Fusion for electricity generation? A jump up, but how close?

Discussing the future of domestic use of nuclear fusion technology–a jump up for sure.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ethansiegel/2015/08/27/how-close-are-we-to-nuclear-fusion/

Advertisements

8 responses to “Fusion for electricity generation? A jump up, but how close?

  1. Regretfully, fusion energy is part of the BIGGEST LIE that destroyed the sovereignty of nations and the integrity of government science after 24 October 1945.

    Mass immigration is an inhumane way of destroying national boundaries for what other purpose than this?

    https://brittius.wordpress.com/2015/08/16/dr-o-manuel-ph-d-stalins-science/

  2. I’ve just finished reading a group of articles on the current (no pun intended) state of the art re. fusion experiments. The keyword is scaleability, even if one of the schemes succeeds in getting more power out than was put in. The best result so far is around 1000:1 – a thousand times more in than out. Also, the compressed hydrogen fusion “targets” are about the size of a full-stop on this page at their largest. A successful “run” would produce power for a few microseconds at best.

    The gap between present technology and a continuously working reactor is wide – very wide. Just getting a small but continuous output is a good way off, and scaling that up would be an immense, likely impossible task. The gap hasn’t really closed over the last 10 years – advances are made, and then new problems emerge. The Forbes article is a good technical summary, but in the end, the writer is just “talking it up”.

  3. Wow! That Forbes article is certainly one of the worst ones I have ever seen, as far as any factual and real information. I believe I saw an outright error, or some amount of misinformation, in every paragraph. That could be used as an example of how not to write a science article.

  4. Isn’t this one of those ‘forever 20 years away’ deals? It’d be a miracle if it actually came about

    • Fusion is based on two lies inserted into the foundations of nuclear and solar physics after WWII to hide the source of energy that destroyed Higoshima and Nagasaki: NEUTRON REPULSION

      1. Carl von Weizsacker’s flawed concept of nuclear binding energy replaced Nobel Laureate Francis William Aston’s valid concept of nuclear packing fraction in Nuclear Physics textbooks after WWII

      2. The internal composition of the Sun in textbooks of astronomy and solar physics was abruptly changed, with no discussion or debate, from
      _ a.) Mostly iron (Fe) in 1945 to
      _ b.) Mostly hydrogen (H ) in 1946

  5. FUSION FOR ELECTRICITY IS THE SECOND BIGGEST CON, EVER!!! Warmist are only ripping-off the public for big billions, to save it from the phony global warming. NOT ONE KILOWATT OF ELECTRICITY WILL EVER BE PRODUCED FROM FUSION, HERE IS THE TRUTH:: https://globalwarmingdenier.wordpress.com/fusion-for-electricity/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s