Can This $22 Billion Megaproject Make Nuclear Fusion Power A Reality?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ย. 2021
- Fusion is the process that powers the sun and the stars, and scientists are getting a lot closer to replicating it here on Earth. ITER, the $22 billion dollar international fusion megaproject in the south of France, is the most well-funded endeavor, paid for by the governments of its member nations. But VC’s and private investors are also pouring money into fusion start-ups, with hopes to commercialize fusion power within the next decade. With a number of breakthroughs already this year, the race is on to prove that fusion power is not only possible, but integral to a clean energy future.
» Subscribe to CNBC: cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBC
» Subscribe to CNBC TV: cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBCtelevision
» Subscribe to CNBC Classic: cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBCclassic
About CNBC: From 'Wall Street' to 'Main Street' to award winning original documentaries and Reality TV series, CNBC has you covered. Experience special sneak peeks of your favorite shows, exclusive video and more.
Connect with CNBC News Online
Get the latest news: www.cnbc.com/
Follow CNBC on LinkedIn: cnb.cx/LinkedInCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Facebook: cnb.cx/LikeCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Twitter: cnb.cx/FollowCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Instagram: cnb.cx/InstagramCNBC
#CNBC
Can This $22 Billion Megaproject Make Nuclear Fusion Power A Reality?
I'm so glad that the question about fusion energy is moving towards when and how, instead of if, this could solve a lot of problems for us
"still decades away" sounds like "if" to me. "fusion is just 10 years away" has been said for most of the last century.
@NEAR TERM EXTINCTION - HUMAN humans will almost certainly exist in 2030.
@NEAR TERM EXTINCTION - HUMAN I think I will exist when I am 31... Norway will be fine for quite some time even if worst case scenario would happen (in terms of climate change).
There is very little chance of this actually working. It will be a fun science experiment that the scientists will enjoy but won't actually work. The intilectuals will have fun using our tax dollars. It is fun to spend other peoples money.
@@howard6433 you must be younger than me, I've always heard it's 20 years away :-)
Mastering fusion energy is so hard that you would be more than happy if your competition won the race.
You cannot trust the CCP.
@@maincoon6602 Your brain is rotten. Lmao
@@MGZetta He is right though the CCP is a bunch of liars
@@bigfatstupidfish2397 United we are stronger than any rough country. A good example is the Quad alliance in the South China Sea. The CCP Seven Line claim is just a simple land/resources grab just like what Germany and Japan did in WW2.
@@maincoon6602 you think I don't know that? I was agreeing with you
I took my first nuclear engineering class in 1966. At that time, we were told that "fusion is just X years away," where X was some number in the range 15 to 50, the exact value depended on who was talking. The same statements are being made today in 2021. I hope it works, but magnetic confinement of plasma is a very difficult problem to solve.
Isnt that already achived by Wellenstein 7X tho?
It shouldn't be classified as very difficult. It is plain and simple impossible.
The thing is that fusion is here and has been for a few years, now it is just about making it happen in a way where more energy can be generated than what is needed to make fusion happen.
@@rosomak8244 Thank God our ancestors didn't listen to people like you or we'd still be in the middle ages.
@@rosomak8244 just like fission was impossible to solve yeah?
Wrong.
Considering the potential of fusion power, those costs of 20 billion Euro seem like a pretty okey deal. I realise that ITER is only an experiment and not the final step in the testing or development of fusion, but still. Let's hope it won't be too long before fusion becomes applicable!
Even a cost of a trilion euros is very, very justafiable.
sooner than we have giant fusion plants we'll have household units that just use electrolysis to break water into hydrogen th-cam.com/video/KkpqA8yG9T4/w-d-xo.html
@@davidmiletic6647 true
Hope we never need, Science is not based on Hope...
We need to control the plasma first, this magnet is just a small step
It's 65 trillions € now but still justifiable because if this works its the biggest game changer in human history and technological advancement
There's a key detail to add to this report... SPARC and other newer projects were built around new superconductors that only need liquid nitrogen to maintain superconductivity rather than much colder liquid helium. ITER, unfortunately, was too far along in the development process to redesign around high temperature super conductors. SPARC is running MUCH higher power through the HTSCs generating a denser, tighter magnetic field, drastically shrinking the size of the machine by around a factor of 10. This is how they're moving fast.
Iter is a scientific experiment.
If you squirt water into the super hot plasma ring --- won't it get repelled because of the enormous magnetic field?
Thank you for the information, that means as a old man how's been waiting for this i might live long enough to see it ! .
Joe with the FACTS
all of these mega project face the same issue, you started with cutting edge and by the time you put everything together, its already old tech.
"We know that when we build it, it will work. We just don't know exactly how... So theres alot of science to be done." This sounds like it should be an Aperture Science quote from Portal lol
I'm so glad that the question about fusion energy is moving towards when and how, instead of if, this could solve a lot of problems for us
@@kalo6699 You and Raunak Shahi said that already, give it a rest.
This is the world's largest waste of money.
@@thesauce1682 Or the worlds greatest investment.
@@DeathDefiant Funding basic research has a payoff years down the line. As soon as this one starts operating they should design the next one based on what they learn.
This is a great example of what we all as Human Beings can do instead of finding small small differences and fighting over them.
