Fusion energy breakthrough by US scientists boosts clean power hopes

First-ever net energy gain from fusion raises hopes for zero-carbon alternative.

See full article...

 

[Aidolon]

Exciting to see incremental progress on this front. I assume Ars will post a follow-up article with more specifics once the findings have been publicly released?

On a side note, it bothers me tremendously that the article image is ever-so-slightly askew.

 

[retsibsi]

If the report is correct then there is going to be a lot more investment into fusion over the next few years

 

[radulov]

If the report is correct then there is going to be a lot more investment into fusion over the next few years

There has been a lot of investment into fusion but the research is private. No government money = no need to share progress. It's a $100T prize ... I just hope to see it in my lifetime.

 

[ColdWetDog]

Exciting to see incremental progress on this front. I assume Ars will post a follow-up article with more specifics once the findings have been publicly released?

On a side note, it bothers me tremendously that the article image is ever-so-slightly askew.

Yeah, I'm hoping that Ars will come up with a bit meatier article. But we're still in the early, unsubstantiated phase of this particular episode.

And, as usual, mainstream media has Mr. Fusion in a couple of years. Sigh.

EDIT: And it appears this result is along the lines of 'necessary, but not sufficient' as far as real power source. Magic 8 ball says, 'ask again later'.

 

[radulov]

There is the second problem: Even with net energy gain, can that energy be collected and converted to electricity with a net gain?

 

[aerogems]

A small step, but a very important small step. Assuming it all holds up on review, they just proved that the process is viable. Now it's just a matter of refining and improving it.

 

[ranthog]

Just another 10 years away, as it has been for the last 60 years.

The statement is usually that it has been 20 years away.

That being said, the original estimates were before we found out just how complicated the plasma physics and containment would be. Right now things like the results of this test along with others indicate that we likely finally have a good enough undrstanding to actually progress into practical reactors now that the theoretical work has progressed far enough.

 

[Derecho Imminent]

Two of the people with knowledge of the results said the energy output had been greater than expected, which had damaged some diagnostic equipment, complicating the analysis."

Always exciting when you blow up your meters!

 

[Statistical]

It is very surprising to have a breakthrough at this facility. As the article notes it uses inertial confinement and has long been believed to be a dead end in energy production. The US has largely used this for gathering observational data for building models to perfect nuclear weapon design after the comprehensive test ban treaty made the old fashion way of building a bomb and detonating it impossible. Even with Nova Laser the potential for net energy production looke dismal. When the US built the national ignition facility a larger version of the same concept it was called a blatant nuclear weapons development program under the guise of fusion science by critics for decades. While the truth might not be that black and white it is clear perfecting models used to simulate nuclear weapons is a large part of why both were built and continue to be used with any non-weapon research that might also happen being a bonus.

Of all the various fusion facilities around the world this is the last one I would have expected a breakthrough at. It shows sometimes science does happen unexpectedly. I wonder if they even fully understand why output spiked so high yet. From reports of damaged equipment it seems nobody would expecting it or at least not expecting the magnitude of the increase.

 

[Hydrargyrum]

Is there any even slightly practical path towards useful power production from inertial confinement? I thought the “green power” aspect of NIF was basically just greenwashing PR for its true purpose of nuclear weapons research (as this article mentions).

It would please me greatly to learn that my cynicism is wrong, so if anyone’s in a position to explain how wrong I am, please do so.

Even having demonstrated a positive energy gain, that doesn’t mean inertial fusion can be turned into a practical power plant. Is there any way to actually capture the net energy and keep the cycle going?

 

[ranthog]

I truly wonder how the US will utilize this once its got minimum viable production and maturity. Our gov is owned by special interest money that typically has a stake in not encouraging renewables. For one I would imagine oil nations would stick their money in our mouth to sweep or delay this as a widely deployed tech.

By the time fusion becomes practical most if not all of the fossil fuels need to be off of our power grid. In fact, utilities are building out a lot of renewables because the bottom line on ROI is far better and less risky than fossil fuel plants. The only utilities fighting this are the ones that made some very bad calls on power plants during the Bush administration and have large coal plants that are going to never turn a profit.

