Star power: Troubled ITER nuclear fusion project seeks new path

May 22, 2015 by Pascale Mollard
The construction site of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) in Saint-Paul-les-Durance, southern France,
The construction site of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) in Saint-Paul-les-Durance, southern France, on May 18, 2015

In 1985, then Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and US president Ronald Reagan launched one of the unlikeliest ideas of the Cold War.

Under it, the Soviet Union would team up with United States and other rivals of the day to develop nuclear fusion: the same limitless energy source that powers the Sun.

Today, 30 years on, their dream is still a long and agonising way from reality.

Launched in 2006 after years of wrangling, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) project is saddled with a reputation as a money pit.

It has been bedevilled by technical delays, labyrinthine decision-making and cost estimates that have soared from five billion euros ($5.56 billion) to around 15 billion. It may be another four years before it carries out its first experiment.

But, insists its new boss, a page has been turned.

"There has been a learning process," said Bernard Bigot, 65, a scientist and long-term chief of France's Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) who was named ITER's director general in March, replacing Japanese physicist Osamu Motojima.

"Today, there's a real awareness among all the partners that this project has to have a dimension of strong management to it."

ITER's job is to build a testbed to see if fusion, so far achieved in a handful of labs at great cost, is a realistic power source for the energy-hungry 21st Century.

Fusion entails forcing together the nuclei of light atomic elements in a super-heated plasma, held by powerful magnetic forces in a doughnut-shaped chamber called a tokamak, so that they make heavier elements and in so doing release energy.

Graphic explaining the workings of ITER, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor

The principle behind it is the opposite of nuclear fission—the atom-splitting process behind nuclear bombs and power stations, which carries the risk of costly accidents, theft of radioactive material and dealing with dangerous long-term waste.

Despite the long haul, buildings are now emerging from the dry, yellowish soil near Aix-en-Provence, in the Mediterranean hinterland of southern France.

"The tokamak building is scheduled to be finished in 2018 and all 39 buildings by 2022," Laurent Schmieder, in charge of civil engineering, told journalists during a press tour of the site.

The tokamak—a word derived from Russian—by itself is an extraordinary undertaking: a 23,000-tonne lab, three times heavier than the Eiffel Tower.

"This is a project of unprecedented complexity... a real challenge," said Mario Merola, in charge of ITER's internal components division.

Management tangle

Part of ITER's problems lie in a diffuse managerial structure and decision-making among its partners: the 28-nation European Union, which has a 45-percent stake, the United States, Russia, Japan, China, India, South Korea and Switzerland.

The partners are providing their contributions mostly in kind, which has been a cause of messy, protracted debate about who should provide what, when and how. It has been further complicated by the role of national agencies, which in turn deal with their own suppliers.

In some cases, said Bigot, discussions have dragged on for six whole years without resolution.

Bernard Bigot, head of France's Atomic and Alternative Energies Authority (CEA) and ITER director-general nominee, pictured at t
Bernard Bigot, head of France's Atomic and Alternative Energies Authority (CEA) and ITER director-general nominee, pictured at the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) in Saint-Paul-les-Durance, southern France, on May 18, 2015

He said that he told ITER's board he would only take the top job if everyone agreed there was a need for change.

"A CEO has to have the power to make a decision and to have it applied," he said.

Bigot has named his first priority as getting a fix on where the project stands overall.

By November, there will be a new progress report, with the likelihood of a further increase in the price tag. The project has no reserve fund to deal with the unexpected—something that Bigot hopes to change.

Journalists visit the construction site of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) in Saint-Paul-les-Durance
Journalists visit the construction site of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) in Saint-Paul-les-Durance, southern France, on May 18, 2015

In 2010 ITER abandoned its goal of obtaining the first plasma in 2018 and set a new date for a year later, but Bigot said that this deadline "clearly isn't feasible".

So far around seven billion euros have been contractually committed to the thousand or so companies working on the scheme. Every year of delay adds 200 million euros to the bill.

Technicians work at the construction site of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) in Saint-Paul-les-Duran
Technicians work at the construction site of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) in Saint-Paul-les-Durance, southern France, on May 18, 2015

"There have been difficulties, but we still have total faith in nuclear fusion as being worthy of the investment," said Bigot.

"But clearly if we can't manage this project correctly, if undertakings are not kept... (the project) could be in danger."

Explore further: States agree new funding, schedule for nuclear fusion plan

Related Stories

ITER panel votes to postpone non-vital physics work

October 16, 2013

(Phys.org) —Nature is reporting that a panel of experts and International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) staff has announced that non-essential physics work and other experimental studies being conducted as part ...

Recommended for you

Electron highway inside crystal

December 8, 2016

Physicists of the University of Würzburg have made an astonishing discovery in a specific type of topological insulators. The effect is due to the structure of the materials used. The researchers have now published their ...

Researchers improve qubit lifetime for quantum computers

December 8, 2016

An international team of scientists has succeeded in making further improvements to the lifetime of superconducting quantum circuits. An important prerequisite for the realization of high-performance quantum computers is ...

144 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Moebius
3.6 / 5 (5) May 22, 2015
My prediction is that if fusion ever becomes a viable power source it won't be a tokamak. We will look back at the vast amount of time and money spent on the tokamak now and realize a fraction of that money would have gotten us a better source of fusion much sooner if it was put towards researching other fusion ideas.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (10) May 22, 2015
My prediction is that if fusion ever becomes a viable power source it won't be a tokamak. We will look back at the vast amount of time and money spent on the tokamak now and realize a fraction of that money would have gotten us a better source

It would be a first if we didn't improve upon an initial design eventually. The first one is always clunky (in anything...look at cars, planes, trains, ships, rockets, .... and what they have become right now ).
But the thing about a first one is not that it is perfect. It's that it works. Anything else is secondary.
(In software there's a saying "We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: premature optimization is the root of all evil. Yet we should not pass up our opportunities in that critical 3%"
-- Donald Knuth)
HeavyKev
1.7 / 5 (6) May 22, 2015
My prediction is that if fusion ever becomes a viable power source it won't be a tokamak. We will look back at the vast amount of time and money spent on the tokamak now and realize a fraction of that money would have gotten us a better source

It would be a first if we didn't improve upon an initial design eventually. The first one is always clunky (in anything...look at cars, planes, trains, ships, rockets, .... and what they have become right now ).
But the thing about a first one is not that it is perfect. It's that it works. Anything else is secondary.
(In software there's a saying "We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: premature optimization is the root of all evil. Yet we should not pass up our opportunities in that critical 3%"
-- Donald Knuth)


This would be true except for the fact that TOKAMAK reactors have been around since 1956. It's not "the first one" by a long shot
El_Nose
4.3 / 5 (7) May 22, 2015
I think the issue with the tokamak is that it's design is not good enough for high energy delta . And that's not my opinion but the many many people how have Ph.d's and all other letters after their names say we have gotten really good at fixing tokamak issues and if we applied those fixes to other reactor types they become clear winners.

But WHO CARES as long as we get FUSION.

If we get Fusion - we get water. Plain and simple. If we get Fusion power the plants will be set up on the coasts of the world and desalination plants will spring up like McDonald's in a low socio-economic neighborhood. We will get water, and HOPEFULLY stop piping water from the water table into homes and begin to use salt water. Energy waste yes, but solving global water issues before they arise - Priceless
PhysicsMatter
3.7 / 5 (3) May 22, 2015
The controlled nuclear fusion in last 50 years was shamefully underfunded and plagued with scandals, waste and over overblown bureaucracy. We need at least hundred times more funding and tens of thousand educational grants for young talented physicists to deal with the problem in new revolutionary ways since old ways are stuck in the rot for decades.

Part of the reason of the setbacks so far was failure of the theoretical framework of collisional plasma physics, a patchwork of mostly linear mathematical models that only partially fit the specific data and utter absence of general non-linear plasma theory and issue only partially addressed by plasma simulations. The instability problems in plasma confinement setting were first discover in 1950-ties and it continue to be Achilles heel.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (31) May 22, 2015
Nope. We do not need "unlimited energy", because we are insufficiently wise to use it.

We can get all we need from renewables.

No "Magic Boxes". We wasted enough effort on them.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (23) May 22, 2015
Glam is insufficiently sane to know reality from wishful thinking.

Tokamaks are the most efficient way of storing plasmas in bulk. This will be essential to future technologies which use materials in plasma form for manufacturing, propulsion, research, etc.

And so the development of this tech is essential. The promise of cheap power is only a convenient way of convincing the public to fund it. And who knows? Maybe it will produce power as well.

Antimatter can only be stored in plasma form. Tokamaks will be the only way of storing large quantities of it. I've always found it curious that ITER is located very close to, and directly south of, a facility which may be capable of producing it in significant amounts - the LHC.

Coincidence or ?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (21) May 22, 2015
Just think gkam - if you're still around when this happens you could whine about the potential for a France-sized crater in Europe.