To be fleeced by snake oil salesmen is a virtue.
@@georgeorwellsghost3833 Military could use this too. But government and all, so yeah.
Scientist : "It's going to take decades to build this"
Obadiah: "Tony stark was able to build this in a cave!!! With a box of scraps!!!"
because Tony Stark uses a fictional Element Palladium ingredients to his Arc reactor that's why it's easy for him but Palladium doesn't exist in reality and yet we still capable of developing the fusion energy that will change the grid in the future...
im just so proud of all the scientist especially the old ones who are spending their time not for the money but for the future of their children, planting a tree on which shade their not gonna sit
This is all a long running scam, fusion is never going to be used to generate power. See Sabine Hossenfelder video. She is a real physicist, and has no dog in the fight, and gives an honest analysis.
Ban science..save world
@HunterBidensCrackPipe Only thanks to those @jose mari robledo and I honor
@@Starship737 Ban Faith based claims
@@DumbledoreMcCracken And why use such a complex system to boil water for steam to turn turbines. It is equivalent to picking a pimple with two house bricks. You just would not do it. Solar, wind and battery storage is always going to be easier and cheaper. Leave fusion to scientists ans their research grants. It will always be 10 years away, so there will always be a research grant to be had.
I am so relieved that this is all happening. At 69, I will probably be dead when net energy is produced but it does give me hope for the future. We need nuclear now.
Public booed joe biden
th-cam.com/video/NqvQT8jqsK0/w-d-xo.html
Here’s hoping your wrong!! Let’s go nuclear!!
@@borisstroganoffs104
You she entity lifeforces (including she entity lifeforces existing in XY DNA template bodies) do the strangest things.
You smugly cause your own demise and then of course endlessly complain, complain, complain that you're dead now.
@@tubeamv4275 *Biden 2024*
I mean... ITER is supposed to do it by 2025, that's only 4 years! Even DEMO, the plant after ITER, is supposed to come online sometime in the late 2030s or early 2040s and you could make that if you get to your mid to late 80s. Either way, I rate your chances of seeing net gain from fusion. Good luck!
Ah yes, nuclear fusion.
The technology that has been 5 years away for 30 years
wait wait wait is it safe or will it melt down what are the safety measures against a melt down!
@@raven4k998 It is perfectly safe. Relax. They wouldn't do it if it wasn't safe. It's 2021.
@@mattg5878 are you serious they say we have no clue how to do it and you think that one in this day and age when they cannot even keep covid under control your talking about power like that found in the sun and you think they can control it when they do not even know how to make it happen
@@raven4k998 I think you are conflating two very different issues.
Covid can not be kept "under control" as it relies upon the entire public to behave in a specific way (to limit transmission). The public, as a group, as stupid.
This is a project being undertaken by the finest minds in our society, who have many years experience in one of safest and heaviest regulated industries in the planet.
@@raven4k998 Simply put turn off the power then there won't be the plasma and thus no fusion. You can think of it a gas powered generator you may have on a work site, when it is off it is very safe and it is even safer when there is no fuel.
Once we achieve this feat, we can dream to become a type 1 civilization, to harness the power hidden in solar system, in an efficient and proper way. Also, the negativities and sabotages would be worse than horror stories.
Yay! Then we can go out and conquer and pillage the rest of the galaxy on our way to type 3!
@@jalight27 Hell yeah, once we conquer the galaxies, what's stopping us from pillaging the rest of the universe.
@@jalight27 and clap some alien cheeks!!
There's a couple misstatements in this video:
1) Fusion produces 4X the amount of energy as fission and 4,000,000X that of fossil fuels. This is true, but you're not getting all of that energy out of the reactor, as it cost a lot of energy to maintain the reactor. Currently, we're just trying to get as much energy out of the reactor as what we put in, but, hopefully, in the next decade or two, we'll probably break through and actually achieve energy gain. Let's assume we make some massive breakthroughs in super conductors in the next decade or two so that we not only achieve energy gain from fusion, like getting out 25% more power than what we put into the reactor, but we will be able to generate 2X the amount of power we put into the reactor. That means your reactor requires you dump 50% of the power that it produces right back into the reactor just to maintain fusion. So, under this OPTOMISTIC scenario, your fusion reactor is really only generating 2X the amount of power you'd get from fission and 2,000,000X what you get from fossil fuels, and that's after a couple more decades of major technological breakthroughs. Fission reactors, on the other hand, already exist and are already able to produce 1,000,000X the amount of power you'd get from fossil fuels..... Also, with a fission reactor, you don't have to dump any power back into the reactor to maintain the reactor. You just add fuel.
2) The fuel used by these reactors is plentiful. Fusion advocates like to talk about how, compared to fission reactors, the fuel used by fusion reactors is much more plentiful, as it's "just hydrogen". That's not exactly the case though. Almost every fusion reactor currently being worked on right now and planned for in the near future will use deuterium and tritium, both isotopes of hydrogen. Deuterium isn't nearly as common as simple hydrogen, but it's still common enough that it's still way more common than fission fuels. Tritium, on the other hand, doesn't exist naturally, but must be produced by "fissioning" lithium atoms. Lithium is a little more than 2X as common as thorium, the ideal fuel material for one of the best potential fission reactors, LFTR's. HOWEVER, you don't get tritium from common lithium, but primarily from an isotope of it, Li-6, which only makes up ~7.5% of natural lithium. This is where things flip around though, as Thorium is 6.4X as common as Li-6. As such, fusion fuel is actually less abundant than fission fuels.
