
ITER is one of the most ambitious energy projects - tempestn
https://www.iter.org/proj/inafewlines
======
hannob
I can say upfront that I'm extremely skeptical about nuclear fusion in
general. I don't think that it will ever play any major role in energy
production.

The ITER project is only fueling that skepticism. They started with projected
building costs of around 6 billion euro and before they really started these
costs have already more than doubled. It seems very likely that if this
project ever gets finished the costs will rise a lot more. If you're
advocating for nuclear fusion and projects like ITER then my first advice
would be to be honest: It won't be a bargain.

That said I want to mention why I'm so skeptical about fusion: It is often
quoted as some kind of magical energy source without problems. Although it's
hard to make predictions about a technology that isn't working yet, most
likely it will mean expensive, huge power plants that generate large amounts
of energy at one place. That means even if you are able to build these plants
technically, you face a number of additional challenges: Getting it to work so
that it makes any economic sense (competing probably mostly against much
cheaper wind and solar which will likely be much cheaper than today when
fusion is ready) and getting energy transmission working at a huge scale.
Right now for many energy projects transmission lines are a major cost and
acceptance factor already.

~~~
andrepd
Is 6 billion euro a large sum to invest on such a potentially game-changing
project? How much does the US spend on coal, or solar, or wind each year?

~~~
hannob
The 6 billion is the original number. The real number is 15 billion + X with X
largely unknown. That was my whole point: I find a project that is so
dishonest about its real cost not trustworthy.

Whether you consider that worth the price will largely depend on whether you
believe it's game-changing. I don't.

~~~
jacquesm
It will be game-changing at any price, the first problem is to find a solution
that works sustainable at the scales we are looking for, then we can look at
the economics. I agree that that is the harder problem but I'd be more than
happy if ITER or any other fusion project would get to > 1.

------
jessriedel
Excellent longform piece on ITER in the New Yorker from March 2014:

[http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/03/03/a-star-in-a-
bot...](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/03/03/a-star-in-a-bottle)

~~~
dang
With a couple of major HN discussions:
[https://hn.algolia.com/?query=star%20bottle%20points%3E20&so...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=star%20bottle%20points%3E20&sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=story&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0).

------
supernova87a
Um, you know that ITER is also one of the most delayed and in-jeopardy major
science mega-projects out there?

[http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/how-to-fix-
iter](http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/how-to-fix-iter)

Classic case of scientists being allowed to become project managers with no
training...

~~~
mtgx
They just announced it's going to be delayed by another 6 years, probably why
the reason for this article:

[http://news.sciencemag.org/europe/2015/11/breaking-iter-
fusi...](http://news.sciencemag.org/europe/2015/11/breaking-iter-fusion-
project-take-least-6-years-longer-planned)

ITER is going to be the F-35 of science projects.

~~~
jacquesm
At least the F35 flies.

------
transfire
> "ITER will be the first fusion device to produce net energy. ITER will be
> the first fusion device to maintain fusion for long periods of time. And
> ITER will be the first fusion device to test the integrated technologies,
> materials, and physics regimes necessary for the commercial production of
> fusion-based electricity."

Lord, let us pray that is not true, as ITER is notorious for pushing their
time tables back. Right now they are pushing 2027.

~~~
venomsnake
> "ITER will be the first fusion device to produce net energy.

Is that proven or just hopeful?

~~~
Someone
AFAIK, proven in the sense that extrapolating known results shows that a
device this size should be net positive, and that material scientists state
that the necessary parts can be made, size- and tolerance-wise.

Hopeful in the sense that the pudding hasn't been eaten and in that it may
take only one of these material scientists to be wrong or too optimistic to
turn a 'can' into a 'cannot' (In many cases, we have never built parts at the
necessary scale and tolerances, so scientists assessing whether we can build
them have to extrapolate, too)

And of course, it helps for many of the scientists involved to be on the
optimistic side. That possibly is a good thing, as we will never know whether
we can build this if we do not try doing it.