But sadly you won't be.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (23) May 22, 2015
Yeah, but without any education or experience in the field, what good are your wishes?

We do not need any Magic Boxes. You have shown yourself to have incomplete control of your emotions. Who would let you have unlimited power?
lengould100
3.7 / 5 (3) May 22, 2015
We need fusion energy asap, and a gaggle of bureaucrats involved in every decision is not the way to "git er done". See Manhattan Project. EU and others should agree to provide their financing in cash rather than corruptible "kind", then jointly select a proven leadership pair, one from business and one from a military background, then just review the reports every year-end.

BTW, Tokamak will work, and is still the logical technology of choice.
WillieWard
2.6 / 5 (9) May 22, 2015
Nope. We do not need "unlimited energy", because we are insufficiently wise to use it.
We can get all we need from renewables.
Including eco-Friendly fertilizers from millions of birds annihilated by wind blades to serve as organic matter.
syndicate_51
3 / 5 (2) May 22, 2015
The sun does not possess unlimited energy.
luke_w_bradley
2 / 5 (4) May 22, 2015
People need to look at the actual breakdown of US federal spending to see how ridiculous it is that we haven't found a way to finance 15 billion over years, in collaboration with other countries, on an energy source that could eventually eradicate energy costs around the world. Last year we spent 231 billion just on interest to the national debt, and way higher amounts on welfare, defense, and so on. The US spends about 1.4 trillion a year on energy, meaning a tiny reduction on that spending could pay for ITER and so many more projects like it.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (8) May 22, 2015
This would be true except for the fact that TOKAMAK reactors have been around since 1956. It's not "the first one" by a long shot

It's designed to be the first one that can produce a net energy output.That's a bit different from just putting up another tokamak.
Scottingham
5 / 5 (3) May 22, 2015
I'm still interested in that Lockheed Martin fusion system they are working on. I hope they work something out too. The more ppl working on this the better!
cantdrive85
1.6 / 5 (7) May 22, 2015
Part of the reason of the setbacks so far was failure of the theoretical framework of collisional plasma physics, a patchwork of mostly linear mathematical models that only partially fit the specific data and utter absence of general non-linear plasma theory and issue only partially addressed by plasma simulations. The instability problems in plasma confinement setting were first discover in 1950-ties and it continue to be Achilles heel.


Yep, continually using the same theoretical maths "that we know from experiments are wrong" is called insanity. These projects are the only real black holes in the Universe, gravitational money laundering on epic scales.

If commercial fusion is achievable, it will likely be accomplish by folks on the fringes using real plasma processes rather than the fanciful solar fusion nonsense.

http://lawrencevi...-fusion/
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (7) May 22, 2015
Yep, continually using the same theoretical maths "that we know from experiments are wrong"

What are you blathering about? Tokamaks have been shown to work in experiments since the late 60's.
cantdrive85
1.7 / 5 (6) May 22, 2015
Yep, continually using the same theoretical maths "that we know from experiments are wrong"

What are you blathering about? Tokamaks have been shown to work in experiments since the late 60's.

Yep, that's why the whole world runs on fusion power.. Dolt. Sure you can turn on a Tokamak, but the results don't match theoretical assumptions of plasma stability and power production. Let's try and stay on point rather than nitpick semantics.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.6 / 5 (18) May 22, 2015
Yeah, but without any education or experience in the field, what good are your wishes?

We do not need any Magic Boxes. You have shown yourself to have incomplete control of your emotions. Who would let you have unlimited power?
I think that expressing disgust at people like yourself who would tend to double the number and magnitude of earthquakes in CA on any given day, because he cant control his compulsion to exaggerate and lie, is an entirely healthy thing.
Tokamaks have been shown to work in experiments since the late 60's
Stellerators may well be the preferred configuration but have proven very difficult to construct.
http://en.wikiped...llarator
Mark Thomas
2.5 / 5 (11) May 22, 2015
"Bigot has named his first priority as getting a fix on where the project stands overall."

"By November, there will be a new progress report, with the likelihood of a further increase in the price tag."

Pathetic. Bigot needs 6 months to figure out ITER is behind schedule and over budget?! He should have demanded a draft of that report before he even arrived. He should not have accepted the job without the ability to hire and fire either. In the first month at least 10% of ITER management and all previous country representatives should be terminated. All buildings should be complete by 2018, not 2022 or later. Bigot, you need to set AGGRESSIVE deadlines befitting a project of this importance to humanity. If a member country does not deliver on time, find a way to impose financial penalties, publicize their failure to the world and create an option to expel that loser country if it is in the best interest of the project. It's time to turn up the heat in every way.
JIMBO
not rated yet May 22, 2015
How can the Euros successively construct the largest & most complex science expt. in the history of civilization & crown it w/the `smashing' discovery of the Higgs boson, yet be unable to complete a much smaller, altho equally as ambitious project such as ITER ?
Obviously it's a bumbling bureaucracy, & despite pleas to the contrary will remain so, always over budget & behind schedule. How long can the Euros afford this 600 lb gorilla moving @ 600 cm/hr ?
Perhaps like its US counterpart NIF, they should've undertaken ITER not as an attempt to create controlled nuclear fusion, but as a `front' for nuclear weapons design & testing ? At least NIF is successful in this respect, & the money always flows.....
rufusgwarren
1 / 5 (2) May 22, 2015
My question: Who said we needed a super-heated plasma? Proximity, of two very low states of a space with saturated deuterium contained as a function of volume at low energy, i.e. as the volume falls add more deuterium until complete saturation at "variable? Modulation?" pressure. No extra neutron. If you want the extra neutron, same thing, proximity; then, you get the free neutron and its signature neutrino. Placing this stream of neutrons into a loop that separates the protons from the neutron and another neutrino. Therefore, source of current! So I think we are using the resultant state due to confinement within the sun incorrectly. However, what scale is required? Helium could be produced in free fall with other ... Do we know what we are doing?
RealityCheck
1.4 / 5 (18) May 22, 2015
Hi Ghost. :)
Tokamaks are the most efficient way of storing plasmas in bulk. This will be essential to future technologies which use materials in plasma form for manufacturing, propulsion, research, etc.
You're dreaming, mate. The bulk/mass of structural, electro-mag and protective/support materials, combined with the control problems which would result in significant damage/costs should siad controls fail, make such systems unviable/unsustainable financially/practically. And if significant Net Energy production is the goal, the inherent problems/losses are huge in getting continuous/efficient operation and economically justifiable/useful inputs and extraction of Net Energy. It's a dead end. The most promising fusion-electricity system is a type of Plasma Focus Device, one very different developmental version of which is already on my drawing board for pursuing after a couple more urgent projects are completed late this year and early next year. Good luck to us all. :)
gkam
1.4 / 5 (22) May 22, 2015
More promises, more Big Bucks, and from those who denigrate the small sums spent on alternatives.

Wouldn't it be better to have more realistic technologies, simple ones for which we do not need a Nuclear Priesthood, with systems we understand, and can fix ourselves, and do not need a Police State to maintain.

If we have societal disruptions, I would rather have distributed energy systems I can deal with than some Tokamak which needs spacial babying, parts, personnel, and care.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (1) May 23, 2015
"A CEO has to have the power to make a decision and to have it applied," he said.
As though scientific collaboration is some kind of unworkable mob-rule clusterfuck? Tyrant kings, emperors and high preists said as much of their kingdoms, empires and religions, and they, too, expected 300-400 times the pay of everyone else for their you-can't-do-it-without-me hoo-hah. [/wall_crackin_rant]
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (6) May 23, 2015
As though scientific collaboration is some kind of unworkable mob-rule clusterfuck?

It's a large, multinational project which means it's intensely political as well as scientific. And the US and the Russians are in on it - two nations whose puppet-masters are not at all interested in seeing a clean energy source being developed.

If you want to do big multi-national science it is (sadly) currently a good idea not to involve either nation when it comes to energy matters.
ayesdi_fdesay
not rated yet May 23, 2015
I'd like to think that humanity could be sane enough to meet its energy needs through a % of renewables that would mitigate the impending disaster, but I know it's not--not yet (but some nations are already quite close). I think this is the reason some people find nuclear fusion so off-putting: it could altogether circumvent the problem that humanity cannot act in this context. Sure, you could say that the tech breakthrough of nuclear fusion itself is "humanity solving the problem," but for those that think there is some significance to our collective sanity, this problem is more than just preservation: to them, it's also about our capacity to overcome self delusion, greed, apathy, laziness, and our lack of trust in other people's willingness to act.

But IMO mitigating the damage is more important than proving that we could do so without addressing our more unfortunate tendencies. In addition, nuclear fusion would help open up many other possibilities, e.g. space flight
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (3) May 23, 2015
So I was leafing through the dictionary the other day and I casually observed:

boon·dog·gle
ˈbo͞onˌdäɡəl,-ˌdôɡəl/
NORTH AMERICANinformal
noun
1.
work or activity that is wasteful or pointless but gives the appearance of having value.
"writing off the cold fusion phenomenon as a boondoggle best buried in literature"
verb
1.
waste money or time on unnecessary or questionable projects.