3) Unlike fission reactors, fusion reactors don't produce long lived radioactive waste. Contrary to what the video states, there are actually several Gen 4 reactor designs, such as LFTR, that don't produce long lived radioactive waste either, as those long-lived wastes are chiefly the transuranics which largely aren't produced by LFTR's and would be consumed in other types of fast reactors. So the wastes produced by reactors such as LFTR's would be short lived radioactive waste. Fusion reactors also produce short-lived radioactive waste as H-2 + H-3 fusion produces hell'a lots of free neutrons which will be slamming into the reactor vessel and surrounding materials, converting many of those materials into radioactive isotopes.
4) Fusion reactors can't melt down. Neither can fission reactors like LFTR's, which are liquids to start.
One thing to put the tritium in a little more perspective. At 30k dollars per gram, it is the most expensive isotope in existence. There is good reason to think fusion reactors will not be able to produce an out of tritium equal to what they will need. And that is a show stopper because there is a finite amount in existence.
The issue with tritium is honestly what I think is the biggest reason fusion energy will never be a viable source, even more than actually getting it to work. The way things are going we won't even have any tritium by the 2040s.
Fusion Tech, Quantum computers, Graphene are all the next gen tech
You’re also forgetting automation and additive manufacturing.
Hmm, im missing Advanced AI, Self driving cars should be under that category, ofc you mention modern tech if they have a major breakthrough
@Flame i said they're next gen for a reason and next gen doens't mean the next 5 years
We better have quantum laptops by 2035 --- I am getting old and wanna see it before I die
Yep, always 40 years in the future
It warms my heart that the world is uniting together for a common cause, some enemies and friends coming together is truly amazing
US: We are willing to spend 2 trillion on a war to accumulate oil that our dollar is based on
Also US: But you're telling me I have to spend 30 billion on nerds in lab coats? Yikes
They must have not done a good job accumulating oil, considering current gas prices.
Yikes, you got a figure for how many trillions in oil the Yanks have looted from Iraq and Afghanistan in the last 20 years? It has to be nearly as large as the number of grid-ready megawatts produced by current fusion technology.
@@aerohard Dude. the war wasnt to loot the oil but to keep it traded with the dollar.
@@okbuddy5304 Hence why the EU wanted no part of the war, well except for America's pet terrier, England.
Oatmeal
Is China willing to start a war for the US oil dollar corruption?
Trump did fix the oil deals with the middle east, we don't need it!
Kudos for acknowledging that raising living standards requires energy and that wind and solar are not going to cut it because they're not "always on".
Wind and solar by themselves are not, but wind and solar in combination with battery storage will.
@@franksang5014 Indeed.
@@franksang5014 In theory only, there has not been a battery tech breakthrough that will allow this. Unless the new tech in China works.
solid state batteries are what we need to fund the most, if our batteries improve so too will the capacity of Solar & wind, it's the only hurdle holding us back, in reality solar energy alone is more than enough to power the entire planet if we master energy storage
@@franksang5014 no it won’t. Where I live we get winter 6-8 months out of the year. Solar is not viable. And wind turbines will freeze up.
As long as can start building Fusion Reactors in my Sim City by 2050, I'm happy.
Not for nothing, I had fusion power plants available in Sim City 20 years ago.
Haha Sim City classsiccv
Cities Skylines
I'm so glad that the question about fusion energy is moving towards when and how, instead of if, this could solve a lot of problems for us
you did covid in SimCity too?
Prof Sabine Hossenfelder has a youtube clip in which she explains the difference between an energy gain in the plasma and an overall gain. Energy is expended in great quantities outside the plasma to keep the plasma at operating temperature and confined. I much higher gain in the plasma would be required to produce a total energy gain. Then, of course, the output energy must also be produced. Great sums of money produce a great deal of hype, it is good to remember. Hype cannot be converted to useful energy.
@@andriusk5044 They are spreading misinformation plain and simple. If you had not seen that video from Sabine and watched this, as you can clearly see from the comments here, people actually think its going to happen soon or even at all. That is ridiculous.
Up for this! Though I believe science reality all started from being a hype to get fundings. And I am just guessing that $22B is not enough. I'm also a big fan of SABINE :)
The declared tenfold gain on a very narrow metric would in itself be indeed an achievement and brings hope and generates interest to push it further. It is necessary to find the right balance between transparency and communication. These are delicate nuances on how to cover the topic since nobody wants fusion nuclear research to halt based on partial, or even less hidden, information since its promise could resolve crucial challenges for humanity. Let's not repeat the failures of the nuclear fission industry and research in that regard. They lacked transparency about not having sufficiently resolved its waste problems. As a result it lost the necessary public support and thus public funding to address these problems. The waste issue, according to some, could today be solved. In the case of fusion, it would be most useful for example that other scientists produce an estimate of the total gain balance (Qtotal) with any technology currently available or in the making for the case by including a tenfold gain (Q=10), that would indicate how important other aspects of the reactor would benefit from additional research.
i like Sabine Hossenfelder but she is often too negative...i understand...it's her niche on youtube.
