Once again I ask the question that was never addressed: "Just how does anyone propose to control a self sustaining fusion reaction????"

Certainly present power generation systems are not started up until the control mechanism has been verified to be correctly functional. Even coal fired generation systems had control mechanisms to assure control, because it was understood to be vital.
And consider that it will take a lot more than those very expensive fusion fuel pellets to even start a self sustaining fusion reaction. The cause for concern is that there is no mention of any plan as to how to control the reaction if they do get one started.

 

So, this is all a big elaborate joke, right?

I'm sure they seriously would like to have your money to 'invest' in the future Quantum Kinetic Well holes.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/mckane-lee-41a32a4/details/education/
CEO background.

• Centre for Digital MediaCentre for Digital Media
  Masters, Digtial MediaMasters, Digtial Media2007 - 20092007 - 2009
  • • -Short Listed for Webby Award 2007 - Student Selection - Crossing
      -Short Listed for Webby Award 2008 - Student Selection - MoviSphere - Online Mobile Game
      
      http://mdm.gnwc.ca/blog/webby-award
      
      -Canada Line Porject - 3D Visual Ride of the New Canada Line 2009 - Lead Communications Director and Computer Graphics Director on Project-Short Listed for Webby Award 2007 - Student Selection - Crossing -Short Listed for Webby Award 2008 - Student Selection - MoviSphere - Online Mobile Game http://mdm.gnwc.ca/blog/webby-award -Canada Line Porject - 3D Visual Ride of the New Canada Line 2009 - Lead Communications Director and Computer Graphics Director on Project
• 
  University of WashingtonUniversity of Washington
  Certificate, 3D Art for Video GamesCertificate, 3D Art for Video Games2006 - 20072006 - 2007
  • • Certificate # 1: 3D Art for Video Games
      Modeling, Texture Mapping, Rigging, Skinning and Animation
      Instructor: Jason MacCoy
      
      Certificate # 2: Advance 3D Art for Video Games
      Project Planning, 3D Face Animation and Rigging
      Instructor: Jason MacCoy and Tito Pagan

 

Once again I ask the question that was never addressed: "Just how does anyone propose to control a self sustaining fusion reaction????"

Certainly present power generation systems are not started up until the control mechanism has been verified to be correctly functional. Even coal fired generation systems had control mechanisms to assure control, because it was understood to be vital.
And consider that it will take a lot more than those very expensive fusion fuel pellets to even start a self sustaining fusion reaction. The cause for concern is that there is no mention of any plan as to how to control the reaction if they do get one started.

By magnetic confinement and energy moderation, the same way we control continuous plasma generation today. Every possible fusion power generation device today is a R&D machine. We simply don't know all the engineering it will take to make it work but the physics is solid on it working (as a net energy positive device) if we can maintain the critical three conditions.

Three conditions must be fulfilled to achieve fusion in a laboratory: very high temperature (to provoke high-energy collisions); sufficient plasma particle density (to increase the likelihood that collisions do occur); and sufficient confinement time (to hold the plasma, which has a propensity to expand, within a defined volume).

https://www.iter.org/fusion-energy/making-it-work

ITER is designed to achieve and sustain fusion reactions at a scale that will enable the study of a controlled "burning" (self-heating) plasma. However, achieving sustained fusion reactions is only one piece of the puzzle. To harness fusion as a practical energy source, several key challenges must be addressed. ITER will contribute to addressing each of them, in an integrated manner, but further R&D is a prerequisite to delivering a credible design for a next-phase demonstration reactor.

Materials resistant to extreme conditions: The intense flux of high-energy neutrons and other particles generated during fusion reactions subject the reactor's structural materials to extreme conditions. Finding materials capable of withstanding these conditions while maintaining structural integrity is a top priority. These materials must be compatible both with the requirements of plasma purity, and also with the harsh thermal, radiation and vacuum environments inside the reactor. ITER employs advanced materials in its design, but ITER's efforts must be supplemented with materials science R&D to identify materials that can withstand the rigors of long-term fusion operation.

 

I'm sure they seriously would like to have your money to 'invest' in the future Quantum Kinetic Well holes.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/mckane-lee-41a32a4/details/education/
CEO background.

• Centre for Digital MediaCentre for Digital Media
  Masters, Digtial MediaMasters, Digtial Media2007 - 20092007 - 2009
  • • -Short Listed for Webby Award 2007 - Student Selection - Crossing
      -Short Listed for Webby Award 2008 - Student Selection - MoviSphere - Online Mobile Game
      
      http://mdm.gnwc.ca/blog/webby-award
      
      -Canada Line Porject - 3D Visual Ride of the New Canada Line 2009 - Lead Communications Director and Computer Graphics Director on Project-Short Listed for Webby Award 2007 - Student Selection - Crossing -Short Listed for Webby Award 2008 - Student Selection - MoviSphere - Online Mobile Game http://mdm.gnwc.ca/blog/webby-award -Canada Line Porject - 3D Visual Ride of the New Canada Line 2009 - Lead Communications Director and Computer Graphics Director on Project
• 
  University of WashingtonUniversity of Washington
  Certificate, 3D Art for Video GamesCertificate, 3D Art for Video Games2006 - 20072006 - 2007
  • • Certificate # 1: 3D Art for Video Games
      Modeling, Texture Mapping, Rigging, Skinning and Animation
      Instructor: Jason MacCoy
      
      Certificate # 2: Advance 3D Art for Video Games
      Project Planning, 3D Face Animation and Rigging
      Instructor: Jason MacCoy and Tito Pagan

I assume if I send the check to you, you'll make sure it gets to the right place, right?