For some reason, ITER came to mind...

Mark Thomas
2.2 / 5 (9) May 23, 2015
"And the US and the Russians are in on it - two nations whose puppet-masters are not at all interested in seeing a clean energy source being developed."

The evidence does not support that, but something does feel wrong here. The organization agreement was signed in 2006 and the buildings alone won't be done until 2022!?! That needs to be explained. The finances of everyone at the executive level in ITER should be investigated. If nothing else, this is extreme negligence and incompetence. If the structure of the organization was somehow preventing progress, the public should have been made aware years ago. The internal evaluation report has still not been made public. Fusion power may be our best long-term hope and these morons/criminals are squandering it.
lengould100
5 / 5 (2) May 23, 2015
I second Mark Thomas.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (20) May 23, 2015
Hey there mate/barbie/Mel Gibson
bulk/mass of structural, electro-mag and protective/support materials, combined with the control problems which would blah
1) the use of large amounts of materials in plasma form, including antimatter and other exotic materials) is essential to future tech and knowledge; 2) the closed magnetic bottle (tokamak/stellarator/spheromak) is currently the only way we know of containing large amounts of plasma in bulk; 3) the requirements for producing fusion energy are exactly the same as economic storage; density, purity, duration, reactor materials, no contact with vessel walls, etc.

Further these things are what ITER is expressly designed to explore. And even if it doesn't prove to be a viable power source we will still have learned a great deal more about plasma.

Sorry but I dont think this is an accident.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.5 / 5 (17) May 23, 2015
The evidence does not support that, but something does feel wrong here. The organization agreement was signed in 2006 and the buildings alone won't be done until 2022!?! That needs to be explained. The finances of everyone at the executive level in ITER
??? How long did it take to build the ISS? Multinational mega projects are the future of tech. Building such projects is another valuable source of experience whether they are entirely successful or not. It is the ONLY source of this experience.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (21) May 23, 2015
Instead of everybody being more independent, concentrated power brings with it the necessity for control of us and our dependence on Big Money and Big Brother.

I thought "Me First" Republicans hated the Guvmunt. Why are conservatives again pushing for concentrating power in one place? Do they think they will control it? Like they controlled Dubya and Cheney??

Yup.
Mark Thomas
1.6 / 5 (7) May 23, 2015
"??? How long did it take to build the ISS?"

I might agree with you if ITER was struggling with complex ELM or divertor plate issues, but they are struggling with constructing buildings in France! What bothers me the most is the complete lack of transparency and progress. All we really know is that for every year that goes by the schedule slips by one year or more, so they did an internal investigation and the results were so bad they were kept secret, but they brought in Bigot. There needs to be a real investigation and the results made public. Humanity sorely needs this technology, or we need to know it will never work, so we can focus our efforts on something that does work. There is no sense of urgency at ITER that I can detect reflecting the deadly seriousness of this problem. The new guy wants until November to get a status report together?! Why so long? Let me guess, he needs the summer off. Pathetic.
rgw
4 / 5 (4) May 23, 2015
Nope. We do not need "unlimited energy", because we are insufficiently wise to use it.

We can get all we need from renewables.

No "Magic Boxes". We wasted enough effort on them.


Yep, by Jiminy horses and mules were good enough for millenia!
gkam
1.4 / 5 (22) May 23, 2015
"Yep, by Jiminy horses and mules were good enough for millenia!"
------------------------------------

Perhaps you may lack imagination or knowledge of new technologies?
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (4) May 23, 2015
"Yep, by Jiminy horses and mules were good enough for millenia!"
------------------------------------

Perhaps you may lack imagination or knowledge of new technologies?

It is you who is ignorant and lack imagination. The simplicity of Lerner's focus fusion does not require a centralized police state nor does it require multi-billion dollar power plants to house it. It will allow safe, small, and inexpensive power generation to be placed where needed. That is of course if the powers that be allow such a thing. But that would cut into their profit stream, wouldn't it?

http://lawrencevi...t/peace/

http://lawrencevi...ronment/

Sadly, the central bankers prefer profits over ANYTHING else!
gkam
1.3 / 5 (21) May 23, 2015
I ain't educated regarding "Lerner's focus fusion".

I'll check it out. But I am aware of many others, none of which are either proven or practical.
rbrtwjohnson
2 / 5 (4) May 23, 2015
Nope. We do not need "unlimited energy", because we are insufficiently wise to use it.
We can get all we need from renewables.
Environmental Impacts of Wind Power
Land Use
Wildlife and Habitat
Public Health and Community
Water Use
Life-Cycle Global Warming Emissions
http://www.ucsusa...wer.html

Environmental Impacts of Solar Power
Land Use
Water Use
Hazardous Materials
Life-Cycle Global Warming Emissions
http://www.ucsusa...wer.html
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 23, 2015
I did not any proof of principle, an actual demonstration.
Moebius
3.8 / 5 (5) May 23, 2015
.....Tokamaks are the most efficient way of storing plasmas in bulk. ......


Not true, a sphere is. Check out the big reactor in the sky.
Moebius
1 / 5 (1) May 23, 2015
My prediction is that if fusion ever becomes a viable power source it won't be a tokamak. We will look back at the vast amount of time and money spent on the tokamak now and realize a fraction of that money would have gotten us a better source of fusion much sooner if it was put towards researching other fusion ideas.


Actually I didn't phrase that correctly. The tokamak will probably be viable. But commercially viable is another thing and commercially viable for widespread use is something else still. I should have said commercially viable for widespread use. For that it seems to me something that needs pellets continuously fired into it, while consuming a ton of power, will be woefully inadequate and maybe not even be commercially viable at all. There have been many different proposals of ways to achieve fusion over the last 50 years that aren't tokamak at all and to my knowledge almost none have received research money and that's a stupid shame.
RealityCheck
1.4 / 5 (21) May 23, 2015
Hi gkam. :)
Instead of everybody being more independent, concentrated power brings with it the necessity for control of us and our dependence on Big Money and Big Brother.
Yes, that is the old 'business model' of govt and criminal exploitative cartels, mate. My own novel version of the well known Plasma Focus Device/Principle is on my drawing board and just waiting for my further attention after I complete a couple of other projects. The beauty of this fusion system/unit is that it's scalable, portable and plug-in-and-go' which is easily distributed/maintained locally by basic electricians/electronics etc practitioners. :)

I thought "Me First" Republicans hated the Guvmunt. Why are conservatives again pushing for concentrating power in one place?
You have very good reasons to be skeptical of anyone who opposes reasonably intelligent green approach. So far, all those that have are either types of trolls or shills or both. Keep up the good work, gkam. Kudos. :)
RealityCheck
1.5 / 5 (17) May 23, 2015
Hi Ghost. :)
bulk/mass of structural, electro-mag and protective/support materials, combined with the control problems which would blah
1) the use of large amounts of materials in plasma form, including antimatter and other exotic materials) is essential to future tech and knowledge; 2) the closed magnetic bottle (tokamak/stellarator/spheromak) is currently the only way we know of containing large amounts of plasma in bulk; 3) the requirements for producing fusion energy are exactly the same as economic storage; density, purity, duration, reactor materials, no contact with vessel walls, etc.
The unwieldy bulk/mass of which I spoke was that of the container/machine overall, not the amount of plasma contained. That amount is miniscule in comparison because of the ultra low density of the necessarily 'rarefied' working fluid (ie, gas/plasma). It makes any useful/excess energy unlikely, unmanageable/uncontrollable/uneconomic for sustained action, stationary or other.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (20) May 24, 2015
The unwieldy bulk/mass of which I spoke was that of the container/machine overall, not the amount of plasma contained. That amount is miniscule in comparison because of the ultra low density of the necessarily 'rarefied' working fluid (ie, gas/plasma). It makes any useful/excess energy unlikely, unmanageable/uncontrollable/uneconomic for sustained action, stationary or other
You mean 'now' don't you. That is now/at the moment/at this point in time.

As I said these research projects are meant to increase density, duration, purity, and temperature. They will get smaller, cheaper, and more efficient.

An ITER-sized machine is already expected to produce economical power, your unwarranted objections notwithstanding. If used for storing antimatter it would be worth even more.
KBK
3 / 5 (2) May 24, 2015
The most recent enhancement of tokamak reactors, to help skip them over the edge, into +1.x production, is the introduction of lithium.

Note that lithium is a prime ingredient in Rossi's Hot-cat.

Rossi got there first with a very small individualized system, instead of this POS monstrosity (tokamak reactors) which has gone nowhere for 50-60 years, puttering along....doing it's job of promising something that never comes.
ubavontuba
2.1 / 5 (7) May 24, 2015
Fusion Confusion
by Ubavontuba:

Fusion confusion, infusion and more
Funding required, greenbacks for sure
Hydrogen heated with lasers that cook
Energy forever, if they get it to work

Polywell, Pinch, Tokamak and more
Fusion alternatives they wish to explore
Billions of dollars spent on a whim
"Hurry!" I say, "My bulbs grow dim!"

