
China Is About to Fire Up Its HL-2M Tokamak - off_by_one
https://www.newsweek.com/china-about-fire-its-artificial-sun-quest-fusion-energy-1477705
======
nopinsight
Related: Either China or the US has the largest overall PPP-adjusted R&D
budget in the world. (The US data here is 2016 while China’s is 2018 so it’s
hard to tell exactly.) China’s investment is about the same % of its GDP as
France’s.

Others in the top five are the EU, Japan, and Germany, followed closely by
South Korea. South Korea invests the most as a percentage of GDP.

All of the “Asian Tigers”, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore,
appear to have been invested heavily in R&D as a % of GDP (European level or
higher) for a long time, and they were the only ones in Asia crossing from
third-world to first-world status after Japan, which did the same before that.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_researc...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_research_and_development_spending)

Few places managed to join the developed nation status in the last half
century. Chile is arguably the only other example.

~~~
roenxi
I am instantly suspicious - Research & Development conjurers an impression of
lots of research and a hint of development.

However a mining corporation developing a new coal mine site counts that under
their R&D budget - it is development. And I suspect the 'development' part of
R&D is both substantial and possibly defined differently in different parts of
the world with different norms depending on the industry.

I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing, but this evidence is unreliable. It
might be a straight proxy for industrial development.

~~~
coldtea
> _I am instantly suspicious - Research & Development conjurers an impression
> of lots of research and a hint of development._

Not to me. It could as well be an equal split of research and development, or
fairly basic research focused mainly on product development.

> _I 'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing, but this evidence is unreliable. It
> might be a straight proxy for industrial development._

Industrial development still needs R&D to compete with industrial development
in other parts of the world, it's not like statically applying what the state
of the art was in the past.

In several areas we've seen the Chinese go from the same path the Taiwanese,
South Korean, and Japanese went in the 60s to the 80s and 90s. From copy cats,
to high quality manufacturers and eventual innovators.

One example whose products I've used: DJI for example is the leader in drones
and perhaps gimbals, and even started to take down GoPro.

------
willis936
There seems to be some confusion in the comments. This is a science machine
that does not aim to set any records. It’s more akin to DIII-D/ASDEX catchup
and provide a decent platform for plasma physics.

[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092037961...](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920379619308622)

~~~
jacquesm
That's mostly because the article linked is not exactly subtle, complete with
pictures of coronal mass ejections and other hyperbole. But there is some
innovation going on here and I'm pretty curious if it will work as designed
without a lot of do-over.

------
jacquesm
To all of you worried that it will work and that China will take the lead: it
doesn't matter. What matters is that once someone shows it can be done there
will be a race on to copy the feat and that race won't be too long without
other winners. The same thing has happened with every other key technology
that might give a nation a head start in the military domain, and this
definitely is one like that.

Simply knowing that something is possible is often enough to remove the
political and mental roadblocks required to see it through.

~~~
yummypaint
Im always happy to see more funding for magnetic fusion research. Maybe this
will put more pressure on US politicians to at least not renege on our
existing commitments (ITER). For reference, here is how we have funded it so
far:
[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/U.S._his...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/U.S._historical_fusion_budget_vs._1976_ERDA_plan.png)

~~~
imglorp
If Earth spent a tiny fraction of the annual fossil subsidy, which is in the
$US Trillions, on this stuff we'd have it knocked out in no time.

~~~
ethbro
Or for < 1/3 of an Iraq War, to put it in other terms.

------
stoicShell
Here's to one more step on the road to a Kardashiev type 1 civilization.

If we harness the power of fusion, we basically remove the biggest roadblock
to a space-faring, galaxy-spanning civilization.

And we'd solve so many pressing problems right here within a few decades.

~~~
fnord77
in the book "Flight to the Stars: An Inquiry into the Feasibility of
Interstellar Flight" by James Strong, the author theorizes the max-v of a
generational ship would be about 15% the speed of light. It would take 450
years to get to the next closest star.

Spanning the galaxy would take hundreds of thousands of years, if not longer.
There'd be next to no contact between earth and settlements more than a few
light years away.

Not so sanguine about it solving near-term problems, either. We currently have
exponentially more wealth than anytime in history, yet most of it is being
hoarded by a small percent of the population. The benefits of cheap power will
also be hoarded

~~~
LessDmesg
An average person today with e.g. a car, a shower and a smartphone with
internet access is already richer than any of the kings of the past.
Retirement plans also didn't exist or were not widespread. Dentistry and
birthcare were either charlatanic or inaccesible etc. So no, wealth isn't
"hoarded by a small percent of the population", we really are, the vast
majority of us, richer than ever in history of man.

~~~
dwaltrip
If I'm richer than a king, why do I have to cook my own meals?

