SCI FI TECH
The False Hype Around Nuclear Fusion
by Allan Grain
minby @allan-grain
The internet has been awash with reports of a “major breakthrough” in nuclear fusion technology that could change the way we produce energy, moving from dirty fossil fuels to clean, green energy.
In a historic first, the team at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s National Ignition Facility (LLNL), recently announced that they managed to create a surplus of nuclear fusion energy by bombarding hydrogen isotopes with powerful lasers.
But according to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the reports are misleading and major hurdles to a fusion-powered world remain.
The fusion achievement that the US Energy Department has announced is scientifically significant but does not relate primarily to the generation of electricity.
Replicating the process that gives the Sun its energy — turning hydrogen into helium - is not as simple as the media outlets may have it sound.
It is true that carbon-free, fusion-powered electricity generation is everyone’s dream but not everyone was paying close attention to what has been said and what the truth is.
The focus was on what Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said in the news conference but few people paid attention to National Nuclear Security Administration Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs Marv Adams who noted that while the science is there, the practicality of using it to replace fossil fuels is still not relevant.
The fact is that the project, carried out in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), focuses more on protecting nuclear stockpiles than it does on producing clean energy, but you wouldn’t know that from Granholms’ press conference, the media reportage, or comments made by public figures.
Granholm said this new breakthrough will provide “invaluable insights into the prospects of clean fusion energy, which would be a game-changer for efforts to achieve President Biden’s goal of a net-zero carbon economy.”
While she did say that nuclear fusion would “help us solve humanity’s most complex and pressing problems, like providing clean power to combat climate change” she also mentioned that it would help in “maintaining a nuclear deterrent without nuclear testing.”
US government officials are also guilty of misconstruing the news in what seems to be their over-excitement that the use of fusion energy could halt or even reverse the negative effects of climate change.
U.S. Representative Eric Swalwell said, “This breakthrough will ensure the safety and reliability of our nuclear stockpile, open new frontiers in science, and enable progress toward new ways to power our homes and offices in future decades.”
“This monumental scientific breakthrough is a milestone for the future of clean energy,” said U.S. Senator Alex Padilla.
We still have a long way to go, but this… could help fuel a brighter clean energy future for the United States and humanity,” said U.S. Senator Jack Reed.
“This astonishing scientific advance puts us on the precipice of a future no longer reliant on fossil fuels but instead powered by new clean fusion energy,” U.S. Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer.
But again, the possibility of nuclear fusion replacing fossil fuels wasn’t the real news.
According to Molly Glick at Inverse, “the National Ignition Facility team emphasized that, while the recent feat is worth celebrating, we can’t expect large-scale fusion plants to power our homes anytime soon.”
She quotes Mark Herrmann, deputy director for fundamental weapons physics at LLNL, who said, “The laser wasn't designed to be efficient. The laser was designed to give us as much juice as possible to make these incredible conditions possible happen basically in the laboratory.”
Yes, the National Ignition Facility at LLNL finally attained “fusion ignition” – a long-awaited achievement for nuclear fusion researchers around the globe, but fusion ignition for consumer electricity generation is only one part of what NIF does.
NIF was built for two missions: performing research in support of the Stockpile Stewardship Program - its foremost duty - and to further our quest to understand and harness energy from nuclear fusion.
Its second mission, having reached a certain level of success now, is what made headlines, but it is mostly hype and a lot less fact that you will see in the media.
According to the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), one of its core missions is to ensure the United States maintains a safe, secure, and reliable nuclear stockpile through the application of unparalleled science, technology, engineering, and manufacturing.
The Office of Defense Programs carries out NNSA’s mission to maintain and modernize the nuclear stockpile through the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Program.
According to experts with knowledge of what NIF does, the machine to create nuclear fusion used approximately 400 megajoules to operate during the experiment and lost about 99% of the power it consumed.
That difference in energy is considerably far from what anyone would consider a net energy gain.
Another problem with the hype about nuclear fusion soon replacing fossil fuels is that the machine used for the experiment takes a number of hours until it can be reused. It took years to perfect the process and the ability to use the machine at all.