Consumption presumption, gumption and more
Heat from a source, like from a star's core
"It's coming soon." they assert yet again
Here I'm wondering, will I be here then?

Conflagration fiction, confliction and more
It passes from fact to myth then to lore
"Unlimited energy." I hear them yet say
Just burn the money ...it's cheaper that way
gkam
1.5 / 5 (22) May 24, 2015
It seems most folk have some pure faith in one magic energy box, but we are insufficiently wise to use it without killing everything we can reach.
gkam
1.4 / 5 (21) May 24, 2015
KBK says he neutralized radiation with his process. I want to hear how he got his "nuclear waste", what it was, and what happened to it.
Newbeak
2 / 5 (4) May 24, 2015
"I'm still interested in that Lockheed Martin fusion system they are working on. I hope they work something out too. The more ppl working on this the better!

Read more at: http://phys.org/n...html#jCp "

Variety is the spice of life,I agree. This start-up I've been following may beat ITER to the punch: http://www.generalfusion.com/

Newbeak
1.8 / 5 (5) May 24, 2015
"I'm still interested in that Lockheed Martin fusion system they are working on. I hope they work something out too. The more ppl working on this the better!

Read more at: http://phys.org/n...html#jCp



Or this approach: http://lawrencevi...ion-faq/
RealityCheck
1.4 / 5 (19) May 24, 2015
Hi Ghost. :)
The unwieldy bulk/mass of which I spoke was that of the container/machine overall, not the amount of plasma contained. That amount is miniscule in comparison because of the ultra low density of the necessarily 'rarefied' working fluid (ie, gas/plasma). It makes any useful/excess energy unlikely, unmanageable/uncontrollable/uneconomic for sustained action, stationary or other
You mean 'now' don't you. That is now/at the moment/at this point in time.
It has been "now" for how many decades now? Pie in the sky "tomorrow".
these research projects are meant to increase density, duration, purity, and temperature. ...will get smaller, cheaper, and more efficient.
Such systems have inherent limitations due to separation requirements from containment walls. Also due to losses/instability caused by increased density of non-plasma gas surrounding actual plasma stream. Excess energy extraction also problematic.

Alternatives are progressing "now". Cheers.
rufusgwarren
not rated yet May 24, 2015
... only newly viewed over-site?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (20) May 24, 2015
Yup Inertial Confinement with the World's Most powerful Laser does not work, either. Perhaps we can give up on this idea of a Magic Box to give us the unlimited power we are sure to abuse.

We can live within our means without the concentration of power and control of Big Brother and Big Money. I want to be independent, not to rely on someone who knows what is "better" for us, or happens to be the only game in town. Maybe you folk like it?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (20) May 25, 2015

KBK says he neutralized radiation with his process. I want to hear how he got his "nuclear waste", what it was, and what happened to it
Why? You think that nuclear waste contaminated everything it touches. Obviously you don't know there is more than one kind. So why do you think you would understand any detailed discussion of it?
It has been now for many decades
this is always a silly argument. Why on earth would you think these things happen overnight?

We know a lot more about plasma and fusion than we did back then. And ITER is essential to learning even more.
Magic Box to give us the unlimited power we are sure to abuse... Big Brother... Big Money... Filthy fuels... WMDs... Dubya...
-Maybe you want to give up t shirt slogans as a valid means of discourse? Unless they are the only things your ADHD and your VA drugs will let you consider-
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (19) May 25, 2015
Such systems have inherent limitations due to separation requirements from containment walls. Also due to losses/instability caused by increased density of non-plasma gas surrounding actual plasma stream. Excess energy extraction also problematic
You must know that that is just an opinion. An unwarranted, unsubstantiated opinion. And it is certainly one that is not shared by the 1000s of people who have committed their lives to this research, and who have agreed to fund it.

I think their opinions outweigh yours a little, yes? You fail to consider projected advances in materials, superconductors, control, design and fabrication, and general knowledge of plasma confinement.

Like I say it's important enough to keep looking.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (20) May 25, 2015
Notice how otto stopped screaming "liar" and "bullshit" in all caps?

I have a VA psychologist interested in the "otto syndrome". We can get a report in perhaps a month, after they go through a load of his posts. They are interested in his lack of social skills in anonymity, his lack of self-control, and the cause of the maladjustment.

Normally, they work with well-adjusted folk who got stressed past the elastic limit. They seldom get a true case of just poor character. Otto is candy to them.

As far as ITER is concerned, it is another huge guvmunt boondoggle. Give us the billions, and we will have clean alternative energy we all understand and can fix. I want stuff in my hands, not those of Big Money or Big Brother.
WillieWard
3 / 5 (4) May 25, 2015
"Mr. I am an engineer" seems to believe in his own lies.
Give us the billions, and we will have clean alternative energy we all understand and can fix. I want stuff in my hands, not those of Big Money or Big Brother.
"clean alternative energy"? Clean? After squandering trillions (huge big money) in investments and subsidies on the "Big Renewable Industry", it has become ever clearer that the auto-heralding "green clean energy" is not nearly as clean and good for the environment as the lobbyists and opportunistic politics want public to believe.
http://www.bloomb...e-energy
http://renewecono...ts-44986
"For today's Germany, which has 39 Gigawatts, this would add up to 2,340,000 – 3,900,000 dead birds a year."
"Spain's 18,000 wind turbines kill on average 6 – 18 million birds and bats a year."
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 25, 2015
If you folk like centralized control, a police state, and your future in the hands of Big Brother or Big Corporate, go ahead.

I can put my own microgrid together, and be independent of those of you who scream you hate guvmunt, but absolutely depend on it because you live in a Red State or have some Muslim nation to invade, or are on some kind of assistance.

Ironic, isn't it?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 25, 2015
I love it: Willie sends us to several references, and in the very the first one I get this:

"In 2014, renewables made up nearly half of the net power capacity added worldwide," Achim Steiner, UNEP's executive director, said in a statement. "These climate-friendly energy technologies are now an indispensable component of the global energy mix. Their importance will only increase as markets mature, technology prices continue to fall and the need to rein in carbon emissions becomes ever more urgent."

The other reference is better, with more information Willie will not like.

Willie is a Wiki-warrior, like others, who do not understand what they refer.
WillieWard
3 / 5 (4) May 25, 2015
Big money is already there, greed for profits on renewables. Now they will never tell that "These climate-friendly energy technologies" are provoking more fatalities and environmental impact per gigawatt generated than nuclear.
Luckless Mother Earth.
Renewable large-scale environmental catastrophe is becoming unstoppable.
"...climate-friendly energy technologies..." = demagoguery
gkam
1.2 / 5 (18) May 25, 2015
Willie needs to look up the pdf :

NUCLEAR SAFETY: A (CHARLIE) BROWNIAN NOTION1
John Downer
WillieWard
5 / 5 (2) May 25, 2015
"Mr. I am an engineer" loves biased papers against nuclear. In his suggested paper, there is no mention of impact per unit of energy generated in relation to renewables, neither comparison between earth natural radioactivity and nearby Fukushima nor Chernobyl, very convenient scaremonger paper.
TechnoCreed
4.3 / 5 (11) May 25, 2015
@Birdy
"clean alternative energy"? Clean? After squandering trillions (huge big money) in investments and subsidies on the "Big Renewable Industry", it has become ever clearer that the auto-heralding "green clean energy" is not nearly as clean and good for the environment as the lobbyists and opportunistic politics want public to believe.
http://www.bloomb...e-energy
All the semi concerned consideration that you show for the aviary fauna is so moving, I had to wipe a little teardrop. Sorry but the reality of things shows that you could not care less for the bird population.
Here is the real threat to the bird population: http://d2ouvy59p0...inal.pdf
RealityCheck
1.3 / 5 (16) May 25, 2015
Hi Ghost. :)
Such systems have inherent limitations due to separation requirements from containment walls. Also due to losses/instability caused by increased density of non-plasma gas surrounding actual plasma stream. Excess energy extraction also problematic
You must know that that is just an opinion. An unwarranted, unsubstantiated opinion. And it is certainly one that is not shared by the 1000s of people who have committed their lives to this research, and who have agreed to fund it.

I think their opinions outweigh yours a little, yes? You fail to consider projected advances in materials, superconductors, control, design and fabrication, and general knowledge of plasma confinement.

Like I say it's important enough to keep looking.
Lots of things are "important". But 'failed' boodoggles are not as important as proven and improving renewal alternatives, especially if enormous amounts of money, intellectual and other resources are denied to better alternatives.
RealityCheck
1.4 / 5 (18) May 25, 2015
PS to Ghost:
I think their opinions outweigh yours a little, yes? You fail to consider projected advances in materials, superconductors, control, design and fabrication, and general knowledge of plasma confinement.
This is fascinating, Otto. When I rightly used that very same sort of justification to continue with Wind Power etc alternatives developmental trajectory and importance, you tried every daft rationalization/evasion/dismissal in the book! But now you use that very same developmental trajectory/importance argument to justify obviously failed/wasteful boondoggle 'research effort' on ITER etc, and all of a sudden that argument is "ok"? Not very consistent, let alone have any validity in the ITER etc case.