Finally, there always is a chance that we overlook some important problem, or
(less likely) that new science rears its head.

~~~
venomsnake
So it is expected. Because it was stated as "settled and done" in the article.
Which was a surprise to me, since my opinion on the matter is close to yours.

------
etrautmann
Doesn't it seem more likely that one of the stellerators will win the fusion
race due to the plasma containment issues that make controlling a tokamak
difficult?

For anyone not familiar, these are eye-poppingly impressive machines:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendelstein_7-X](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendelstein_7-X)

------
rwmj
Anyone got a good summary of how the alternative fusion projects are working
out? eg. The company that was trying to use hydraulic rams to compress the
target (I think it was
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Fusion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Fusion))
Are they hoaxes or wishful thinking or likely to succeed?

Edit: This is a good summary from 4 years ago:
[http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/skeptical-
look-3-w...](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/skeptical-look-3-wild-
fusion-energy-schemes/) I'm looking for something more up to date.

~~~
DennisP
Tri Alpha, General Fusion, and Helion just got major coverage in the NYTimes
and Time Magazine. Here's a summary:
[http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/10/pictures-of-tri-alpha-
energ...](http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/10/pictures-of-tri-alpha-energys-
nuclear.html)

Tri Alpha has achieved stable plasma, next step is to ramp up the temperature,
which is relatively easy. According to their model the plasma should get
_more_ stable, in which case they'll move straight to an attempt at net power
from aneutronic boron fusion.

Helion and General Fusion haven't released any major results but they seem to
be doing well, and have good funding. Helion is attempting a mostly-aneutronic
hybrid D-D/D-He3 reaction, which I think is news since four years ago.

EMC2 released a paper about a year ago:
[http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/low-cost-
fusion-...](http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/low-cost-fusion-
project-steps-out-shadows-looks-money-n130661)

They're looking for funding, and need about $100 million for the next step:
[http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/01/emc2-chief-scientist-
presen...](http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/01/emc2-chief-scientist-presents-
path-to.html)

LPP is doing a lot better with funding since their indiegogo campaign, and is
working on getting the last residue of contamination out of their reactor
chamber: [http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/10/lpp-fusion-will-line-
vacuum...](http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/10/lpp-fusion-will-line-vacuum-
chamber.html)

Some recent work suggest that petawatt picosecond lasers could ignite boron
fusion: [http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/11/picosecond-pulsed-laser-
des...](http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/11/picosecond-pulsed-laser-design-
for.html)

The most advanced lasers have been increasing by a factor of 1000 every ten
years: [http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/11/generating-kilotesla-
magnet...](http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/11/generating-kilotesla-magnetic-
fields.html)

Sandia's MagLIF got good results in 2014 and is making upgrades:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetized_Liner_Inertial_Fusi...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetized_Liner_Inertial_Fusion)

Germany's about to turn on their stellarator. UW's Dynomak and MIT's ARC are
looking for funding.

Edit: also see this IEEE Spectrum article on ARC, LPP, and fast lasers:
[http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/nuclear/three-alternative-
fu...](http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/nuclear/three-alternative-fusion-
projects-that-are-making-progress)

And Scientific American has a new article covering at least one fusion company
I hadn't heard of, but I don't have a full text link:
[http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-fusion-
researc...](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-fusion-researchers-
are-going-small/)

Also of course Lockheed Martin's made a splash in the press, but they haven't
released much detail and fusion researchers have been fairly skeptical.

------
Simorgh
Has anyone any knowledge of machine learning being combined with nuclear
fusion data? I ask because I may be pursuing this intersection.

(Anecdotes from HNers can be more insightful than research papers).

~~~
sanxiyn
I don't know anything about this area, sorry about that.

Quick search found this: Fuzzy logic and support vector machine approaches to
regime identification in Joint European Torus (JET), Plasma Science.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPS.2006.875825](http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPS.2006.875825).

~~~
Simorgh
very interesting article!

It seems that machine learning could be used to stabilise a nuclear fusion
reactor through a real-time control strategy, e.g. optimising the reactor's
environment/conditions via micro-adjustments.

~~~
cocoablazing
The article previously posted concerns design of a reactor for inherent
stability. What you are thinking about is called active control. Here is a
paper investigating such control of a fusion torus:
[http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/pop/21/8/10.106...](http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/pop/21/8/10.1063/1.4893418)

------
chefkoch
Fusion is only 10 years away.

~~~
venomsnake
For the last 50 years

------
powertower
Also, Germany's "Mobius Strip" Tokamak Reactor is going live.

[http://www.businessinsider.com/germany-is-turning-on-its-
mon...](http://www.businessinsider.com/germany-is-turning-on-its-monster-
stellarator-2015-10/)

------
transfire
I suspect ITER was setup to act as a honeypot for fusion research money, to
slow the technology's development.

