A massive nuclear fusion experiment just hit a major milestone, potentially putting us a little closer to a future of limitless clean energy.

  • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    If we could harness the heat from nuclear fusion here on Earth, we could use it to generate electricity on-demand without worrying about carbon emissions, nuclear waste, or running out of fuel

    I don’t want to detract from this exciting milestone. Fusion is an absolute requirement for the complete end of our reliance on fossil fuels and there are no problems significant enough to warrant the end to fusion experiments. However, this statement is definitely not true with tokamak reactors. They typically use deuterium and tritium for fuel, which are limited resources. Fusion reactions are far more difficult with other light elemental isotopes. These reactors also use beryllium as shielding, which is a carcinogen. When the shielding needs to be replaced, it actually is radioactive.

    • Decoy321@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      82
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Those are entirely accurate facts, but those downsides are absolutely dwarfed by the upsides to the technology’s potential. It’s like getting your own spaceship, then pointing out that it lacks cup holders.

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        48
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I agree, fusion reactors will absolutely revolutionize everything, and even if we can’t do better than tokamak reactors, these problems are still pretty mild. I just expect more from scientific journalism

        • woefkardoes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          Fusion is a very long term goal and I’m sure they are careful to not tarnish its image. But yes sadly the first commercial fusion reactors probably won’t be sustainable but once they are a reality investment into the technology will be much greater and hopefully cleaner fuels will become a reality.

        • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          I remember about 15 years ago I did a school report on fusion power. I remember there was another model than the tokamak that was more complex to set up but had other advantages going for it. Think it was called the stellaradiator or something. Has it been a developmental dead end?

          • RubberElectrons@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            has it been a developmental dead end?

            Nope, there are several companies & universities working on it.

            W7x is the latest stellarator to come online, but there’s a new Princeton University startup called Thea doing all the complex geometry and control problems of a stellarator in software.

            It’s a neat and elegant idea, engineering-wise. And no matter whose strategy works out, we all win in terms of understanding plasma physics, and possibly unlocking the secrets of the universe.

        • Ben Hur Horse Race@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          it may be that the author knew that if that was included their work would be used by your ben shapiro types to proclaim that fusion reactors create substances that are both carcinogenic AND radioactive!!! and can site their article. not saying thats the case, but I could understand such reasoning

          • jasory
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think you are severely overstating the level of knowledge of most journalists. Most science reporting to the public goes like this: journalist hears something, contacts a single scientist in the field, or is contacted by a single scientist. They talk to that person for a few minutes, then write their article. That’s being generous, many simply copy press releases and add their own interpretation.

            There are only a handful of decent scientific reporting agencies targeting the public that actually do a good job.

    • jasory
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Deuterium is pretty common, and tritium can be produced by lithium irradiation. They are finite resources, but still much larger than pretty much any existing resource.

      It is true that fusion equipment suffers from neutron radiation, however this is a potential for breeding tritium.

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Like I said elsewhere, the problems I pointed out are relatively mild in comparison to all the good from fusion energy. However, there’s only approximately 25kg of tritium in the entire world. ITER is expected to use a majority of this world-wide supply. The mass manufacturing of tritium also presents another problem you pointed out with the supply: a super rare isotope needs rare earth metals to manufacture, one that is already in extremely high demand. I love this research and I want to succeed in any way possible. But we have to face reality and the material problems the science has to overcome.

      • acosmichippo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        weaning off fossil fuels completely is going to be a long complicated process. for now we will need to use fossil fuels to build greener infrastructure.

      • RubberElectrons@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Possibly. Industrial processes are very energy intense.

        For example, melting steel takes a certain amount of energy per mass to liquify, and since you’re trying to liquify it, you need that energy quickly, otherwise it’ll just get warm but stay solid. Nuclear could do it, maybe even wind if all other energy sinks (e.g. houses, apartments, etc) aren’t using too much of that renewable energy when the melt is occurring.

        We do our best, but once the process starts, it must be completed no matter where the energy is coming from, otherwise it was just a waste of time and money.