 

I assume if I send the check to you, you'll make sure it gets to the right place, right?

My dog 'Spot!' will handle the money.

 

Once again I ask the question that was never addressed: "Just how does anyone propose to control a self sustaining fusion reaction????"

Certainly present power generation systems are not started up until the control mechanism has been verified to be correctly functional. Even coal fired generation systems had control mechanisms to assure control, because it was understood to be vital.
And consider that it will take a lot more than those very expensive fusion fuel pellets to even start a self sustaining fusion reaction. The cause for concern is that there is no mention of any plan as to how to control the reaction if they do get one started.

Hi,

Not sure why you are so worried about this.
First there is the magnetic confinement, and then there is the injection of materials or particles that control the reaction itself. I don't remember what they inject now, but you should be able to find that on the web.
I seriously doubt they would overlook that if it was that important.
I can imagine it would be like squirting water on an incinerator fire. The water manages the burn rate and the smoke billowing out of the chimney to keep the environmentalists at rest.
That's all I know at the moment

 

The reason for my concern is that a self-sustaining reaction is a bit different than the typical combustion reaction. And like other things that are not fully understood, there are some serious unknowns.
Consider the required control systems on atomic power plants, and the unfortunate results there when control is lost. And consider how well that process is understood, and that the shut-down requirements are "fairly well" understood. But things still get out of control occasionally. And consider that "just shutting off the fuel supply" on a self sustaining process is not likely to have much effect. It is not obvious if the sun or the stars are being re-fueld by some magic means. The very nature of a self sustaining process is that it does not run out of fuel.
So all the happy thoughts about Free Energy are very seriously ignoring a of of details. Or at least, never even mentioning them.

 

The reason for my concern is that a self-sustaining reaction is a bit different than the typical combustion reaction. And like other things that are not fully understood, there are some serious unknowns.
Consider the required control systems on atomic power plants, and the unfortunate results there when control is lost. And consider how well that process is understood, and that the shut-down requirements are "fairly well" understood. But things still get out of control occasionally. And consider that "just shutting off the fuel supply" on a self sustaining process is not likely to have much effect. It is not obvious if the sun or the stars are being re-fueld by some magic means. The very nature of a self sustaining process is that it does not run out of fuel.
So all the happy thoughts about Free Energy are very seriously ignoring a of of details. Or at least, never even mentioning them.

I'm pretty sure some of the best minds on the planet have included all of your very minor quibbles in the reactor design.

It's not 'Free Energy', it will likely be damn expensive.

 

It's not 'Free Energy', it will likely be damn expensive.

All free energy is damn expensive.

 

It's not 'Free Energy', it will likely be damn expensive.

Agreed. If I was in charge of pricing fusion electricity once it becomes commercially available, I'd think of pricing in the 2X-5X range, compared to then-current market pricing. Why not? Plenty of people will want to support the new technology and the demand will far outstrip the supply for years. In the long run after we're all dead, yes, fusion-produced electricity will become cheaper and possibly displace other sources. I doubt it will ever have a monopoly, because of the enormous capital demand.

 

I'm pretty sure some of the best minds on the planet have included all of your very minor quibbles in the reactor design.

It's not 'Free Energy', it will likely be damn expensive.

There is nothing minor about controlling a self sustaining fusion reaction.

 

There is nothing minor about controlling a self sustaining fusion reaction.

Correct but your quibbles are minor as they contain no scientific evidence, only vague inklings of things that could go wrong.

The ITER Fusion design does not have a runaway chain reaction. If conditions are not maintained (like temperature and pressure), the fusion reaction simply stops, period. The hard engineering problem is keeping it going as it wants to stop. The most 'dangerous' levels or energy will be in the magnets with the equivalent of a ton of TNT. A uncontrolled quench of superconducting magnets would cause damage to the reactor building and structures but the only way a fusion generator could “blow up” is if you dropped a big bomb on it. 99% of the damage would be from the bomb exploding.

 

Certainly many of the major disasters in history were caused by "minor" details that had been considered "unimportant."
That includes those smaller disasters that I have had to repair because others had assumed that the ignored issues were unimportant. Very often it is "the little details" that wind up needing the most attention and sometimes the biggest effort. I am thinking that others have experienced a similar reality.