In order to generate consumer-level energy, the machine would need to accomplish this feat 10,000 times faster and scientists and engineers would need to perfect a way to extract the energy in the form of heat for practical use.
According to Tom Hartsfield at Big Think, there is also a supply problem. The pellets used to produce fusion contain deuterium and tritium.
While deuterium is plentiful, unfortunately, the world’s entire supply of tritium is somewhere around a pithy 50 pounds and the market cost of tritium stands at around $1 million per ounce.
Clearly, fusion energy to create consumer-ready electricity production is far off. As with anything in the news, be aware of the hype and read the small print. Yes, nuclear fusion as a clean energy source may be the future. But not yet.
by Allan Grain @allan-grain.
The internet has been awash with reports of a “major breakthrough” in nuclear fusion technology that could change the way we produce energy, moving from dirty fossil fuels to clean, green energy.
In a historic first, the team at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s National Ignition Facility (LLNL), recently announced that they managed to create a surplus of nuclear fusion energy by bombarding hydrogen isotopes with powerful lasers.
But according to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the reports are misleading and major hurdles to a fusion-powered world remain.
The fusion achievement that the US Energy Department has announced is scientifically significant but does not relate primarily to the generation of electricity.
Replicating the process that gives the Sun its energy — turning hydrogen into helium - is not as simple as the media outlets may have it sound.
It is true that carbon-free, fusion-powered electricity generation is everyone’s dream but not everyone was paying close attention to what has been said and what the truth is.
The focus was on what Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said in the news conference but few people paid attention to National Nuclear Security Administration Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs Marv Adams who noted that while the science is there, the practicality of using it to replace fossil fuels is still not relevant.
The fact is that the project, carried out in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), focuses more on protecting nuclear stockpiles than it does on producing clean energy, but you wouldn’t know that from Granholms’ press conference, the media reportage, or comments made by public figures.
Granholm said this new breakthrough will provide “invaluable insights into the prospects of clean fusion energy, which would be a game-changer for efforts to achieve President Biden’s goal of a net-zero carbon economy.”
While she did say that nuclear fusion would “help us solve humanity’s most complex and pressing problems, like providing clean power to combat climate change” she also mentioned that it would help in “maintaining a nuclear deterrent without nuclear testing.”
US government officials are also guilty of misconstruing the news in what seems to be their over-excitement that the use of fusion energy could halt or even reverse the negative effects of climate change.
U.S. Representative Eric Swalwell said, “This breakthrough will ensure the safety and reliability of our nuclear stockpile, open new frontiers in science, and enable progress toward new ways to power our homes and offices in future decades.”
“This monumental scientific breakthrough is a milestone for the future of clean energy,” said U.S. Senator Alex Padilla.
We still have a long way to go, but this… could help fuel a brighter clean energy future for the United States and humanity,” said U.S. Senator Jack Reed.
“This astonishing scientific advance puts us on the precipice of a future no longer reliant on fossil fuels but instead powered by new clean fusion energy,” U.S. Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer.
But again, the possibility of nuclear fusion replacing fossil fuels wasn’t the real news.
According to Molly Glick at Inverse, “the National Ignition Facility team emphasized that, while the recent feat is worth celebrating, we can’t expect large-scale fusion plants to power our homes anytime soon.”
She quotes Mark Herrmann, deputy director for fundamental weapons physics at LLNL, who said, “The laser wasn't designed to be efficient. The laser was designed to give us as much juice as possible to make these incredible conditions possible happen basically in the laboratory.”
Yes, the National Ignition Facility at LLNL finally attained “fusion ignition” – a long-awaited achievement for nuclear fusion researchers around the globe, but fusion ignition for consumer electricity generation is only one part of what NIF does.
NIF was built for two missions: performing research in support of the Stockpile Stewardship Program - its foremost duty - and to further our quest to understand and harness energy from nuclear fusion.
