Endless Energy!! Hydrogen Fusion in the "near" future.

  • Thread starter GT4 genius
  • 43 comments
  • 3,387 views

When will a nuclear fusion plant power your home?

  • 10-25 years

    Votes: 2 5.7%

  • 25-40 years

    Votes: 12 34.3%

  • 40-50 years

    Votes: 6 17.1%

  • 50+ years

    Votes: 9 25.7%

  • Never

    Votes: 6 17.1%
  • Total voters
    35
nick09
I don't think the oil companies would let such a profitable market go away because of small hydrogen plants at every house in the world. Hydrogen Fusion may be good for our environment but it is not good for our wallets.
Click to expand...

They're going to be the ones that fund it. Once all the oil runs out, you think they're just going to scratch their heads and go away? They're energy companies.
 
Sheesh. I should of explained more about my idea.:dunce: I was just basing my statement on the present time and our abilities with our latest technology.
 
nick09
Sheesh. I should of explained more about my idea.:dunce: I was just basing my statement on the present time and our abilities with our latest technology.
Click to expand...

Its just your first post seems a little confused and mis-informed.

nick09
I don't think the oil companies would let such a profitable market go away because of small hydrogen plants at every house in the world. Hydrogen Fusion may be good for our environment but it is not good for our wallets.
Click to expand...

Oil companies can't rely on the black stuff forever, and they know it.

Secondly, fusions got a lot more to it than simply 'clean' energy, its not some back yard alternative fuel, like a small wind turbine or solar panels, hydrogen fusion could come in the form of a few facilities dotted around, which replace the current fossil fuel and fission plants. Either way, if sufficient evidence to suggest fusion is a viable energy source then the oil companies will have their work cut out, preventing fusion getting the go-ahead. If they have any sense, they will jump ship at the first opportunity.

I don't get the 'is not good for our wallets bit either' sure initial R&D costs are high, then we have infrastructure. Long term however, it seems like it will be immensely cheap, solved energy crisis anyone?.I realise I am painting a golden halo around fusion at the moment, but it seems like the power source of the future to me. Lets just hope it works :boggled:
 
Can we add fusion engines to the wishlist for GT5 hehe

I was actually reading an article on the BBC about this a few days ago. It's very interesting and perhaps we may see some drastic advances in the near futire - as we have some hugely clever people out there doing some amazing stuff.
 
Beat you to it :D

Famine
The timeline sketched out by the IAEA is for ITER to be replaced with a facility called "DEMO" which will be used to generate electricity with a start-up time of 2033.

I just hope it isn't being built by PD.
Click to expand...
 
Here's a question - what if this facility (the NIF), or similar facilities planning to attempt a net gain of energy from fusion reactors, actually work? It will still take a long time to build reactors capable of feeding power into the national grid, but if it can be shown to work in principle, governments and private investors will literally pour money into these projects like there's no tomorrow... this wouold be great for fusion power, but what about "conventional" energy companies - oil, gas, coal producers etc.; solar power, renewables etc., or even regular nuclear power stations? These will obviously still be needed - perhaps for a long time to come, but if fusion can be shown to work and work well, then could it potentially trigger a collapse of existing energy companies as investors pull their money out of dying technologies and invest in the future instead?
 
In all major energy producing technologies, the chief sponsors are, typically, existing large energy companies.

So it's all good. Except they'll still find a way of charging us 6p/kWh now for the R&D into these things and 6p/kWh when they're raking in unlimited, free energy...
 
Sureboss
That would be good, as it'd have no damage!
Click to expand...

:lol:

As much as I love the media attention this is getting I still think that the Plasma Tokamak design is possibly closer to achieving a net gain in energy than this method. Although by 'closer' I'm still thinking 2018-2020 at the earliest when ITER starts up and running properly.
 
ITER is expecting to begin operating in just 6 years!

https://www.iter.org/construction/construction

From the website it looks like net power generation should be achieved around 2035, which is 16 years out. There are some companies coming online that seem to think they can do it sooner than that. But it's pretty wild that the design of what is claimed to be the first fusion reactor to generate net power output has already been done, and it is well under way in construction. 6 years out from operation, crazy.
 
Danoff
ITER is expecting to begin operating in just 6 years!

https://www.iter.org/construction/construction

From the website it looks like net power generation should be achieved around 2035, which is 16 years out. There are some companies coming online that seem to think they can do it sooner than that. But it's pretty wild that the design of what is claimed to be the first fusion reactor to generate net power output has already been done, and it is well under way in construction. 6 years out from operation, crazy.
Click to expand...

Woot. Love me some nuke power. Between this and some novel concepts for better fission plants, I think we can realistically approach zero emissions power production in the future. How cool is the fission fuel pebble idea?
 

Latest Posts

Back