
The Road Less Traveled to Fusion Energy? - headalgorithm
http://nautil.us/issue/86/energy/the-road-less-traveled-to-fusion-energy
======
ikeyany
I was hoping the article would go into the current state of boron reactors out
there such as [0], but it kept reiterating the disadvantages of D-T reactiors.

Also interesting is using AI for plasma control. It didn't exactly say how
they're using AI, which is nice to know when talking about real-time code that
handles temperatures in the millions of degrees.

[0] - [https://www.hb11.energy/our-story](https://www.hb11.energy/our-story)

~~~
oddthink
Calling it "AI" is a stretch, it's more like using the TensorFlow
infrastructure to do Bayesian inference. Here's a presentation on the process:
[http://hyperion.usc.edu/UQ-
SummerSchool/pres/Langmore.pdf](http://hyperion.usc.edu/UQ-
SummerSchool/pres/Langmore.pdf)

~~~
ikeyany
So their only paragraph on it,

> _Artificial intelligence software, recently developed by TAE with help from
> Google, should keep the fusion fuel stable even at the 3-billion-degree
> temperatures needed in a commercial-scale power plant. “A year ago I was
> concerned about the ability to control the machine,” Binderbauer says, “but
> no longer.”Courtesy of TAE Technologies_

which implies that it's being used for plasma control, is a lie.

~~~
oddthink
No, it's used for control. But you should be thinking more like "process
control" than "intelligent" control. Or to be more specific, deriving an
optimal process control model via pretty hard-core plasma density
reconstructions; my understanding is that they track plasma density
fluctuations and tweak parameters in real-time, but I would be surprised if
the TF model is in the control path.

It seems a bit overly-aggressive to accuse them of lying because some pop-sci
journalist heard tensorflow and went straight to "artificial intelligence."
And even there, it's an understandable and common hype.

It doesn't take away from the point that they're doing some really interesting
and novel computational physics to make this thing work.

------
jeffreyrogers
The thing I never understand about these fusion reactors is how they plan on
generating energy from them, assuming they exceed break-even. In a
conventional nuclear reactor the coolant is piped to a steam generator which
then drives steam turbines to generate power. This is a relatively obvious
design and it was pretty well understood from the start of development how the
power generation would work. Of course, there were a lot of engineering
challenges to overcome to make it work in practice. While fusion itself is a
harder problem (as the lack of success for decades has demonstrated), it seems
like the power generation aspect has many new challenges as well.

~~~
peterwoerner
The people working on fusion generally think it is a solved problem. Namely,
fusion is a heat source and we have numerous technologies which can convert a
heat source to generate electricity a number of which can be connected to the
fusion generator with "some engineering". That's why they talk about the parts
which aren't yet solved.

I used to work with under a guy who worked on ITER, they were all aware of
that part of the problem. It just wasn't part of the research they were
engaged in.

~~~
varjag
Generally, a layperson can safely assume that whatever problem they come up
with on the spot, it has already been thought of by specialists as well.

True for any field you are not an expert in.

------
barbegal
I have yet to read an article or paper which has convinced me that energy
generating fusion is possible at low costs and with materials that we
currently know of. I don't see why anyone (including governments) should
invest in these types of projects. Not only is the science extremely complex,
the implementation is a huge engineering challenge. We already have a huge
fusion power plant at the heart of our solar system and we can harness its
power with some pretty cheap solar panels.

If you want to read a better article explaining the science then try
[http://fusionandthings.eu/2019/06/05/new-calculations-
show-p...](http://fusionandthings.eu/2019/06/05/new-calculations-show-proton-
boron-fusion-is-still-difficult/)

~~~
PopePompus
Sadly, that huge fusion plant is offline half the time for any given location
on the Earth, and is severely degraded by cloudy weather. Also using it to
power the world will require large areas of land to be dedicated to collecting
its output.

~~~
LargoLasskhyfv
So what?

I give you _Space Grid ©_.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-
based_solar_power](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power)

edit: I don't know why that symbol doesn't show as copyleft as intended.

~~~
mrec
Space advocates seem to have been going off the idea of that over the past few
years. I'm not sure how much of that is due to a better appreciation of the
downsides, and how much is due to the _very_ rapid improvements we've been
seeing in ground-based solar.

A couple of recent (late 2019) articles from Casey Handmer:

[https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2019/08/20/space-based-
so...](https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2019/08/20/space-based-solar-power-
is-not-a-thing/)

[https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2019/09/20/no-really-
spac...](https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2019/09/20/no-really-space-based-
solar-power-is-not-a-useful-idea-literature-review-edition/)

It's worth reading the comments too; there are some interesting points there,
although I think the game-changing ones rely on new tech and/or well-developed
lunar industry.

~~~
pfdietz
Space solar is a way to get the most out of expensive PV cells. But PV is no
longer expensive. It's cheaper to just overbuild on Earth and transmit energy
through time (storage) rather than through space (microwaves).

------
naasking
For just the bare facts on the fusion reactor design:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TAE_Technologies#Design](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TAE_Technologies#Design)

~~~
pfdietz
These comments would also be relevant.

[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235032059_Comments_...](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235032059_Comments_on_the_Colliding_Beam_Fusion_Reactor_Proposed_by_Rostoker_Binderbauer_and_Monkhorst_for_Use_with_the_p-11B_Fusion_Reaction)

------
scythe
> Even if renewables come to generate the majority of our electricity, they
> need to be combined with so-called dispatchable power that can be switched
> on at any time.

There is plenty of lithium in the oceans — among other places — and no
shortage of iron or phosphorus (ignoring agricultural use of P which is much
larger), so that it is realistic to store weeks or months of energy in LiFePO4
batteries, even at a global scale. What we lack here is investment.

------
melling
“Relying solely on solar and wind is a fool’s hope, I think,” Binderbauer
says.

We’ve had this discussion many times on HN.

~~~
rob74
I agree that solar and wind have disadvantages, and they can't be used to
cover 100% of the energy demand, but they are available right now, whereas
controlled fusion has been "10-30 years away" for the last 60 (?) years.

~~~
cygx
_whereas controlled fusion has been "10-30 years away" for the last 60 (?)
years_

One standard internet response to that is this graph[1]. No funding, no
results.

The international community decided to pool ressources with ITER. The founding
members? The US, EU, Japan and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union collapsed,
the US pulled out for a couple of years, other countries (eg Canada) joined
and left gain, Brexit has put the future of JET (where some relevant
preparatory experimentation is done) in doubt, etc.

[1] [https://i.imgur.com/3vYLQmm.png](https://i.imgur.com/3vYLQmm.png)

------
zelienople
This is the worst of science writing. I have zero interest in the man's
childhood or what he or his desk looks like; just tell me about the science.

Articles like this are pandering to the lowest intelligence that purports to
be able to read.

~~~
danharaj
How do you go from "this article has too much human interest and not enough
details for my taste" to "this article is for stupid people"?

~~~
jahnu
I replied above but it was meant for you. I'll leave it, perhaps it might help
the parent understand why there is much value in knowing about the people
behind the science.