Its second mission, having reached a certain level of success now, is what made headlines, but it is mostly hype and a lot less fact that you will see in the media.
According to the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), one of its core missions is to ensure the United States maintains a safe, secure, and reliable nuclear stockpile through the application of unparalleled science, technology, engineering, and manufacturing.
The Office of Defense Programs carries out NNSA’s mission to maintain and modernize the nuclear stockpile through the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Program.
According to experts with knowledge of what NIF does, the machine to create nuclear fusion used approximately 400 megajoules to operate during the experiment and lost about 99% of the power it consumed.
That difference in energy is considerably far from what anyone would consider a net energy gain.
Another problem with the hype about nuclear fusion soon replacing fossil fuels is that the machine used for the experiment takes a number of hours until it can be reused. It took years to perfect the process and the ability to use the machine at all.
In order to generate consumer-level energy, the machine would need to accomplish this feat 10,000 times faster and scientists and engineers would need to perfect a way to extract the energy in the form of heat for practical use.
According to Tom Hartsfield at Big Think, there is also a supply problem. The pellets used to produce fusion contain deuterium and tritium.
While deuterium is plentiful, unfortunately, the world’s entire supply of tritium is somewhere around a pithy 50 pounds and the market cost of tritium stands at around $1 million per ounce.
Clearly, fusion energy to create consumer-ready electricity production is far off. As with anything in the news, be aware of the hype and read the small print. Yes, nuclear fusion as a clean energy source may be the future. But not yet.
by Allan Grain @allan-grain.
Avid reader of all things interesting to mankind. Futurist, artist, pianist, realist.
Nuclear fusion reactors could change the way we live. Are they also a path to riches?
Some say the global fusion market will be worth $40 trillion, but the fusion reactor market could also become a giant money pit.
By David Olive
Star Business Columnist
Thu., Dec. 22, 2022
For a nanosecond on Dec. 5, nuclear fusion researchers near Silicon Valley unleashed enough power with a fusion reaction to power most of the world.
In that flash, the physicists at California’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory also gave an enormous boost to the nascent and potentially immense field of fusion investing, one with all the promise and perils for investors in any new life-changing technology.
After decades of toil dating from the 1950s, U.S. nuclear physicists were at last successful earlier this month in igniting a nuclear fusion reaction that generated more energy than it consumes.
In doing so, they proved the viability of generating “net gain” energy from a fusion reaction. And at least technically, that paves the way to fusion nuclear reactors that could power the world.
Fusion, of course, generates energy by fusing atomic particles, in contrast to the fission used in conventional nuclear power production, where atoms are split apart to create energy.
The science is fascinating. But the topic here is what fusion means for investors.
If nuclear fusion can be taken out of the lab and scaled up — the Herculean task for engineers over the next decade — it could decarbonize most of the planet.
Energy from nuclear fusion could supplant most of the world’s energy assets with a form of energy whose fuel, usually hydrogen, is inexhaustible; whose waste, usually helium, isn’t radioactive; and whose reactor footprint is far smaller than hydro, wind and solar installations.
Because that potential seems fantastical, and the first prototype fusion reactors won’t be ready for testing until the early 2030s, fusion is still dismissed in many quarters as lacking commercial viability.
But fusion is now taken seriously.
In recent years, governments have ramped up their investments in fusion. And private enterprise has become a major player in a field until recently dominated by government sponsors.
Almost $5 billion (U.S.) has been committed to about 35 fusion startups this year. Conventional energy firms including oil giants Chevron Corp. and Italy’s ENI are investing in fusion research.
Among the most prominent independent fusion companies is B.C.-based General Fusion Inc., founded 20 years ago. Among its principal backers are Amazon.com Inc. founder Jeff Bezos, Shopify Inc. founder and CEO Tobias Lütke, the Singapore sovereign wealth fund Temasek and a large U.S. state pension plan.
General Fusion claims to be “pursing the fastest and most practical path of commercial fusion energy,” It expects to have its first nuclear fusion reactor ready for testing in the early 2030s.