PS: gkam is on the money regarding your character/agenda, Otto. You make a fascinating case study almost as interesting and full of psychology 'gold' as that of Auncle Ira and 'friend' for anyone having the time and stomach to analyze your posting records. :)
WillieWard
3.7 / 5 (3) May 25, 2015
All the semi concerned consideration that you show for the aviary fauna is so moving, I had to wipe a little teardrop. Sorry but the reality of things shows that you could not care less for the bird population.
Here is the real threat to the bird population: http://d2ouvy59p0...inal.pdf
WWF correlating birds and climate change; whether 'climate change' is real or imaginary, a fact is that millions birds and bats are butchered every year by renewables, is real.
I'd like to hear about WWF, Greenpeace and other Taliban environmentalists, protesting beneath huge wind farms someday.



TechnoCreed
4.1 / 5 (9) May 26, 2015
@Birdy
WWF correlating birds and climate change; whether 'climate change' is real or imaginary, a fact is that millions birds and bats are butchered every year by renewables, is real.
I'd like to hear about WWF, Greenpeace and other Taliban environmentalists, protesting beneath huge wind farms someday.
Caring for wildlife and caring for the environment goes hand in hand and your response demonstrates clearly that you do not give a fuck about birds. Change your gimmick you do not fool anybody with this one.

Let's see what the National Audubon Society thinks about climate change and green energy... we know that THEY care about birds. http://www.audubo.../climate
WillieWard
3 / 5 (4) May 26, 2015
Let's see what the National Audubon Society thinks about climate change and green energy... we know that THEY care about birds. http://www.audubo.../climate
If these big environmental organizations care so much about birds, why are they not protesting beneath huge wind farms? That are monstrously slaughtering millions birds and bats? A dubious/imaginary climate menace instead a real threat from wind blades.
These huge environmentalist Talibans organizations believe in what they want and see what they want to see, and have their own interests('clean energy' lobby):
"Most of the evil in this world is done by people with good intentions."― T.S. Eliot
"Hell is paved with good intentions." ― Samuel Johnson
"A good intention, with a bad approach, often leads to a poor result."― Thomas A. Edison
"The evil that is in the world almost always comes of ignorance, and good intentions may do as much harm as malevolence if they lack understanding."-Albert Camus
WillieWard
3 / 5 (4) May 26, 2015
But honest organizations "Save the Eagles International" deserve our respect:
"Save the Eagles International is a platform regrouping bird lovers, ornithologists and associations from 14 countries, who think that we cannot count on mainstream ornithologists and bird societies to save bird life from the windfarm threat."
http://savetheeag...onal.org
"Contrary to what we are told wind farms will cause the extinction of many bat and bird species."
TechnoCreed
4.2 / 5 (10) May 26, 2015
@WW
I will stop calling you Birdy; this is an insult to birds.
If these big environmental organizations care so much about birds, why are they not protesting beneath huge wind farms? That are monstrously slaughtering millions birds and bats? A dubious/imaginary climate menace instead a real threat from wind blades.
Say what you want but NAS is about birds first and foremost.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 26, 2015
Willie knows nothing about power production, so he picks up one term and goes whole hog on it, wrong or not. Those of us who were utility engineers have no idea where these wiki folk come from, . . . but it isn't school.

Again, a Magic Box to give us all the power we want is not a good idea. How many do you trust Putin with? ISIS? George Dubya Bush?
WillieWard
3.7 / 5 (3) May 26, 2015
...this is an insult to birds.
stop calling renewable 'clean Eco-friendly energy', it is an insult to human intelligence.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 26, 2015
Willie thinks the wind which passes through wind turbines is contaminated, I guess. Perhaps he is unaware of the many technologies which do not produce nasty and toxic waste.
WillieWard
3.7 / 5 (3) May 26, 2015
...knows nothing about power production, so he picks up one term and goes whole hog on it, wrong or not. Those of us who were utility engineers have no idea where these wiki folk come from, . . . but it isn't school.
loutish gkam aka "Mr. I am an Engineer" http://www.kamburoff.com
always posing/self-proclaiming as (pseudo) energy expert, just his pedestal of falseness from where he feels a doctoral self-confidence for insulting other people.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 26, 2015
Gosh, Willie, I really was a Senior Engineer for Pacific Gas & Electric.

What is your experience?
WillieWard
3 / 5 (4) May 26, 2015
"Climate Scientists Get Respect, So Why Don't Nuclear Scientists?"
http://www.forbes...respect/
"39 Societies Sign Declaration: Nuclear Power Vital to Fighting Climate Change"
http://ansnuclear...-change/
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 26, 2015
Willie, I asked you a question. It directly ties to the credibility of our respective posts.

Respond, please.
WillieWard
3.7 / 5 (3) May 26, 2015
...thinks the wind which passes through wind turbines is contaminated,...
Wind turbines disturb humans too.
"Literature reviews and peer reviewed scientific articles confirm the symptoms associated with low frequency noise exposure include annoyance, stress, sleep disturbance, headaches, difficulty concentrating, irritability, fatigue, dizziness or vertigo, tinnitus, heart ailments anxiety, stitch and beating palpitation."
"International research and media reports document people exposed over time, to too-close wind turbines, are experiencing adverse health effects. These symptoms include sleep disturbance, headaches, difficulty concentrating, irritability and fatigue, but also include a number of otologic symptoms including dizziness or vertigo, tinnitus and the sensation of aural pain or pressure."
http://www.windvi...turbines
http://westminste...2003.pdf
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (20) May 26, 2015
Lots of things are "important". But 'failed' boodoggles are not as important as proven and improving renewal alternatives, especially if enormous amounts of money, intellectual and other resources are denied to better alternatives
But theyre not 'failed'. Again thats an OPINION not a fact.

Research over the last few decades has made great strides in our understanding of plasma and how to control it. Our understanding of plasma is CRITICAL to future technologies. Just because its not producing the electricity for your tortured A/C unit as of yet, doesnt mean it is not going to continue.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (19) May 26, 2015
Gosh, Willie, I really was a Senior Engineer for Pacific Gas & Electric.

What is your experience?
Why would PG&E hire someone with no education, degree, EIT-equivalent experience, or licence in CA for a senior level position? Their website says they wouldnt.

This makes you a liar. And your confirmed lies about what you know and how you know it, kind of says that you cant do much else but lie, can you?
the credibility of our respective posts
Your posts include nonsense about manure being a MAJOR component of 'high atmosphere' (???) pollution in the central valley.

And we KNOW thats bullshit.

So who are you to talk about credibility?

I rest my case.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (19) May 26, 2015
you tried every daft rationalization/evasion/dismissal in the book!
No I didnt. You must have misunderstood. Why, just this morning I heard charles osgood explaining how there is tech now to allow turbines to talk to each other and compensate for wake disturbances, thereby improving efficiency and reducing maintenance. This would make wind power competitive without subsidies.

Yay.
But now you use that very same developmental trajectory/importance argument to justify obviously failed/wasteful boondoggle 'research effort' on ITER etc, and all of a sudden that argument is "ok"?
You bet its ok. Its critical.

Im sorry but wind is rinky dink. Its a stop gap measure until we have a compact, safe, scalable power source which can eliminate the grid.

Something like this
http://www.e-catw...e-units/
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (19) May 26, 2015
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 26, 2015
Magic Boxes are the dream of those not in the field.

Typical.

TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (20) May 26, 2015
The unwieldy bulk/mass of which I spoke was that of the container/machine overall, not the amount of plasma contained
Join the club.

It is apparent to me that the possibilities of the aeroplane, which two or three years ago were thought to hold the solution to the [flying machine] problem, have been exhausted, and that we must turn elsewhere.

— Thomas Edison, quoted in New York World, 17 November 1895.

Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible.

— Lord Kelvin, President of the Royal Society, 1895.

It is apparent to me that the possibilities of the aeroplane, which two or three years ago was thought to hold the solution to the [flying machine] problem, have been exhausted, and that we must turn elsewhere.

— Thomas Edison, quoted in the 'New York World,' 17 November 1895.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 26, 2015
You folk on the outside of the power business can pump all of your own money into those dreams. Many of the rest of us will construct our own systems using stuff we can control, not requiring a Nuclear Priesthood and a Police State.

I thought you guys hated Big Brother.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 26, 2015
Didn't the "History Channel" use those same quotations of otto's to "prove" the meddling of Ancient Aliens?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (19) May 26, 2015
You folk on the outside of the power business can pump all of your own money into those dreams. Many of the rest of us will construct our own systems using stuff we can control, not requiring a Nuclear Priesthood and a Police State.