@@benegesserit9838 she is often too negative because pop sci journalism is based on optimism, when was the last time you read a pessimistic article in SA?
i never thought this idea would come to fruition in my lifetime and im only 26 but this video gives me hope. Great job CNBC!
3:09 that's incorrect - the 50 MW quoted only includes energy that goes into the plasma and not what's used for the whole system, the 500 MW produced is the plasma emergy, not what can be used to produce electricity. Overall the power output will be only about 75% of what is used and that's only for 8 minutes of operation.
But that's fine because the production of net electricity was never a goal - ITER is a testing and development platform for the next reactor DEMO.
This is a very important point, was just going to mention it but you mentioned it. Thanks for pointing it out.
Yes sabina sabine hossenfelder made video on this Qplasma QTotal
well 75% is a lot better than the ~1% that was possible before.
It's worse than that. The Qtotal of ITER is about 0.1. That's before converting the thermal energy into electric energy.
ITER takes 440MW, 120MW of that is consumed without any plasma at all.
ITER was touted as being able to produce more energy than it consume on more than one occasion, conveniently leaving out the fact they were only talking about Qplasma. Like they assume the plants themselves will just magically consume less power.
I'm so glad that the question about fusion energy is moving towards when and how, instead of if, this could solve a lot of problems for us
The "50 MW in, 500 MW out" is actually only for the plasma, not for the overall energy. Looking at the total, ITER will still consume more energy than it will produce, even under ideal conditions
Yes, and that only applies while it is running. Even when making no power they need a power input.
"Fusion energy is 30 years in the future and always will be" still applies so far.
@@kensmith5694 Clean Planet Inc. and Miura (Japan's biggest boiler manufacturer) have concluded an agreement for joint development of industrial boilers that use Quantum Hydrogen Energy (eg. LENR). Clean energy is not so far after all.
@@marcbuttler7681 I wish them luck but I am skeptical. The question of no fatal gamma ray doses in the very early work has not been answered. If the claimed process was going on, that should have happened. The only way it could be real is if they stumbled onto something and their explanation of what it is , is incorrect.
Imagine thinking you know the stuff better than the thousands of ITER scientists working on this 🤦🏻♂️
@@Engineer9736 What he stated about it is correct and is from the ITER scientists. According to the scientists, the plasma makes 10 times the energy out than went into it. The inefficiencies along the input path are not being counted for the purpose of rating the experimental results.
The fact that so many countries came together to do this is encouraging. It shows that they can set differences aside and work together when they want to and when they have to. If there is ever an alíen invasion i have faith now that they'll work together to defend earth.
aliens are not compatible, we just don't see them....
I have been following this project from such a long time thk u CNBC for covering it
You mean to tell me Tony Stark did this on a cave by himself with scraps and we are decades away?
But we are not Tony stark
@@theunbeatable1755 ah, a person of culture
Yeah, wasn’t it awesome how he then went all like pew pew and the bad guys died?
@@alvarorodriguez1592 it was!
Technically, he only miniaturised it. Tony already had a big one powering Stark Tower.
Nuclear Fusion is already a reality, all that is left is for humans to know the right recipes through trial, and error. Let's hope for the best, and to not ruin our future.
*planet blows up*
Nope, we are not even close to being net positive.
@@crissd8283 he said about fusion, not about being net positive... Fusion has been achieved like 5+ decades ago...
@@tbird81 Achieving fusion is different from going on. Ofc its been going on but since when did we achieve it is probably what he's saying. Obviously they first discovered that the concept of fusion exists and then tried to replicate it.
One wrong move and our planet and solar system will be gone 🤣
The rule is everything that is a game-changing innovation is either a circle or cycle. I see fusion has a circle and a cycle, this will change everything.
Décadas de trabajo y ahora se ve más claro el arranque secuencial de este sistema de generación de energía que va adoc a las situaciones actuales. Esto será el cambio para lograr el equilibrio geo económico que hemos conocido desde hace centurias. Gracias por este video.
“Strong enough to lift an aircraft carrier six feet off the ground” Jesus Christ
Really? I don't believe that.
@@RampageG4mer bruh u haven't seen the size and power of that thing
gnarly eh? 😳
Why can it only lift the carrier six feet off the ground? Do they mean it pick it up from six feet away? If the magnet is stuck to the carrier....then you can lift the carrier as high as you like, no? It's just a weird sentence :)
@@sirenbrian I believe six feet of the ground means levitating just like how maglev train works I guess.
No news reporting on this ever mentions that the 500MW output versus 50MW input they talk of is Qplasma, not Qtotal. They will not be net energy positive by far, they just speak of the plasma.
Sabine FTW.
To be more precise should they obtain the 10x target the whole reactor would roughly need twice the energy it produces to run.
I'm so glad that the question about fusion energy is moving towards when and how, instead of if, this could solve a lot of problems for us
they only need it to generate energy, that's why they build this plasma field, needing the magnet
This will never be a power plant, generating lucrative energy!
This is something to keep an ion.
I’m glad to see countries working together
It lifts an aircraft carrier or not. The distance (you said 6 ft) doesn't matter.
