Jump to content

Chinese Fusion


druS
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've been surprised that this report in the local Australian popular press has not tipped interest.

calin https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-15/china-attempts-to-create-an-artificial-sun/10495536

My understanding was that once temperature were achieved of something like 60million K that the system would be self sustaining. Here they claim more than that but that it was maintained shortly.

What am I missing? Why aren't physicists talking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a specific link to read michael123456?

From druS's article, I can see that China's EAST demonstrated that 100 million C has been achieved for 10 seconds, hence proofing that fusion temperature is easily achievable as the interior of the Sun is only 15 million C. I read the claim on China Daily last year I think.

I am amazed that ITER has no facility to harness the energy, whilst I thought that it was supposed to demonstrate a plant that can harness more energy than the amount input on a continuous basis.

It is good to see that there are several teams in the world trying out different approaches & materials to achieve fusion energy generation.

 

Edited by Edwina Lee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ITER is an experimental project, it is not designed to produce electricity for use. It is almost ready. China is also involved in this project together with the U.S., Russia, Europe, Japan, India, South Korea & others. The goal is to provide the know-how for everybody on planet Earth. It is the largest peaceful collaboration between nations after the International Space Station.

As far as I know the chinese project will retrieve all information from ITER in order to build a real productive unit. Other such projects exist in other nations at other scales.

18 hours ago, Edwina Lee said:

Is there a specific link to read michael123456?

 

 

Begin with the ITER wikipedia.

The ITER site is a bit complicated to dig but there is plenty information.

18 hours ago, Edwina Lee said:

It is good to see that there are several teams in the world trying out different approaches & materials to achieve fusion energy generation.

Yes I agree. There should be more of these. I find it especially encouraging & progressive.

Sor far I know the ISS, CERN, & ITER.

And of course Olympic games & football (soccer) that cost much more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/16/2018 at 7:36 AM, druS said:

My understanding was that once temperature were achieved of something like 60million K that the system would be self sustaining. Here they claim more than that but that it was maintained shortly.

Maintaining a plasma is an extremely difficult operation. It has to be kept in shape with phenomenally powerful magnets, and the hotter it gets, the more unstable it gets. It's very impressive that they kept it going for ten seconds. We have a Tokamak in Oxford called JET and there's one in the USA called TFTR. They are all research Tokamaks, they are nowhere near sustainability. The JET and TFTR found that as energies and densities of the plasma increased, stability got worse, and couldn't be improved with machines of their size. That's what led to the ITER project. Interestingly, JET have recorded temperatures of 200 million C, according to this : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27138087  and they did set the record for Q . To break even on energy in/out you need Q of 1 and they managed 0.67. 

The break even point is a bit misleading. You need five to ten times energy in/out ratio to be economic, because the energy in is expensive electricity, and the energy out is low value heat. 

Some of the problems to be overcome to enable a continuous run are stability at higher energies, materials for shielding and heat collection that can withstand the constant bombardment from neutrons, and robots to remotely handle materials in a harsh environment.

I'm amazed that with the joint effort being made, the budged is less than twenty billion, for something that's potentially world changing. 

Bill Gates could have funded ITER three times over. I think I read somewhere that the USA spends more on pet grooming, than it does on fusion research. It shows how seriously government actually take climate change. ITER is pin money to them. 

There are other approaches to fusion being followed, using high-powered lasers to heat pellets of fuel, but they don't seem to be as optimistic about those at present. 

I'd like to see the money going into ITER and it's successor DEMO doubled or trebled, to speed it along. There must be a profit in it at the end, looking at what the world spends on electricity, and how it's forecast to rise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.