General Fusion was able in its latest funding round, in November 2021, to raise $130 million to finance its expanded operations in B.C., London, U.K., and Oak Ridge, Tenn.
The main caveat expressed since the fusion breakthrough is that even prototype fusion reactors are at least a decade away, and that’s assuming some of the most challenging engineering problems in history can be solved.
This space is concerned with another caveat, the potential for fusion to become a giant money pit, pulling investment dollars into legitimate and dubious fusion projects alike.
Fusion is a “disruptive” technology, meaning it could change the way we live. Following a familiar pattern, fusion could spur the kind of overbuilding excesses of the early era of railways, or the irrational exuberance of the dot-com boom and bust a century later.
Now imagine a single new industry that combines the wealth-creation potential of the nascent rail, steel, auto, airlines, telecommunications, computing and internet technologies.
That’s fusion, which could exert unprecedented investor allure as it gets closer to commercial viability.
There’s no saying for certain that fusion will even achieve that viability. It is certain, however, that later this decade, fusion companies will go public, offering shares in the fusion revolution to investors.
Investors will be invited to buy fusion stocks, fusion mutual funds, fusion energy futures and other fusion securities.
How much money will be at stake? A year ago, Bloomberg News calculated that the global fusion market could achieve a market valuation of about $40 trillion.
An unimaginable number, you say? Not really. It’s less than two years’ worth of U.S. economic activity.
And if fusion’s ultimate valuation turns out to be “just” $10 trillion, that still more than 10 times bigger than the global crypto market.
So consider this a distant early warning.
Not this year, but over the rest of the decade, fusion could be on the tip of every investment adviser’s tongue. And there will be pressure on you to invest in it, no different from the run-up in hyped high-risk tech stocks and crypto.
We at least have a heads up about this new investment class before it becomes all too easy to invest in. We have time, as regulators, investors and money managers, to devise safeguards against dubious fusion investments.
You might not be interested in fusion. But there’s a good chance it soon will be interested in you.
Thu., Dec. 22, 2022
For a nanosecond on Dec. 5, nuclear fusion researchers near Silicon Valley unleashed enough power with a fusion reaction to power most of the world.
In that flash, the physicists at California’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory also gave an enormous boost to the nascent and potentially immense field of fusion investing, one with all the promise and perils for investors in any new life-changing technology.
After decades of toil dating from the 1950s, U.S. nuclear physicists were at last successful earlier this month in igniting a nuclear fusion reaction that generated more energy than it consumes.
In doing so, they proved the viability of generating “net gain” energy from a fusion reaction. And at least technically, that paves the way to fusion nuclear reactors that could power the world.
Fusion, of course, generates energy by fusing atomic particles, in contrast to the fission used in conventional nuclear power production, where atoms are split apart to create energy.
The science is fascinating. But the topic here is what fusion means for investors.
If nuclear fusion can be taken out of the lab and scaled up — the Herculean task for engineers over the next decade — it could decarbonize most of the planet.
Energy from nuclear fusion could supplant most of the world’s energy assets with a form of energy whose fuel, usually hydrogen, is inexhaustible; whose waste, usually helium, isn’t radioactive; and whose reactor footprint is far smaller than hydro, wind and solar installations.
Because that potential seems fantastical, and the first prototype fusion reactors won’t be ready for testing until the early 2030s, fusion is still dismissed in many quarters as lacking commercial viability.
But fusion is now taken seriously.
In recent years, governments have ramped up their investments in fusion. And private enterprise has become a major player in a field until recently dominated by government sponsors.
Almost $5 billion (U.S.) has been committed to about 35 fusion startups this year. Conventional energy firms including oil giants Chevron Corp. and Italy’s ENI are investing in fusion research.
Among the most prominent independent fusion companies is B.C.-based General Fusion Inc., founded 20 years ago. Among its principal backers are Amazon.com Inc. founder Jeff Bezos, Shopify Inc. founder and CEO Tobias Lütke, the Singapore sovereign wealth fund Temasek and a large U.S. state pension plan.