It’s probably a misinterpretation of the narrator regarding the range of the magnet.
As in, it can probably lift a plane sitting 6 ft under it.
It's true. Gotta love "science journalism"
@@brunojl2 I know. I thought too much about it. It was causing me cognitive dissonance.
Force over distance is the amount of work it can do.
Ok. A Nimitz-class aircraft carrier has a draft of 37 ft. If this magnet can pick it up 6ft, the bottom of the ship would still be 31ft underwater and the magnet would not be lifting the entire weight of the ship.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nimitz-class_aircraft_carrier
I wish you also mentioned Wendelstein 7-X, which is the coolest fusion expetiment in my opinion.
💯💯💯
Is that the one with pistons?
@@jsl151850b nope
lol, only because it LOOKS cool, right ? truth be told, you have no clue if it is any better than a 1940's Tokamac from Russia.
Hopefully it solve the instability problems. A larger scale test reactor would be great. As well as some room temperature superconducting magnets.
This is wonderful, excellent human ingenuity! only good things can happen when humans put their mind together!
Umm. No. The nazis put their minds together and that didnt end so well.
Awesome, human innovation and teamwork at its finest.
Even if fusion reactors are never technically feasible or economically viable, all the technological offshoots will have well been worth it, better lasers, superconducting magnets, plasma control, etc... Maybe one day we will have magnetic heat shields for spaceship reentry thanks to this research.
0:38
Nuclear fusion is economically viable
The reason why it costs 22 billion
Is because governments are involved.
Why does this matter governments always over spend which is part of the reason why socialism always produces poverty and fails
Also there’s no incentive for the scientists to actually complete the work nor are they likely even care about it
Have you not heard about the government vs the weight brothers.
These governments are just wasting tax payers money let the private sector take care of this
@@stayswervin554 This has little to do with socialism and the governments. ITER is first and foremost a huge experiment in which a lot of trial and error happens. Of course, it is extremely expensive, and fortunately the governments have invested a lot of money in it. A project that costs billions, goes on for decades and will never bring profits and maybe never breakthroughs, is very difficult to finance privately. Especially in the 80x years when the project was established.
@@stayswervin554 you really have no clue how project management and product development works do you?
@@stayswervin554 bruh, I am in my phone all day today and this is the most stupid thing I saw today.
I think the title should be renamed to: A race to save the world.
not "the" world but "our" world
I am glad they are ahead of schedule and able to run it for 5 sec to prove the concept already in 2022 instead of 25. Hopefully it will get more funding and commercialize it ahead of schedule too. If battery tech can also improve significantly then we might be looking at a very different world in the next decade
no
If the leaders of these nations all cared for humanity, this would be good but all we can do is pray and hope they do it for the greater good of humanity and that they don’t end up having conflict over POWER (control).
Is a shame how humanity missed the nuclear fission potential for fear mongering, let’s hope the same doesn’t happen with nuclear fusion. Also is no coincidence ITER is being built in France since the country supplies 70% of its energy with fission
It wasn't just fear. There was:
1) Corruption in the power nuke building industry
2) Bad designs
3) The super high cost of decommissioning
Any of those three could have done it all alone.
@George Mann The latter part of your statement is just idiocy. Projects like ITER are designed to create more knowledge and technology necessary to make fusion a reality, not delay it. Dunno what conspiracy theories you've been getting into your head. 🙄
@George Mann I recently delivered a lecture on COVID-19 disinformation to like half a thousand people. You're not the first conspiracy theorist I've encountered on TH-cam, and I'm not talking just about COVID-19 but many other things. I know exactly how pervasive conspiracy theories are and how many people believe in them. I can only shake my head at how gullible people are in believing these falsehoods.
@George Mann you owned him lol. Good point
@@Vendemiair If you think that ITER will be a breakthrough everyone waited for 70 years, then you're the one who is gullible.
Half a million years from now people will refer to this technological leap as the most important step after the taming of fire by our ancestors.
If you think about it, fusion reactors are just 'taming of fire, part two'.
@@Steamrick taming of stars
A fire can be started by a lightning strike or some flint and dry wood. Find one instance you can start a fusion reaction outside of a star by accident. Not a chance. Star nurseries are huge and a star birth likely takes hundreds if not thousands of years. But humans are going to do it using a few acres of empty lot in ten years. Good luck with that happening. I want unlimited energy at my fingertips as badly as anyone but my hopes are waning as I get older.
I work there ! Also 0:15 is my hometown, proud af
I am so happy for this. This is the golden hope for this planet. For this home.
I'm very hopefully and wish them the best, but we've been hearing that feasible fusion is just around the corner for a long time, so forgive me if I withhold any celebration until it actually works.
The projected date has always been 2055, you may be celebrating early a bit.
@@erdemmemisyazici3950
RE: "The projected date has always been 2055, you may be celebrating early a bit."
I would love to see fusion power become commercially viable. However, I have to admit that fusion power has been "twenty years away" ever since about 1957. I know this because I can remember all of the propaganda over the decades.
@@spaceman081447 No clue. These guys have a budget, it's multi-national, and that's what was projected. Not a nuclear scientist. I'm just glad we are attempting to make energy from nuclear fusion.