~~~
zeeZ
You can use your smartphone with internet access to have your meals delivered
to you.

~~~
dwaltrip
I personally could afford to do that (not everyone with a car and smartphone
can), but it wouldn't be a good use of my limited budget to do that for every
meal.

------
4ntonius8lock
I hope they succeed. We desperately need to adopt nuclear energy world wide.

The success of such a project would pressure western governments into adopting
the technology to stay competitive. Especially when the cost of a kilowatt
hour plummets.

I sure dislike authoritarianism, but on this one I think everyone's interest
are aligned. Anyone who isn't misinformed or sentimental will support modern
nuclear. I'm amazed there isn't more unity here in the comment section; this
is an objectively good thing for humanity. The advancement of science.

~~~
stjohnswarts
Yeah, at this point I've given up on the USA as an innovator in the nuclear
field. China seems to be much less luddite in this field and AI, maybe they'll
let us buy it off them as we become second or third in the field (and in
science in general).

~~~
yorwba
> China seems to be much less luddite in this field

If by "luddite" you mean "not building more reactors due to worries about cost
and safety", then not really.

 _" though reactors begun several years ago are still coming online, the
industry has not broken ground on a new plant in China since late 2016,
according to a recent World Nuclear Industry Status Report."_

 _" The 2011 meltdown at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi plant shocked Chinese
officials and made a strong impression on many Chinese citizens. A government
survey in August 2017 found that only 40% of the public supported nuclear
power development."_

 _" Within days of Fukushima, nuclear reactor construction in China was
frozen. When building resumed months later, after a wave of inspections,
Beijing insisted that future nuclear power projects adopt more advanced
designs with extra safety features."_

 _" The bigger problem is financial. Reactors built with extra safety features
and more robust cooling systems to avoid a Fukushima-like disaster are
expensive, while the costs of wind and solar power continue to plummet: they
are now 20% cheaper than electricity from new nuclear plants in China,
according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. Moreover, high construction costs
make nuclear a risky investment."_

[https://www.technologyreview.com/s/612564/chinas-losing-
its-...](https://www.technologyreview.com/s/612564/chinas-losing-its-taste-
for-nuclear-power-thats-bad-news/)

~~~
4ntonius8lock
Wind and solar don't deal with peak energy use.

See Germany vs France as an example.

~~~
yorwba
Nuclear plants don't deal with peak energy use either. For the peak, you need
a plant that can quickly regulate it's power output up and down to respond to
demand. Nuclear plants only work for base load.

~~~
pedrocr
There are nuclear power plants capable of throttling up and down at will. Not
all designs work like that but some do.

~~~
akvadrako
Really? Are you talking about a tiny fraction of operating plants?

~~~
pedrocr
I think it's pretty common. I'm not an expert but I think most of France's
grid is run that way. Wikipedia has a few details:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load_following_power_plant#Nuc...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load_following_power_plant#Nuclear_power_plants)

------
sballin
Fusion grad student here. HL-2M is very similar to the US DIII-D reactor in
size, magnetic field strength, and plasma current. HL-2M will have 11 MW of
heating power in its first stage compared to 23 MW on DIII-D according to
Wikipedia, though this will likely be upgraded. But consider the fact that
DIII-D was built in 1986.

JET, currently operating in the UK, is the tokamak closest to producing more
fusion power than absorbed heating power. It would be a nice surprise if it
achieved this in its upcoming research program using deuterium-tritium fuel.
But to reliably pass this milestone and get closer to producing electricity,
we need to build tokamaks bigger, like ITER, or with a stronger magnetic
field, like SPARC. Neither one will produce electricity, but they will allow
us to study the potentially different plasma environment and materials issues
at high fusion power.

Electricity-producing tokamaks are in the extremely early conceptual design
phase (DEMO, ARC) and will require much more research on tritium breeding and
materials that can withstand insane levels of heating and irradiation.

HL-2M specs (paywalled):
[https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fusengdes.2015.06.106](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fusengdes.2015.06.106)

~~~
Havoc
Great comment. Nice to see a 20 second summary of where we (humanity) is on
this currently

------
noobermin
Can someone more in the know tell us where the HL-2M stacks up compared to
other tokamaks and related magnetic confinement devices?