I thought you guys hated Big Brother.
Nah we hate smelly liars and bullshit artists.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 26, 2015
Let's all worship at the Shrine of The Nuclear Priesthood. We can entrust a very few with the special highly-technical knowledge in these fields, or we can make our own power with distributed energy systems, and stop being controlled by the Big Brother the conservatives really want, like the Bush Police State.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (8) May 26, 2015
'failed' boodoggles are not as important as ...
@RC
sorry, i have to disagree with you here
it is all about perception

the same term was applied to the accelerator being built in the US until the cold war ended, which caused everyone in the US gov't to claim it was a waste of spending: lo and behold, the accelerator, which was to be far more powerful than CERN, was called a boondoggle and worse (pork barrel spending) and cut

basically, fundamental science is always on the edge of what is known seeking answers, and will always be at risk by those wishing to cut funding because they are scientifically illiterate

IMHO - ANY knowledge that furthers us into the future must be protected and followed
we already have historical proof of what happens when dogma/politics/religion overtake knowledge

it is not a failure if we gain knowledge from it: from its successes AND from its failures
not talking business here but SCIENCE
we can do BOTH renewables and fusion
RealityCheck
1.2 / 5 (17) May 26, 2015
Hi Otto. :) Thank you for your polite and reasoned replies to mine. I see what your thrust is, in each of the discussion points between us. However the difference between us on each is subtle. I will respond in order of your posted responses/points to my last, across a few posts by dint of physorg's text limits:

- research into plasma properties/behaviors/benefits is not new. It does not require such huge/expensive 'projects' as these, especially if it has produced no substantial return on investment for many dcades/efforts/costs, either in sustainable energy or knowledge not obtained from less expensive, more promising, less futile projects. PS: I don't use A/C for health as well as commonsense/environmental reasons. :)

[continued...]
RealityCheck
1.4 / 5 (18) May 26, 2015
[...continued]

- Re the Wind Turbine evolution/advances, I was the one who brought your/others' attention to that 'trajectory' in improvements in all areas involved to make them more efficient, less expensive, more durable etc.; and my point was also that 'conventional' power/mining/distribution/development has had more and longer subsidies than green alternatives could ever dream of; and Wind Energy is part of a wholistic 'mix' to avoid "all eggs in one/centralized basket" vulnerability to disastrous events etc....and you lambasted me for pointing these things out, and me advising more subsidies for development/implementation of all alternative, not just Wind. It's good to see you have dropped your erstwhile vehement 'contrarian' rhetoric/attacks since then. Thanks. [continued...]
RealityCheck
1.4 / 5 (18) May 26, 2015
[...continued]

- Regarding Kelvin's "aeroplane" and other self-satisfied, defeatist naysaying of new knowledge/technology possibilities, it is important to understand the difference between something limited merely by HIS lack of vision based on conventional tech/thought, and something limited INHERENTLY by the plasma (and overall ITER/Tokamak type/scale machine) physics which bulk/mass, instabilities, losses INHERENTLY intractable problems present for extracting useful amounts of excess energy without damage and with unreliability/unsustainability unlikely to be solved in our generation or next and beyond....much too late for our looming CO2 'tipping point' deadline.

Thanks again for your polite and reasoned replies. Good to talk with you man to man without our past 'personal baggage', mate. Cheers. :)
RealityCheck
1.2 / 5 (18) May 26, 2015
Hi Captain.

Thanks for your polite and reasoned contribution to my exchange with Otto. :)
'failed' boondoggles are not as important as ...
@RC
sorry, i have to disagree with you here
it is all about perception

the same term was applied to the accelerator being built in the US until the cold war ended, which caused everyone in the US gov't to claim it was a waste of spending: lo and behold, the accelerator, which was to be far more powerful than CERN, was called a boondoggle and worse (pork barrel spending) and cut

basically, fundamental science is always on the edge of what is known seeking answers, and will always be at risk by those wishing to cut funding because they are scientifically illiterate
Please first read my above replies to Otto. In this case it's about INHERENT physical/technical unfeasibility, not merely 'perception'.

PS: LHC was not physically/technically unfeasible, but WAS 'perceived' too expensive in 'opportunity cost' terms etc. Ok?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (20) May 27, 2015
thank you for your polite and reasoned replies
Bite me :)
It does not require huge and expensive projects
Of COURSE it does. The PURPOSE of this research is to explore play behavior at the quantities, densities, temperatures, and confinement times that can only be produced in these large reactors.

Your comment only demonstrates how little you know about the subject.
no substantial return on investment in many decades/years/generations/months and months
Again, this is how little you know and refuse to find out. This mindset is called 'prejudice'. It is unscientific as well as impolite.

Here is an article you never read about the benefits we enjoy today from fusion research.
https://www.ameri...oday.pdf

-And as I say the big one will not be cheap energy but the ability to store antimatter and other such exotic materials in plasma form, indefinitely.

gkam
1.2 / 5 (20) May 27, 2015
Fusion "research", another Economic Black Hole.

Let the fusion religion pay for it themselves. I do not want power I cannot control myself. Now we can be independent of Big Corporations and Big Brother.
WillieWard
3.7 / 5 (3) May 27, 2015
Instead of everybody being more independent, concentrated power brings with it the necessity for control of us and our dependence on Big Money and Big Brother
..
We can live within our means without the concentration of power and control of Big Brother and Big Money. I want to be independent, not to rely on someone who knows what is "better" for us
..
Give us the billions, and we will have clean alternative energy we all understand and can fix. I want stuff in my hands, not those of Big Money or Big Brother
..
If you folk like centralized control, a police state, and your future in the hands of Big Brother or Big Corporate
..
I do not want power I cannot control myself. Now we can be independent of Big Corporations and Big Brother.
There are no laws prohibiting people from installing solar panels on their home's roofs nor placing wind turbines in their backyards; in case of someone is willing to go back to the middle age or exterminate millions birds, no legal impediments
gkam
1.2 / 5 (20) May 27, 2015
Willie, give it up.
WillieWard
3 / 5 (4) May 27, 2015
Willie, give it up.
from trying to protect wildlife's habitats from the 'green energy' hypocritical lobbies interests?
Honest organizations "Save the Eagles International" will not give it up.
http://savetheeag...nal.org/
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
My last post - 'play' should be plasma.

I hate spellcheck like I hate LIARS and BULLSHIT artists.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
The Decent Folk do not appreciate the garbage-mouth snipers who hide behind pseudonyms to play their "games" as otto calls his posts.

If folk knew what they were talking about, they would not need a computer to tell them what they meant.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
If folk knew what they were talking about
Well lets see, you know that:

Fallout is the MAIN cause of lung cancer

Dried manure is called volatile solids and is a MAJOR polluter of the 'high atmosphere' (??) in CA

H2 explosions can cause dirty molten Pu puddles to fission and throw imaginary reactor parts 130 km

HIGH ENERGY alpha cannot penetrate the skin

Its ok to double the number and intensity of earthquakes for effect

Graphene and graphite are the same things

Merely standing in a facility can tell you how it works and how it was designed

Etcetcetcetc

-Exposing ignorant, lying little trolls like yourself is not sniping. Its a community service.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
Give it up,otto. I have proven who I am, and shown you proof. You have admitted in these fora you are a lurker, a sniper hiding, cowering behind a pseudonym, playing "games" with the rest of us who are serious about discussions.

But I do actually do appreciate your taunts, which give me the opportunity to educate you in another field of mine. We have not gotten to them all, so stay tuned.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
I have proven who I am, and shown you proof.
So explain how this makes the drivel that I listed above, right.

Explain it george.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
But I do actually do appreciate your taunts, which give me the opportunity to educate you in another field of mine. We have not gotten to them all, so stay tuned
What, making up phony personas online? Because like I say its hard to imagine that anybody could be this inane except on purpose. But then I dont know a whole lot about insanity or senility.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
I am sure glad otto's computer spell check lets him scream "LIAR" and "Bullshit!", so we all can see his rationality.

This goober thinks he can hide like a lurker and "out" folk with more education and experience than he/she has.

Hilarious!

Bullying may work on the silly folk with whom you exist, but not with real people. Face it, otto, you tried to be the bully but got shown up.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
This goober thinks he can hide like a lurker and "out" folk with more education and experience than he/she has.

Hilarious!
-So explain why this means that the drivel I listed above, and that you are responsible for, is right when we KNOW that its wrong.

EXPLAIN it george.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
How much have we squandered on the wet dream of Magic Boxes? How many kWh have they produced? What is the cost/kWh?

Billions squandered, but no output? What is this, another Bush War type of scam?

This is a favorite of those on the sidelines.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
How much have we squandered on the wet dream of Magic Boxes? How many kWh have they produced? What is the cost/kWh?

Billions squandered, but no output? What is this, another Bush War type of scam?
Quit dodging. Enough bullshit.