General Fusion claims to be “pursing the fastest and most practical path of commercial fusion energy,” It expects to have its first nuclear fusion reactor ready for testing in the early 2030s.
General Fusion was able in its latest funding round, in November 2021, to raise $130 million to finance its expanded operations in B.C., London, U.K., and Oak Ridge, Tenn.
The main caveat expressed since the fusion breakthrough is that even prototype fusion reactors are at least a decade away, and that’s assuming some of the most challenging engineering problems in history can be solved.
This space is concerned with another caveat, the potential for fusion to become a giant money pit, pulling investment dollars into legitimate and dubious fusion projects alike.
Fusion is a “disruptive” technology, meaning it could change the way we live. Following a familiar pattern, fusion could spur the kind of overbuilding excesses of the early era of railways, or the irrational exuberance of the dot-com boom and bust a century later.
Now imagine a single new industry that combines the wealth-creation potential of the nascent rail, steel, auto, airlines, telecommunications, computing and internet technologies.
That’s fusion, which could exert unprecedented investor allure as it gets closer to commercial viability.
There’s no saying for certain that fusion will even achieve that viability. It is certain, however, that later this decade, fusion companies will go public, offering shares in the fusion revolution to investors.
Investors will be invited to buy fusion stocks, fusion mutual funds, fusion energy futures and other fusion securities.
How much money will be at stake? A year ago, Bloomberg News calculated that the global fusion market could achieve a market valuation of about $40 trillion.
An unimaginable number, you say? Not really. It’s less than two years’ worth of U.S. economic activity.
And if fusion’s ultimate valuation turns out to be “just” $10 trillion, that still more than 10 times bigger than the global crypto market.
So consider this a distant early warning.
Not this year, but over the rest of the decade, fusion could be on the tip of every investment adviser’s tongue. And there will be pressure on you to invest in it, no different from the run-up in hyped high-risk tech stocks and crypto.
We at least have a heads up about this new investment class before it becomes all too easy to invest in. We have time, as regulators, investors and money managers, to devise safeguards against dubious fusion investments.
You might not be interested in fusion. But there’s a good chance it soon will be interested in you.
David Olive is a Toronto-based business columnist for the Star. Follow him on Twitter: @TheGrtRecession
Cambridge company's specialist material helps with nuclear fusion breakthrough
A Cambridge-based manufacturer of specialist metals and materials is playing a key role in the nuclear fusion breakthrough that could change the way we power the world.
Goodfellow Ltd, who supplies over 6000 customers across the world, provided materials to the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California for the eagerly awaited experiment.
On Tuesday 13th December 2022, researchers confirmed that they have overcome one of the major barriers to producing clean energy from fusion: producing more energy from the experiment than was put in.
Nuclear fusion has long been heralded as the future of clean energy. It is the opposite of nuclear fission, the technology currently used in nuclear power stations, but fission produces a lot of waste and radiation that can be dangerous.
In contrast, fusion is a much cleaner solution, does not contribute to climate change and produces a more abundant energy. There are many challenges to the successful production of nuclear fusion but, before this announcement, no experiment has successfully produced more energy output than the amount put in.
“We know there’s a long way to go before nuclear fusion powers our homes,” said Goodfellow’s CEO Simon Kenney.
“However, we’re excited to have been able to partner with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to supply some of the crucial materials used in this fascinating and successful experiment.”
Dr Aphrodite Tomou, Goodfellow’s Head of Technical, added her support: “It is a great success for the National Ignition Facility at LLNL! This is the breakthrough everybody has been waiting for and it is exciting to have played a small, but critical part in supporting them on their journey to this discovery.”
Goodfellow is a supplier of specialist metals and materials to the scientific and industrial manufacturing sectors and have partnered with many businesses to support their research and development departments.
Many of the company’s materials have been used in landmark projects, including the Cassini Huygens probe that landed on Saturn’s moons, Covid-19 vaccine development and medical devices including aiding hearing in deaf children.
No comments:
Post a Comment