At least we know the concept actually works just by looking at the sun. It's always been a question of resources that has determined whether we'll ever have a sustainable fusion tech or not, and now that the private sector is involved, we can be quite assured that the timeline will accelerate from the more pessimistic views from the past.
@@mikitz No we don't. Not unless we invent artificial gravity. There is no "concept" if the basic premise is flat out impossible. Might as well talk about generating energy from black hole accretion disks - it's just nonsense. That's ignoring the blatant lie regarding Qplasma vs. Qtotal. Factor in heat -> electricity conversion via steam turbines and our current best is 0.1% output, while literally the entire scientific community and media lie to our faces conflating the two.
Iter is not (designed to) putting out more energy than it consumes. That 50 to 500 ratio doesn't account for the whole energy necessary.
You're either not smart or a terrible listener.
@@flybeep1661 No theyre right, the 10 Q is Qplasma not Qtotal. The total energy in is going to be less than the total energy out. Physicist confuse people with these variables
@@flybeep1661 No, YOU’RE not smart and not educated on the subject. They don’t typically talk about the total energy when defining the energy ratio, Q. Bradley Huffman summed it up pretty nicely. Don’t go around calling people not smart if you don’t even understand the basic concepts. Go back to high school physics class, son.
@@dahleno2014 exactly right.
"ITER's thermonuclear fusion reactor will use over 300MW of electrical power to cause the plasma to absorb 50 MW of thermal power, creating 500 MW of heat from fusion"
Converting heat to electricity is only about 50% efficient, so you would get 250 MW out, less than you put in.
I'm so excited for Fusion, hopefully it'll happen in my lifetime, well at least before I get dementia
The problem is that heat and pressure just aren't enough. Quantum tunneling initiates much of the fusion process from a star, and our scales are too small to take advantage of that phenomenon. Add to that, even the "Q10" is deceptive. They are quoting Q Plasma, not Q total. We still need to turn that plasma into electricity, and to do that, we are still relying on boilers and steam power. Which by the time you get to electricity, your nowhere close to getting as much energy out as in. I mean I hope we (as a species) come up with something, but right now, we still aren't anywhere close to making this work as an energy source.
"Energy, like time, only flows from past to future."
Time doesn't flow any more than length does. You must be referring to the arrow of time which is related to the second law of thermodynamics.
@@AnalyticalReckoner Humans are lucky fossil fuels deplete over time and the outgoing 20th Century circular Science is no more, soon.
So what
@@level1selamat155 Fossil fuels-derivative
"This 1000-ton magnet is powerful enough to lift an aircraft carrier 6ft off the ground.."
WHAT THE HELL 😂 WHAT IS LIFE
Throw away your magnetic compass.
And all of this just to boil a cup of water.
I'm so glad that the question about fusion energy is moving towards when and how, instead of if, this could solve a lot of problems for us
@@kalo6699 I'm not so glad that you just discovered Copy/paste.
Energy from fusion looks very good. Great video.
1:50 the only reliable person I have ever heard on the Fusion debate. While I'm looking forward to seeing if the technology becomes capable of long term sustainability, its gonna be a while before we get to that point.
Misleading information: 50MW--->500MW... 50MW is not the total input energy of the complete system... The total input energy is much higher... Higher than 500MW. It's an experiment not a power plant.
"science journalism" has a lot in common with the history channel these days.
@@AnalyticalReckoner "science journalism" - except it's not journalists - it's scientists from ITER who are lying
@@IamUzyf good point!
I'm so glad that the question about fusion energy is moving towards when and how, instead of if, this could solve a lot of problems for us
@@IamUzyf Not lying, just obfuscating knowing full well politicians and laypeople can't understand the difference between Qplasma and Qtotal. Which is equally as scummy.
Yeahhhh, most of this was ok until they started talked about wind and solar. We should be moving toward fission while working on fusion.
Companies are moving away from fission because it is too expensive.
I'm so glad that the question about fusion energy is moving towards when and how, instead of if, this could solve a lot of problems for us
@Tim Norris
Yeah, let's atleast wait to have the first permanemt deposit is finnish-ed (pardon the pun) and evaluated for scalability.
Agreed. We need an alternative to fossil fuels asap, and fission would help tremendously
This was a good report, thanks
The Chinese have managed to sustain an energy-producing reaction for 17 secs recently. A big step and statement of their ingenuity.
It is more than slightly inaccurate to say more energy out than in. This is a measure that is made just for the plasma its self. All the losses from the grid to the point of making plasma are many times more than what ends up in the plasma. The losses from the plasma back onto the grid are also high. The net result is a Q(total) of about 1%
you only need to take one look at this project as an Engineer to realize how hopeless it truly is. its a physicists vanity project
you'd use the grid to get the reactor going, and after that the idea is that it'd sustain itself.
@@TheMrgoodmanners ok Nostradamus all you need to know that fusion is an viable option is go outside on a sunny day and look up.
Yes but by tweaking and perfecting the design you can make Q >1 factoring in all the losses. I agree they should be more clear on how they arrive at their estimates, but in the end it's just a matter of time.
Are the engineers scared of physicists? Is that what this is?
Could common needs in surviving the future cause a common peace among world rivals? If our ship is sinking do we work together to patch the hull or sink/ (analogy)?