Explain why you think the drivel I listed above, and that you are responsible for, is right when we KNOW that its wrong.

EXPLAIN it george.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
"I"??

Who are you?

You already admitted you are an anonymous sniper playing games with those of us who want real discussions.

There is no "you".
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
It looks like it will be trouble at Fukushima for centuries.

http://investment...ulation/

http://nuclear-ne...kushima/
WillieWard
5 / 5 (2) May 27, 2015
It looks like it will be trouble at Fukushima for centuries.
Also in some places the Earth's natural radioactivity reaches up to 800 mSv/a while around Fukushima no more than 20 mSv/a.
gkam, left Earth and go to live in another planet.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (18) May 27, 2015
"I"??

Who are you?

You already admitted you are an anonymous sniper playing games with those of us who want real discussions.

There is no "you"
Revealing your name doesn't make the items in the list I posted above any less WRONG.

Explain please why you think it does.

Explain.
WillieWard
3 / 5 (2) May 27, 2015
for Willie. Look one up.
http://www.news.c...02573947
and
http://www.japant...bXUZtGGk
volcano = geothermal energy = renewable
kills more than nuclear, it is not a nuclear fault. Even so, in emergencies, nuclear power plants can be put in the shutdown mode when a volcanic eruption is imminent.
Mark Thomas
1.6 / 5 (7) May 27, 2015
From the ITER website, "The science going on at ITER—and all around the world in support of ITER—will benefit all of mankind." http://www.iter.o...rmission

The folks running ITER must think this is pure marketing fluff meant only for simpletons. If they truly believed it they would have acted like every day and every decade lost is doing real damage to mankind in terms of energy production, pollution, energy-related politics, global warming, space exploration, and pushing related industries forward. Maybe this is why the 21st century seems so much like the 20th. Because real progress on this key enabling technology is being held back through some combination of incompetence and corruption.
WillieWard
5 / 5 (2) May 27, 2015
"No one has died from radiation at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant complex."

2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami is that killed thousands.
"On 10 March 2015, a Japanese National Police Agency report confirmed 15,891 deaths, 6,152 injured, and 2,584 people missing across twenty prefectures..."
http://en.wikiped..._tsunami
But sensationalist mass media and fearmongers love much more nuclear exaggerations to raise irrational public commotions over the world.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (19) May 27, 2015
"Even so, in emergencies, nuclear power plants can be put in the shutdown mode when a volcanic eruption is imminent."
---------------------------------------------------------------

"Shutdown mode"? Do you know what that means? It means it is dependent on outside power to keep the pumps and other stuff running so it will not overheat and melt down.

It is also what happened at Fukushima.
RealityCheck
1.2 / 5 (18) May 28, 2015
Hi Otto.
Bite me :)
No way! But thanks all the same!:)

It does not require huge and expensive projects
Of COURSE it does. The PURPOSE of this research is to explore play behavior at the quantities, densities, temperatures, and confinement times that can only be produced in these large reactors.
I get what you're saying, but all the plasma behaviors are known and simulated by now. The main finding now is: bulk plasma control, and financial/technical feasibility of net energy at assumed 'cheapness' and 'reliability', is too costly/inefficient/unlikely.
Here is an article you never read about the benefits we enjoy today from fusion research.
https://www.ameri...oday.pdf
Mate, I'm 65 and multi-field independent researcher/scientist since age 9. I've read it all. More than you, I bet; including most recent developments. Antimatter cost-per is astro.
RealityCheck
1.2 / 5 (17) May 28, 2015
Repaired post...
Bite me :)
No way! But thanks all the same! :)
It does not require huge and expensive projects
Of COURSE it does. The PURPOSE of this research is to explore play behavior at the quantities, densities, temperatures, and confinement times that can only be produced in these large reactors.
I get what you're saying, but all the plasma behaviors are known and simulated by now. The main finding now is: bulk plasma control, and financial/technical feasibility of net energy at assumed 'cheapness' and 'reliability', is too costly/inefficient/unlikely.
Here is an article you never read about the benefits we enjoy today from fusion research.
https://www.ameri...oday.pdf
Mate, I'm 65 and multi-field independent researcher/scientist since age 9. I've read it all. More than you, I bet; including most recent developments. Antimatter cost-per is humongous!
WillieWard
5 / 5 (2) May 28, 2015
...It means it is dependent on outside power to keep the pumps and other stuff running so it will not overheat and melt down.
"So too must the advanced nuclear power stations now being deployed worldwide based on proven light water reactor technology to replace the existing fleet of operating reactors.
Such safety gains are now being achieved through the adoption of reactor safety systems operated by laws of nature such as gravity and natural circulation, rather than being dependent on actively generated electric power. These emergency coolant safety systems can automatically deliver needed coolant to prevent core damage by gravity flow, without the need for operator action.
Approaches to reduce reactor costs are being achieved through innovations in construction techniques which reduce both capital costs and erection time."
Read more at: http://phys.org/n...rth.html
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (4) May 28, 2015
Such safety gains are now being achieved through the adoption of reactor safety systems operated by laws of nature such as gravity and natural circulation, rather than being dependent on actively generated electric power.

Problem is that this is all contingent on the integrity of the system. A cooling system that works based on natural circulation is still dependent on the pipes not bursting and the reservoir for cooling fluid being not empty.
E.g. through the types of shocks or damage you get during an earthquake or tsunami the 'natural circulation' can be compromised or the pipes downright damages. In those cases you're as much in trouble as in all past nuclear accidents.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (20) May 28, 2015
I get what you're saying, but all the plasma behaviors are known and simulated by now. The main finding now is: bulk plasma control, and financial/technical feasibility of net energy at assumed 'cheapness' and 'reliability', is too costly/inefficient/unlikely
NO they're NOT. They haven't been to sustain containment indefinitely at fusion temperatures. They haven't solved the problem of Plasma quench. They haven't developed materials which can stand conditions found on inner vessel walls. Etc.

These issues can only be explored with an ITER-sized machine.
ive read it all
-So why are you ignorant of all the benefits already gained from fusion research including MRI? Why are you ignorant of all the problems yet to solve?

Why are you ignorant?
antimatter cost
Antimatter is the most concentrated form of energy storage we can conceive. In the future it will be the preferred power source for transportation off-planet. And so we need to figure out how to store it.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (19) May 28, 2015
Things will be manufactured starting with materials in plasma form. They already are.
http://www.plasma...ring.htm

-Something else you were not aware of.
Im a big deal multi field researcher
-This does not make the wrong things you say any less wrong. You expose your laziness and insecurity by trying to use it to justify what you say.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (18) May 28, 2015
Dream on, folk. Just do not use my money.

Yeah, I know, we're "just around the corner" on this one. But the object has an infinite number of sides.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) May 28, 2015
In this case it's about INHERENT physical/technical unfeasibility, not merely 'perception'
@rc
1- the expense was my point re: SSC (NOT the LHC)
2- the point was also that it was a beneficial necessary need for fundamental research until the perceptions changed
https://en.wikipe...Collider

the SSC was justified based upon whatever means you want to give it: that part is not really relevant

the relevant part of my post was WRT the change of perceptions regarding the SSC

IOW- it fully supports my conclusions about scientific illiteracy as well as the fact that perceptions play a huge part in how things can progress, regardless of the knowledge or the science that will definitely come from it (see also: space shuttle/NASA and their current cut in funding)

& don't thank me for anything
as long as you produce logical science, links/proof and are not whining about your perceived victimization, we will get along fine
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (6) May 28, 2015
Mate, I'm 65 and multi-field independent researcher/scientist since age 9. I've read it all. More than you, I bet; including most recent developments. Antimatter cost-per is humongous!
@Sam-you-am
you have also not been able to demonstrate that you are any of these things to date
a claim, unverified or unproven, is simply conjecture without evidence

your idea of being a "multi-field independent researcher/scientist since age 9" is to make a personal verbal claim, and you have YET to be able to produce any reliable links, published papers or proof that you have any scientific credibility to your name

and i am not even going to get into the already well known pseudoscience you've posted in the past, earthling-boy

you like to promote yourself as a grand big deal
but the evidence, from here as well as Sciforums and Sapo's Joint, says that you are seeking attention

http://www.scifor...page=246

http://www.scifor...?page=68

kochevnik
2 / 5 (4) May 28, 2015
@WW millions of birds annihilated by wind blades to serve as organic matter.
If birds can learn to use birdhouses and bird feeders, they can learn to dodge windmills. Many windmills moreover are in isolated places
WillieWard
3.7 / 5 (3) May 28, 2015
If birds can learn to use birdhouses and bird feeders, they can learn to dodge windmills. Many windmills moreover are in isolated places
Wildlife is to have its habitats shrunk, or adapt to dodging from slaughtering wind blades; fair-weather friends: with Eco-friends like renewable, who needs enemies.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (19) May 28, 2015
@Sam-you-am
you have also not been able to demonstrate that you are any of these things to date
a claim, unverified or unproven, is simply conjecture without evidence
It doesn't matter whether he verifies it or not. Like gkam, it wouldnt make the bullshit he posts any less wrong. It only makes his claims of expertise more pathetic.

