Researchers at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California for the first time produced more energy in a fusion reaction than was used to ignite it, something called net energy gain, according to one government official and one scientist familiar with the research
Mathgod already told me it's not a big deal and we shouldn't be excited about this in the Energy Transition thread.
Until peer reviewed and replicated at a separate lab with separate scientists I think Mathgod is right.
This announcement is just the power released was greater than the power to create the plasma. It doesn’t cover anything else. So while it’s a milestone I’m not sure it’s really that significant. More important will be when they can sustain a fusion reaction regardless of efficiency that is measured in days and not seconds.
The Following User Says Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
Considering we won't see an SMR start construction in the next 10 years, fusion power is little more than a pipe dream at this stage. As Mathgod pointed out in the energy transition thread, this latest announcement isn't a world first.
It's all about maximizing renewable deployment, augmented with battery storage plus baseload natural gas. Anyone suggesting anything different is likely greenwashing or outright lying to you.
The problem with electricity is you can't store it, efficiently, effectively or economically vs burning things.
Renewables + electrolyzer to make green hydrogen holds the most near term promise, but it's not really a thing yet.
__________________ It's only game. Why you heff to be mad?
Considering we won't see an SMR start construction in the next 10 years, fusion power is little more than a pipe dream at this stage. As Mathgod pointed out in the energy transition thread, this latest announcement isn't a world first.
It's all about maximizing renewable deployment, augmented with battery storage plus baseload natural gas. Anyone suggesting anything different is likely greenwashing or outright lying to you.
The problem with electricity is you can't store it, efficiently, effectively or economically vs burning things.
Renewables + electrolyzer to make green hydrogen holds the most near term promise, but it's not really a thing yet.
Green hydrogen as storage is a thing, it's still in its infancy though
WASHINGTON, June 8 (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Energy said on Wednesday it has finalized a $504.4 million loan guarantee to help finance the world's largest storage facility for hydrogen, a gas that can be produced with renewable power and used to generate electricity.
Green hydrogen for most other things doesn't work though. I could go on about it, but hydrogen will not be much of a commodity simply due to its physical characteristics. As a storage medium it's pretty inefficient, but if the electricity is cheap enough that becomes irrelevant
Major Fusion Energy Breakthrough to Be Announced by Scientists
