This could change everything

[Grailknight]

If this is repeatable and feasible to upscale, the world will change.

 

Nuclear fusion breakthrough a milestone for the future of clean energy, US officials say | CNN

[Cygnia]

The hubby is really hopeful for this.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Its...  interesting but not as good as its being reported.

 

 

[Lord Liaden]

Please note that that video is from a year ago, long before this announced development. However, most of the scientists I've been listening to/reading about this assert that it's probably still decades away from practical application.

 

Nonetheless, this is the first time they've proven that it's possible with technology at our disposal, to get more energy out of fusion than we put in. Whatever anyone says, that's a big deal.

[unclevlad]

Yah, I don't see this becoming a significant source of energy much before the end of the century.  Cool, sure, but LONG way to go.

[Pariah]

It is a big deal. As it gets closer to practical reality, I fully expect determined and well funded opposition to it. Because once this goes online, the bottom is absolutely going to drop out of the petroleum market.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Yeah its a long time to being remotely feasible.  Maybe this century, probably not (especially as other events take place).  The video covers the many problems reporting have with fusion, including aspects of this (hint: they are not producing more energy than they are putting into it).

 

Reporting on most science, especially this kind of thing is almost always very off base.  Its a two fold problem.  The main problem is that its complicated and reporters rarely have much of a scientific background to accurately understand and report on things.  They also are more inclined toward things that sell, get clicks, go "viral" and get them noticed and promoted.  So words like "may" and "sometimes" and "possibly" just aren't in their vocabulary.

 

Then science is... often um, well scientists need grants and loans, and are just as human as the rest of us.  There's a lot of competition for lab space and funding, and the guy who is more confident, certain, and strong in their statements tends to get more attention and money, etc.  Some are less than entirely ethical or are too swayed by unscientific concerns like religion, a-relgion, politics, and personal whims.  So you get, shall we say, puffery about some stories.  Especially in this field.

[Old Man]

25 minutes ago, Pariah said:

It is a big deal. As it gets closer to practical reality, I fully expect determined and well funded opposition to it. Because once this goes online, the bottom is absolutely going to drop out of the petroleum market.

 

That's already happening.  Solar (with battery storage for overnight loads) is in single digit cents per kilowatt hour.  That's cheaper than coal, nuclear, and natural gas, and it doesn't come with the environmental or political complications of fossil fuels.

[Cancer]

I'm waiting for the technical report.  Plus other comments that would have to go in the Politics thread.

[Lord Liaden]

1 hour ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Yeah its a long time to being remotely feasible.  Maybe this century, probably not (especially as other events take place).  The video covers the many problems reporting have with fusion, including aspects of this (hint: they are not producing more energy than they are putting into it).

 

It's true that the 2 million joule pulse that produced 3 million joules of fusion energy, required 300 mllion joules of electricity to generate. But this is what scientists call "proof of concept." We now have proof that it can be done, therefore what we have to figure out is how to do it more efficiently.