 

Certainly many of the major disasters in history were caused by "minor" details that had been considered "unimportant."
That includes those smaller disasters that I have had to repair because others had assumed that the ignored issues were unimportant. Very often it is "the little details" that wind up needing the most attention and sometimes the biggest effort. I am thinking that others have experienced a similar reality.

All true to some extent but IMO, you could say that about all human progress and technological advances.

 

All true to some extent but IMO, you could say that about all human progress and technological advances.

Very true ... skepticism is an excellent attitude when digging for the truth and evaluating the feasibility of things. But there's a difference between being a skeptic and being a pessimist. The former is a great aid in maintaining a steady course to success, whilst the latter is an obstacle to progress.

 

Certainly many of the major disasters in history were caused by "minor" details that had been considered "unimportant."
That includes those smaller disasters that I have had to repair because others had assumed that the ignored issues were unimportant. Very often it is "the little details" that wind up needing the most attention and sometimes the biggest effort. I am thinking that others have experienced a similar reality.

I was telling you I just read something about this not too long ago. They inject something into the plasma to control the reaction.
We do not have to compare this to anything else that 'burns', if it works, it works
If it does not work, then something else will give but at least it won't be the same as a usual meltdown. Not that anyone would want to be around it though if that happened

If that does not work they use their proton packs they keep on their back (See Ghostbusters) ha ha.

 

I recall reading the analysis of a balcony collapse a few years ago in which several people were killed. The "minor detail" was that the contractor changed the design of the support system "Just a bit" to make it simpler. The unintended MINOR RESULT was a reduction in the strength that lead to the collapse. The reality is that some times minor details ARE NOT so very minor.

 

Has there been any demonstration where fuel is fed in over time and the reaction maintained even for milliseconds? As far as I know, all these tests are a single shot, one load of fuel, bang and we are done. If that is so, maintaining a reaction continuously is certainly far from trivial and unproven. This includes hydrogen bombs, they are just a one short with more fuel.

 

Has there been any demonstration where fuel is fed in over time and the reaction maintained even for milliseconds? As far as I know, all these tests are a single shot, one load of fuel, bang and we are done. If that is so, maintaining a reaction continuously is certainly far from trivial and unproven. This includes hydrogen bombs, they are just a one short with more fuel.

There's been several Q<1 runs of a few seconds with a static deuterium and tritium fuel load in several of the research reactor generating operations data conditions for a ITER sustaining run.
https://www.ipp.mpg.de/5405892/jet_rekord_2024

For experiments with the fuel of future power plants (deuterium and tritium), Europe's scientists operated the JET research facility near Oxford together with the UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA). A new world record was set there on 3 October 2023: 69 megajoules of fusion energy were released in the form of fast neutrons during a 5.2 second plasma discharge. 0.2 milligrams of fuel were required for this. The same amount of energy would have required about 2 kilograms of lignite – ten million times as much. JET thus beat its own record from 2021 (59 megajoules in 5 seconds).

The JET record did not achieve a positive energy balance – in other words, more heating energy had to be invested in the plasma than fusion energy was generated. In fact, an "energy gain" is physically impossible with JET and all other current magnetic fusion experiments worldwide. For a positive energy balance, these fusion plants must exceed a certain size, which will be the case with ITER.

ITER

A 'possible' commerical Tokamak like ITER requires constant plasma fusion so it doesn't operate with the old Soviet Tokamak pulsed inductive 'secondary' plasma current heating.
Bootstrap Current Operation in ITER

http://cds.cern.ch/record/1343736

https://www.iter.org/whatsnew/print/255

Recent research shows it should be possible to reach steady-state fusion production in ITER with the baseline mix of heating and current drive systems, in particular by upgrading the levels of power delivered to the plasma by neutral beam injection and electron cyclotron wave heating. 'One of the goals of ITER is to show that we can produce fusion power for an unlimited amount of time with high fusion gain (Q≥5)—so-called 'steady-state' operation,' says Alberto Loarte, Science Division Head. 'There are no physics or engineering hurdles holding us back.' But since ITER is an experimental facility, designed to facilitate a wide range of explorations, its baseline configuration is not optimized for steady-state operation. To achieve this, ITER will need to demonstrate operation with very high confinement—but not only. 'We will have to replace the inductive current provided by the central solenoid with plasma-driven current (bootstrap) and currents driven by neutral beam injection and electron cyclotron waves.

 

I recall reading the analysis of a balcony collapse a few years ago in which several people were killed. The "minor detail" was that the contractor changed the design of the support system "Just a bit" to make it simpler. The unintended MINOR RESULT was a reduction in the strength that lead to the collapse. The reality is that some times minor details ARE NOT so very minor.

Hi,

Yes I know minor details can sometimes lead to bad results. If this is the case then they are in trouble.
I don't have any insider information on this one though so I can't say much for sure. All I can say is I hope it works, and soon.

Interesting, I read about a balcony that collapsed some years ago where the people were having a party and everyone was dancing, bouncing up and down a bit, and it was too many people and so the whole thing went right down. End of party. I don't think it was too high, but still people were hurt, and I don't remember if any were killed, but still a big bummer for the party.