedvil2 said:

40 years is a long time for a person not for civilization which has been alive for 10,000 years and likewise it is absolutely insignificant the scales of the universe as things last for millions and billions of years. For you or I, 40 years is a long time as it is half a lifetime basically before anything "Cool" happens we will all be dead.

And 20 years is 1/4 of a lifetime.  Enough time to go from no solar to huge amounts of solar.

Look back at the 1300's.  That rate of change happened every few hundred years back then.  For example, the blast furnace took 200 years from first concept to a working, regularly used method for refining metal.

[Vmedvil2]

9 hours ago, billvon said:

And 20 years is 1/4 of a lifetime.  Enough time to go from no solar to huge amounts of solar.

Look back at the 1300's.  That rate of change happened every few hundred years back then.  For example, the blast furnace took 200 years from first concept to a working, regularly used method for refining metal.

I understand but it doesn't change the fact that it happens at a slow enough scale that for a human lifespan basically it may as well be not even be progressing. Who cares about future generations all that matters is how it effects you. I am sure that future generations will be immortal Gods that are all rich and do nothing having slave robots do all the work however that doesn't matter if you are dead. Think about it like this does it really matter if immortality is ever discovered after you die if you aren't around to live forever and reap the rewards?

"Resources exist to be consumed. And consumed they will be, if not by this generation then by some future. By what right does this forgotten future seek to deny us our birthright? None I say! Let us take what is ours, chew and eat our fill."

Edited January 28, 2022 by Vmedvil2

[billvon]

3 hours ago, Vmedvil2 said:

I understand but it doesn't change the fact that it happens at a slow enough scale that for a human lifespan basically it may as well be not even be progressing.

????

In college EV's were big jokes.  Glorified golf carts with 30 mile ranges.

At my second job after college I drove a prototype by Ford.  (We were doing work for them.)  Still lead acid battery but much better controller; it was like driving a real car.  Acceleration was almost as good as my CRX.

About five years later, at a telecom company, I designed a satellite phone using the very first available lithium ion 18650 cells.  They were 1300mah, which was the best they could do.

Today I have a car in my garage that's five years old that has thousands of those 18650's in it.  It's faster than almost anything else on the road, has a range of 300 miles, and it's charged 100% by solar power.  Each of those cells contain twice as much energy and can put out ten times the power as those first cells.

And it's not even the fastest, biggest or longest range EV out there.  You can now get EV's that will go 500 miles without needing to charge.  You can even get EV's that cost $28,000, about half of what the average car in the US costs.

You call that "may as well not even be progressing?"

Quote

Who cares about future generations

Uh - anyone with children?  Anyone who can see beyond their own comfort, convenience and greed?  Anyone who has friends younger than they are?  Anyone who wants the human race to do well?

[Vmedvil2]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

????

In college EV's were big jokes.  Glorified golf carts with 30 mile ranges.

At my second job after college I drove a prototype by Ford.  (We were doing work for them.)  Still lead acid battery but much better controller; it was like driving a real car.  Acceleration was almost as good as my CRX.

About five years later, at a telecom company, I designed a satellite phone using the very first available lithium ion 18650 cells.  They were 1300mah, which was the best they could do.

Today I have a car in my garage that's five years old that has thousands of those 18650's in it.  It's faster than almost anything else on the road, has a range of 300 miles, and it's charged 100% by solar power.  Each of those cells contain twice as much energy and can put out ten times the power as those first cells.

And it's not even the fastest, biggest or longest range EV out there.  You can now get EV's that will go 500 miles without needing to charge.  You can even get EV's that cost $28,000, about half of what the average car in the US costs.

You call that "may as well not even be progressing?"

 

That is just a minor advancement let's talk about something a bit more difficult like interstellar travel or something, the EV example is like saying that we have gone from gigaflop personal computers to teraflop personal computers in 20 years basically barely advancing at a very slow pace. It is like saying "Damn the GTX 1080 TI from 5 years ago is so much less advanced than the RTX 3090" even though it is a difference of 10 teraflops versus 30 teraflops over 5 years which is a minor improvement not a major one.

Edited January 28, 2022 by Vmedvil2

[billvon]

1 hour ago, Vmedvil2 said:

That is just a minor advancement

Changing from gas to electric transportation is not minor.  It will change the course of the future.

Almost everyone in the US having access to all the world's information in the palm of their hand is not minor.  That, and the technology it enables (like pervasive social media) have changed society almost beyond recognition.

Quote

Damn the GTX 1080 TI from 5 years ago is so much less advanced than the RTX 3090" 

Well, it's more like saying "damn a dial telephone is so much less advanced than my Samsung Android phone."  They are so different that there is almost no comparison between the two, even though they were designed for the same basic function.

[Vmedvil2]

4 hours ago, billvon said:

Changing from gas to electric transportation is not minor.  It will change the course of the future.

Almost everyone in the US having access to all the world's information in the palm of their hand is not minor.  That, and the technology it enables (like pervasive social media) have changed society almost beyond recognition.

Well, it's more like saying "damn a dial telephone is so much less advanced than my Samsung Android phone."  They are so different that there is almost no comparison between the two, even though they were designed for the same basic function.