If we set as our goal "making the world a better place," the danger is that at some point it will not matter to us how that is achieved - as long as it is achieved. If a dictator can make our world better, we will want a dictator.
Scripture tells us very clearly that "the ship" *is* sinking. And Jesus commands us to be other-centered, so that we will tell others that "the ship" is sinking. Not only do we tell them that "the ship" is sinking, but we tell them that there is a way to escape "the sinking ship" and lead them to the "lifeboats". It is only through faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God that we have a way off this "sinking ship".
I believe that Satan is the captain of "the ship" and he has been very successful in keeping the people from knowing that "the ship is sinking". Scripture tells us that he is going down with "the ship" and it is his goal to take as many as he can with him. But it is God's desire that none should perish.
Our job, as followers of Jesus, is to help as many as possible off "the ship" and into "lifeboats" before it goes down.
"Could common needs in surviving the future cause a common peace among world rivals?"
No. It will increase conflict and war; the race to be the survivor and not extinct.
No. Imagine the tragedy of the commons, and then apply that principle to politics and world relations. Someone will find some way to make it about themselves and screw it up
No, there's just permanent interest, no permanent friends.
@HunterBidensCrackPipe well sounds like you concur that climate change is real. That’s progress! I’d agree it is used like many things to scare people to keep them watching to sell advertising. Climate events cause lots of suffering, and suffering will sadly continue regardless of the climate.
Thanks for the video. Everyone loves a crazy inventor.
how amazing it is that only just two atoms that are even smaller than any substance in this universe can make energy that even we can't hold in... I'm justing waiting for that to happen. hope that this project could also end up to the concept of wormholes too. I wish that to happen please🥺🥺
Once fusion is perfected interplanetary humans would be thing. Imagining telling people "oh im off to Mars to visit family. Oh I have a work meeting on the moon"
Um no.
@@crissd8283 explain why not
@@raituano849
That requires a broad base of technological developments to keep humans alive in space, not just a dense power source. 1 prerequisite would be an effective cure for cancer. A fair amount of automated construction capacity would make such endeavors a possibility within economic constraints.
Power source has little to do with space travel. If someone's able to build a higher thrust higher efficient propulsion method for rockets, then that will revolutionise space travel.
When they hit the switch for ITER, the Japanese will look at this hugh monstrosity and the first thought in their mind is "we got to make this smaller"
"That didn't work, what's next?"
I'm so glad that the question about fusion energy is moving towards when and how, instead of if, this could solve a lot of problems for us
Fusion power is less than a decade away! - Me, 1977...
Nuclear fusion: the technology of the future, and it always will be - my favourite quote, although I imagine we will actually figure it out sooner or later.
and if all does not go to plan it will melt down and the earth will explode killing everyone on the planet but oh well pay attention to the we still don't know how so bad things could happen other then what they are promising
@@raven4k998 While Fusion has many problems, a runaway meltdown is not one of them. It does not work in any way like a fission reactor.
I just watched an add, during this video, from Delta airlines. They say they're going to be the first carbon neutral airline... I wonder if there's a TH-camr who's made a video about carbon offsets?
I know one but his channel is not in English
Same
Same!
Lol I got same add.. thought to my self.."how much carbon offsets and from where?"
Synthetic fuels make the claim plausible. Syn-fuel refineries powered by molten salt reactors make it possible.
I have seen a lot of exotic multi axil trailer moving everything from 150 tons to over 1200 tons and that truck and trailer configuration moves only 300 tons max. That core magnet tops out at 300 tons not 1000 tons. That trailer would heave the road and tip over with the load as it sinks into the roadbed. Anything over 600 tons is moved by multi articulated schnabel trailers with at least 30 axles connected to 120 wheels or more plus 6 or 8 trucks just to maintain safe traction on the slightest slope.
23000 tons assembled. Individual sections are lighter.
Or an I missing something?
Well I wonder what’s up with that ? Your right about moving loads on roads !
Or road creeper treaded trailer I’ve seen nuclear cores moved around corners using two layers of plywood with grease between layers !
Simple. They'd use a strand of creeper.
I was thinking the same thing, I had to look up the trucks that carry ~500 tons and they're massive. And lifting a carrier 6 feet? Did they mean from a distance of 6 feet? If it could lift it 6 feet, it could lift it 1,000 feet.
Unlimited Energy Bravo humanity!! Fusion is the answer for prosperity!
Great info!!
I just hope they get it right this time as we have been 20 years away from commercial fusion for almost 70 years now.
Nobody said it was 20 years ago 70 years ago
@@theunbeatable1755 It is a metaphor used by the scientific community that Fusion technology is always 30 years from now.
Nerds🤮👊😡🗣
@@Thebreakdownshow1 I know someone who works in the fusion field and he said they never said it was only 20 years ago and there is also no evidence of any scientist in past saying it. The whole thing was made as a joke as fusion was taking so long
@@theunbeatable1755 I think your taking me as a person opposed to fusion. I made a joke about how it’s almost there and has been for a while.
And Just Like that, The Flash other Meta Humans became reality.....