'Scientist since age 9' -bwahaahaaahaaaaaa!
RealityCheck
1.2 / 5 (18) May 28, 2015
Hi Otto.
I get what you're saying, but all the plasma behaviors are known and simulated by now. The main finding now is: bulk plasma control, and financial/technical feasibility of net energy at assumed 'cheapness' and 'reliability', is too costly/inefficient/unlikely
NO they're NOT. They haven't been to sustain containment indefinitely at fusion temperatures. They haven't solved the problem of Plasma quench. They haven't developed materials which can stand conditions found on inner vessel walls. Etc.
They have been through all that. The upshot is that it's all either too expensive, unreliable or unsustainable technically without huge corrective/protective systems that dwarf the plasma content/usefulness for power generation/extraction. That way my point, and you just re-iterted what they have NOT been able to do all this time; and have recognized they cannot do in future without exhorbitant/unweildy costs/systems/structures.

Mate, I knew long before you wiki'd it.
RealityCheck
1.2 / 5 (19) May 28, 2015
Hey Otto and Stumpy. Nice to see a couple of know nothing trolls 'chat' to each other. Need the mutual 'reassurance' from 'peer' ignoramuses, hey? Never mind. I'm sure somebody loves and believes you have anything to offer science and humanity discourse but trolling personal agendas and malignant troll 'parroting' in that mindless way you two are good at while pretending to be in any position to talk. Carry on, with your newfound troll-buddy 'friendship', you two. Stupids 'coupling', but cute to see you've 'found each other' here on phys! :)
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.9 / 5 (19) May 28, 2015
Mate, I knew long before you wiki'd it
Question: are rc and gkam the same person?? The rc persona is full of aussie identifiers and unique catchphrases as if he were all made up.

Perhaps theyre both merely patients at the same facility.
Hi Otto.
Wheres your little smiley face douchbag?
They have been through all that
I know you like to imagine that your made-up facts are just as good as real ones. Easier than actually finding them out.

I know - you think your play facts are actually better than the real things dont you? More fun anyways-

From the ITER website:

"Thermal quench (TQ) and current quench (CQ) studies are part of the research underway on disruption mitigation and runaway electron suppression."
gkam
1.2 / 5 (18) May 28, 2015
"Question: are rc and gkam the same person?? The rc persona is full of aussie identifiers and unique catchphrases as if he were all made up."
-------------------------------------

otto must really get out more, . . . . or at all.

I am surprised at the naivete, a general lack of knowledge of how the world really works. Any one who brags they play games with the rest of us while hiding behind pseudonyms does not count because they do not really exist, do they?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (20) May 28, 2015
Hey I found archival footage of rc the 9yo scientist/researcher/doctorate candidate/boy genius exploring the bounds of materials science.
https://www.youtu...hH7QMnJ8

-Im stunned.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (18) May 28, 2015
I am surprised at the naivete, a general lack of knowledge of how the world really works.
So explain how these things work in your world

Fallout is the MAIN cause of lung cancer

Dried manure is called volatile solids and is a MAJOR polluter of the 'high atmosphere' (??) in CA

H2 explosions can cause dirty molten Pu puddles to fission and throw imaginary reactor parts 130 km

HIGH ENERGY alpha cannot penetrate the skin

Its ok to double the number and intensity of earthquakes for effect

Graphene and graphite are the same things

Merely standing in a facility can tell you how it works and how it was designed

Etcetcetcetc

-Its simple mr big deal senior engr and airman/tech of the month. Explain them. Any of them.

And THEN explain why you think your pedigree makes them right when everybody KNOWS theyre wrong.

And explain why you think your phony pedigree makes you think you can go on posting the same BULLSHIT unquestioned.

Explain yourself George.
RealityCheck
1.2 / 5 (17) May 28, 2015
Otto, get a grip, mate. :)
Mate, I knew long before you wiki'd it
Question: are rc and gkam the same person?? The rc persona is full of aussie identifiers and unique catchphrases as if he were all made up
Conspiracy! Otto, if you'd resist your troll urges which blind you to even the most bleedingly obvious facts, you could ask Stumpy where I live. He knows I live in Oz. And as far as I can gather, gkam lives in US. Just because you have encountered two sane, mature, widely experienced researchers/scientists whom you could never match at any level in intellect, objective, original thinking/problem-solving, you lazily/evasively default to insinuations we are the same person? Chill & Learn instead, mate.
"Thermal quench (TQ) and current quench (CQ) studies are part of the research underway on disruption mitigation and runaway electron suppression."
That means more costs/delays; and still won't solve all the inherent limitations already recognized and pointed out.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (18) May 28, 2015
researchers/scientists whom you could never match at any level in intellect
So explain why you think that
They have been through all that
When in reality the truth is

"Thermal quench (TQ) and current quench (CQ) studies are part of the research underway on disruption mitigation and runaway electron suppression."

You have a few choices. 1) You didnt actually know. 2) You knew but forgot. 3) You knew but decided to disregard what mere scientists had to say, and made up your own facts from the substance of your very excellent mind. 4) You didnt bother to know but decided to make up your own facts from the substance of your very excellent mind. As usual.

So which?
That means more costs/delays; and still won't solve all the inherent limitations already recognized and pointed out
-More facts you made up yourself. Can you tell the difference? Or did you miss that lesson back when you were 9 years old?

:)
RealityCheck
1.2 / 5 (17) May 28, 2015
Otto, stop digging. :)
Hey I found archival footage of rc the 9yo scientist/researcher/doctorate candidate/boy genius exploring the bounds of materials science.
https://www.youtu...hH7QMnJ8

-Im stunned.
See what happens when you don't have sense enough to stop digging? You default to making a fool of yourself by resorting to unscientific personal posts which prove my point about your lacking character and intelligence of any use to yourself or science or humanity. Otto, stop digging. Listen and Learn. Otherwise you are headed for that 'asylum' you imagined for others. Seriously, mate; you present with all the symptoms. Not good. Take a long break from whatever it is you think you are doing here. Good luck for a speedy recovery. Really. I look forward to your return to sound mental health, mate. Take care. :)
RealityCheck
1.2 / 5 (17) May 28, 2015
Otto. :)
researchers/scientists whom you could never match at any level in intellect
So explain why you think that
No need. Your unoriginal 'wiki dependent' posting record as self-demonstrated troll/pretender speaks for itself.
They have been through all that
When in reality the truth is

"Thermal quench (TQ) and current quench (CQ) studies are part of the research underway on disruption mitigation and runaway electron suppression."
Repeating it won't make the reality pointed out any less real, mate. Inherent problems don't just 'go away' by just spending more time and money hoping they will. think objectively; don't believe hype-for-funding propaganda/fantasies, ok?
That means more costs/delays; and still won't solve all the inherent limitations already recognized and pointed out
Or did you miss that lesson back when you were 9 years old?:)
You sound like a 9-year old troll with wiki access; but makes fundamental errors and doesn't know it. :)
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (19) May 28, 2015
You afraid of a little brevity mate? Just explain why you think in your very excellent mind that you know all there is to know about plasma physics, and yet not know this?

"Thermal quench (TQ) and current quench (CQ) studies are part of the research underway on disruption mitigation and runaway electron suppression."

-You didnt even know what these things were did you? (and still dont) Come on, admit it. Pretty obvious.

;)))
RealityCheck
1.7 / 5 (18) May 28, 2015
Otto. :)
You afraid of a little brevity rc? Just explain why you think in your very excellent mind that you know all there is to know about plasma physics, and yet not know this?

"Thermal quench (TQ) and current quench (CQ) studies are part of the research underway on disruption mitigation and runaway electron suppression."

-You didnt even know what these things were did you? (and still dont) Come on, admit it. Pretty obvious.

;)))
You call your trolling and evading and stalking and dismissing from subjective agenda "brevity"? I'd like to see when you are "correct", mate!

And do you realize you are playing the same 'forcing' game of 'explain yourself' etc with me as you did with gkam? It's transparently obvious as it is juvenile. How old are you?

Your repetition of that only reinforces MY points about the inherent/exorbitant problems/costs involved; all of which have long been known by all, including me...but apparently excluding YOU. Catch up! And grow up! :)
gkam
1.2 / 5 (17) May 28, 2015
RC, otto cuts and pastes like Ryggy, not understanding it. Sometimes, he looks up stuff, then bleats it back to me telling me I said it. Hilarious.

Like he said, he plays games. He has no identity or credibility, as demonstrated by his "knowledge" of the world.
rgw
3 / 5 (2) May 30, 2015
"Yep, by Jiminy horses and mules were good enough for millenia!"
------------------------------------

Perhaps you may lack imagination or knowledge of new technologies?


Dass ist because I worship Yimminy Cricket! By golly!!!!

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.