~~~
threeseed
This is the key question as there are quite a few Tokamaks around.

Tokamak Energy has had an operational one for a while now. But they are quite
some time away from having one that can generate surplus power. Question is
whether China is up to this point yet.

[https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuSlFJbBUIj1zfJLRnGXSow](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuSlFJbBUIj1zfJLRnGXSow)

~~~
pinewurst
Yes, since 1958 with the Soviet T-1.

------
jonplackett
If China figured out Fusion first, would they keep secret how to do it or is
scientific knowledge like this shared?

~~~
monocasa
Geopolitically, China is trying to prove that it's capable of ground breaking
technology originating in China.

It makes no sense for them to hide it; they're going to be singing from the
rooftops that they were first if they achieve that.

It'd be like if we went to the moon, but kept it under wraps. Like, why
bother?

~~~
jldugger
> It'd be like if we went to the moon, but kept it under wraps. Like, why
> bother?

Much of the point of space programs is to prove we can drop bombs back on
earth with precision. I don't know how fusion reactors are a threat in that
fashion.

~~~
natechols
Some people claim the real goals of fusion power research have always been in
support of fusion weapons development - specifically, by providing an
experimental system for studying controlled fusion reactions (since
uncontrolled fusion reactions are banned by treaty), and by providing a jobs
program for fusion experts. I do not know enough about the practical obstacles
to fusion power to judge the accuracy of this claim for myself, but there's no
doubt that it's a dual-use technology, and some projects seem suspiciously
like dead ends if commercial electricity generation is the real goal.

~~~
creato
> but there's no doubt that it's a dual-use technology

I do in fact doubt this. We've been building fusion weapons for 50 years very
successfully, progress in fusion power plants is negligible in comparison. If
fusion power plants are a dual use technology for weapons, they must be a
_very_ inefficient way to get there.

~~~
natechols
But we haven't actually tested those weapons in decades. Ensuring that the
stockpile doesn't go bad is a huge money suck for the DOE, and it's been a key
factor driving supercomputer improvements. You're right that it's very
inefficient, but that has to be balanced against the political cost of setting
off thermonuclear explosions regularly.

------
faissaloo
If China gets fusion energy first they will obtain unimaginable power, hell
the same applies to the US. While stopping climate change would be great I
also fear for what we might put in its place.

~~~
hcurtiss
Not sure why you're being downvoted. The most likely use of a new abundant
energy source will be force projection.

~~~
4ntonius8lock
Because it hasn't historically worked that way.

This isn't a first to market huge advantage. Developing the plants is slow
(many years) and the lag between super powers in cracking tech is generally
only a couple of years (see space programs/nuclear energy programs)

It's playing into divisive tribal thinking, when this is literally objectively
good for everyone on the planet.

~~~
faissaloo
This is a nation that is currently conducting a second holocaust, I don't
think there's anything 'tribal' about not wanting them to have power.

~~~
dang
We've asked you repeatedly to stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker
News. If you can't or won't stop, we're going to have to ban you.

(No, that isn't a political position, it's a site guidelines position. Please
follow them:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.))

~~~
zo1
True, but a lot of the time it appears to people that the "site guidelines"
are not applied in a blanket fashion.

~~~
dang
They definitely aren't, because we don't see everything that gets posted here,
or even close to everything. There's far too much.

If you see a post that ought to have been moderated but hasn't been, the
likeliest explanation is that we didn't see it. You can help by flagging it or
emailing us at hn@ycombinator.com.

------
Despegar
China is also firing up more coal plants.

[https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-tougher-times-china-falls-
ba...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-tougher-times-china-falls-back-on-
coal-11577115096)

~~~
simion314
What is your point? They should stop consuming energy until someone gifts them
some magical tech?

From the article we see they are trying better alternatives and if this would
be a success maybe we could have enough energy to undo all the CO2 the
industrial countries put in the atmosphere.

------
m3kw9
I think I know why there isn’t more advanced life out there: as we do bigger
and bigger experiments, the chance of making a mistake that can end planets
increases as we are more technologically advanced..

~~~
layoutIfNeeded
Do you even know what a tokamak is?

~~~
idclip
Its a funny word and it makes me have nice feelings when i think of it working
out.

~~~
rsynnott
Strictly speaking, an acronym (in Russian).