I'm so glad that the question about fusion energy is moving towards when and how, instead of if, this could solve a lot of problems for us
I am simply at awe, at the scientific wonders that the human mind can create.
cool story hiran love it
thank god we have smart people like those who are working on this i already dont understand fusion in school
"I would like nuclear fusion to become a practical power source. It would provide an inexhaustible supply of energy, without pollution or global warming." ~ Stephen Hawking
I'm so glad that the question about fusion energy is moving towards when and how, instead of if, this could solve a lot of problems for us
We won't run out of Uranium for billions of years and using it doesn't produce pollution. We already have a great power source, people are just being difficult.
@@infini_ryu9461 yes, nuclear is the best power source we have right now, but this will be cheaper, safer and make way more power than nuclear
@@personguy1004 They're both nuclear. :P
This gives me some hope for a greener future!
Retired physics Professor: Once proof of concept is proven prolific smaller more common units will be wonderful to see!
Man made abuse of the climate will finally make a turn for the better!
I am waiting for it.
Thorium salt reactors is the way to go until we get this fusion going. The waste has a shelf life of 500 years instead of 500,000. Clean carbon free emissions and with new technology just created by the Swiss there is no chance of a meltdown in newer plants.
We also have alcohol based fuel forms of bio fuel
@@orange-418lol Not after hearing the thorium test reactor in Germany had a major radiological release a few days after Chernobyl. An article in the October Scientific American, doubts any of the other fission technologies being touted are worth a damn.
Great initiative by all nations!
We need more news like this.
Elon Musk: "I'm gonna be the first one to make it real."
Jeff Bezos: "I'm gonna be the first one to buy it."
“It’s just 10 years away”... so they said 10 years ago... and 10 years before that...
More like 30 years. The first fusion in an lab took place in the mid-thirties. It will take at least another 30 years to an commercial fusion reactor...
This is amazing
The world should work together like this one.
This is how the world moves forward. Even if this doesn't work out, its the working together that creates the real power.....
well, regarding producing as much energy as is put in: are we talking Q-plasma or Q-total?
They're not talking Q-total, they are saying, "won't it be great when (if) this works." In more prosaic words, "If pigs had wings they sure could fly!" The next sentence goes something like, "Give us 10 times more money and that pig will fly to the moon."
Q-Plasma, unfortunately.
@@tomblanco8234 we should have that more out in the open, as it is not Q-total the road to a practical use of fusion is way, way longer than they are trying to portrai.
@@srenbro916 They are intentionally misleading. And by misleading, I mean that they lie right in people's faces in order to gain funding.
@@blinded6502 yes, which is why we should shout it from the rooftops.
Tony Stark was able to build this in a cave! With a box of scraps!
Nevermind the power usage or gain, the fact that we would be able to fabricate certain elements out of other elements is amazing, it has unlimited potential. The age of fusion is when we can finally turn lead to gold (actual gold!)
Bruh....
Yes, it is only 40 years away.
They said the same thing 40 years ago. 😆
Better late thn never
@@justinfowler2857 proof
@@theunbeatable1755 Bruh
@@blinded6502 bruh v2
Han Solo: "I gotta bad feeling about this."
chernobyl 2.0
Ever heard of an alternator.... Simple yet... Much love
A lot of respect to those involved, if things go expected it is definitely THE major scientific advance in human history, if goes wrong it will self destruction.
They’ll never land a spaceship on a barge in the ocean.
@@fredwerza3478 Amen!
@@fredwerza3478 amen!!
@@fredwerza3478 they need to strap Bden and Hnter to a drone and drop them in Afghanistan
Impossible!
@james robinson lol rent free forever
Next headline: “fusion reactor costs rise 100x more than initially budgeted”
and take 30 more years
But that's a good thing for all those engineers who spent money on getting vague science degrees. Now they can pay back those loans. Who knows? Learning about quantum particles might be useful or meaningful some day. Nah.
@@g3user1usa optimistically I believe and hope “some day” eventually comes but with so many immediate problems to fix it shouldn’t even happening anytime soon. “mainstream science” needs to acknowledge they are choosing to sacrifice livelihood and life itself for people today on the hypothesized gamble that it could improve the lives of those in the future.
Brilliant Light Power
Grandfather is a founder and ex-lead scientist of a company building a tokomak. Super proud.
It Is Likely That Amature Researchers Or Grad Students Somewhere Have Already Proposed Solutions Which Could Shorten That Delay.
This is all a long running scam, fusion is never going to be used to generate power. See Sabine Hossenfelder video. She is a real physicist, and has no dog in the fight, and gives an honest analysis.
Second coming of Jesus Christ VS fusion VS Graphene
The race is on.
Lmfao...
@@AnalyticalReckoner not for the
Second time
So, you think providing effective, clean, cheaper, and safe energy to the people that will contribute to the betterment of life and the environment is a bad idea?
@@cloroxbleach7554 who said that?
this is so cool
He showed more credibility by fulfilling his promise. Big thanks to your service for the 22,000 euro sent
I heard the real likelihood that this tech becomes a reality is going to take at least another 20 years ☹️
or 30. They always say it is 20-30 years away, and have said this for the last 50-70 years.
@@DumbledoreMcCracken If you asked someone 200 years ago when we will make vehicles that can fly they probably would have said never.
It always is...
They are right again it is only 40 years away! Same as the last time....................
When someone says that fusion is just around the corner, the response is, "and always will be."