Let's just agree to disagree, neither is going to convince the other, I think the pace is rather slow and you think it is rather fast whatever basically both are opinions on how we perceive time, but mainly for me I want to live to see it all happen even though I know I will miss a great deal of it probably unless the billionaires or I figure out the immortality vaccine.

Link = https://www.euronews.com/next/2021/12/14/can-we-live-forever-new-anti-ageing-vaccine-could-bring-immortality-one-step-closer

On second thought, maybe the Japanese will figure it out, I don't really care who figures it out as long as I get to be immortal and I don't believe the fake *** stuff that religion put out about a afterlife (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afterlife).

Even if the case turns out that the afterlife is real then God is one of the most evil beings that has ever existed, but if there was a all knowing being why would he put so much nonsense in the religious texts that obviously is impossible. So, basically God wants us to believe absolute nonsense to get into heaven which makes me highly doubt it wasn't just written by stupid ancient man that didn't know anything about how things worked that seems a more plausible explanation.

Edited January 29, 2022 by Vmedvil2

[atomsmasher]

What kind of reactor powers our nuclear submarines?

Edited January 30, 2022 by atomsmasher

[Vmedvil2]

6 minutes ago, atomsmasher said:

What kind of reactor powers our nuclear submarines?

Nuclear Fission Reactors, Ohio-class submarine - Wikipedia

Edited January 30, 2022 by Vmedvil2

[billvon]

On 1/30/2022 at 2:51 PM, atomsmasher said:

What kind of reactor powers our nuclear submarines?

They are all light water reactors with high-enriched uranium (so they don't have to be refueled often.)  Many can be taken prompt-critical due to this, which means that careful control is VERY important.

[atomsmasher]

19 hours ago, billvon said:

They are all light water reactors with high-enriched uranium (so they don't have to be refueled often.)  Many can be taken prompt-critical due to this, which means that careful control is VERY important.

Could this same technology be used to power our major cities?

[Vmedvil2]

1 hour ago, atomsmasher said:

Could this same technology be used to power our major cities?

Wow, that response was so stupid that I think I lost some brain cells, I am just going to leave this thread alone. Billvon I leave this in your capable hands.

But I will say this, do you know what this is Atomsmasher?

Edited February 3, 2022 by Vmedvil2

[atomsmasher]

On 2/2/2022 at 7:07 PM, Vmedvil2 said:

But I will say this, do you know what this is Atomsmasher?

I asked a simple question. I know that the USA uses some reactors to produce electricity. All I did was ask if we could use the same reactor technology, we now use to power our submarines to power our major cities.

I checked and this is what I found.

 At the end of 2020, there were 94 operating reactors with a combined generation capacity of about 96,555 MW. From 2014 through 2018, annual nuclear generation capacity and electricity generation increased each year even as the number of operating reactors declined.

 The above reactors are not the same reactors used in our submarines. The reactors in our submarines are much smaller. All I was asking is if we could use the smaller reactors to power our major cities.

Edited February 4, 2022 by atomsmasher
spelling

[OceanBreeze]

atomsmasher, 

I don’t see anything wrong with your question, and you don’t need to explain or qualify your question to anybody.

The S8G reactor used on the Ohio-class submarines, is a 220 MW pressurized water reactor, PWR, which is basically the same type of reactor used by the vast majority of the world’s nuclear power plants.

The answer to your question is that this type of reactor is already in use to power many of our cities.

Because it is designed for naval use, there are a few special features, such as taking advantage of natural water circulation, to cut down on the use of coolant pumps. Also, the physical size has been minimized as much as possible. Even with all the size minimization, the reactor compartment for the Ohio submarines is 42 feet (13 m) in diameter, 55 feet (17 m) long and weighs 2,750 tons.

Although the technology is basically the same, the output of only 220 MW is not suitable for use as a commercial reactor, which generally produces about 1 Giga Watt of power. Even the smallest commercial reactor in the USA, the R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant in New York, produces about 582 MW.

[billvon]

On 2/2/2022 at 3:57 PM, atomsmasher said:

Could this same technology be used to power our major cities?

Well, sure.

However, the reactors we use for power are light water reactors with LOW enriched uranium.  One of the nice things about LEU is that it cannot go prompt-critical no matter what happens to it.  (Prompt-critical is how nuclear bombs detonate.)  Thus, if terrorists steal the fuel, it cannot be used to make a nuclear bomb.  Perhaps more importantly, if it is used in a reactor and someone makes a huge mistake, the reactor cannot explode like a nuclear bomb.

As a case in point, the reactor in Chernobyl could (under certain unusual circumstances) go prompt critical - and the #4 reactor did in fact go prompt critical in 1986 during a routine test.

So I don't think it's a good idea.

[atomsmasher]

2 hours ago, OceanBreeze said:

Although the technology is basically the same, the output of only 220 MW is not suitable for use as a commercial reactor, which generally produces about 1 Giga Watt of power. Even the smallest commercial reactor in the USA, the R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant in New York, produces about 582 MW.

Great post. I just wanted to know if we in the usa were using this power source in our cities, 

The concluded answer is yes

Thanks

Edited February 4, 2022 by atomsmasher
clarity