 

[peterford]

just by way of comparison, here's what JET has achieved

[in 1997] it produced a five second shot that produced 22 MJ of total energy and a peak 16 MW of fusion power for about 0.15 seconds. As the pulse was driven by 25 MW of input power

...

on 21 December [2021] researchers at the facility created a deuterium–tritium fusion shot that produced an energy of 59 MJ over five seconds.

The 11 MW produced (with 40 MW of input power) is lower than that achieved in 1997, resulting in a ratio of fusion power to heating power of about 0.3. However, the power was sustained over a longer period of five seconds.

 

[ryanja]

I truly wonder how the US will utilize this once its got minimum viable production and maturity. Our gov is owned by special interest money that typically has a stake in not encouraging renewables. For one I would imagine oil nations would stick their money in our mouth to sweep or delay this as a widely deployed tech.

Sadly, the US has an overwhelmingly large number of people (and elected officials) who will fight anything that isn't coal or natural gas, going so far as to appear to setup energy alternatives to fail in order to boost fossil fuel energy production (see: the failure of Texas to properly prepare wind farms to operate in cold temperatures that they have recent historical precedent of experiencing, something that has been done in colder countries and parts of the world for years). What was (or rather, wasn't) done there and the talking points put forward by state officials is really nothing short of intentional sabotage.

Fusion energy could come out of 'alpha' tomorrow with free plans to build power plants to provide unlimited energy cheaply, and there would be elected officials and lobbyists who would try to outlaw the technology in order to bolster their own state's economies.

 

[linuxophile]

Excellent, but usually they report the Q_plasma( or Q_laser, in this case), namely, the ratio between the energy carried by the lasers into the actual fusion material and the heat produced. This is all good, but the true goal is to have a ratio for the TOTAL energy used versus the useful energy extracted.
This means: on one side the energy for the lasers (In this case, a factor of 10 conservatively), cooling, etc.. and on the other side the energy after conversion from heat to mechanical or electrical.
There is a YouTube video of Sabine Hossenfelder which explains this well (much better than me here).

Don‘t get me wrong; this is a breakthrough. But it is mostly psychological and not quite practical yet. Hopefully it is one less rung in the ladder towards viability.

 

[Wheels Of Confusion]

Headline:

Fusion energy breakthrough by US scientists boosts clean power hopes
First-ever net-energy gain from fusion raises hopes for zero-carbon alternative.​

Article:

“Initial diagnostic data suggests another successful experiment at the National Ignition Facility. However, the exact yield is still being determined and we can’t confirm that it is over the threshold at this time,” it said. “That analysis is in process, so publishing the information... before that process is complete would be inaccurate.”

 

[mhalpern]

Is there any even slightly practical path towards useful power production from inertial confinement? I thought the “green power” aspect of NIF was basically just greenwashing PR for its true purpose of nuclear weapons research (as this article mentions).

It would please me greatly to learn that my cynicism is wrong, so if anyone’s in a position to explain how wrong I am, please do so.

Even having demonstrated a positive energy gain, that doesn’t mean inertial fusion can be turned into a practical plant. Is there any way to actually capture the net energy?

probably not with inertial fusion, or at most generous not just inertial fusion, however, it is useful in informing how much input energy is needed to realistically achieve a net positive reaction. But yeah the NIF is basically how the US is able to continue nuclear weapons development post Nuclear Test Ban Treaty

 

[Statistical]

I truly wonder how the US will utilize this once its got minimum viable production and maturity. Our gov is owned by special interest money that typically has a stake in not encouraging renewables. For one I would imagine oil nations would stick their money in our mouth to sweep or delay this as a widely deployed tech.

Fusion may be part of the future but the human race will transition to low carbon without it or we die. The timeline for successful transition to low carbon (nuclear in theory could be part of the mix) will happen long before fusion power is commercially available.

 

[21five]

There is the second problem: Even with net energy gain, can that energy be collected and converted to electricity with a net gain?

There’s also some discussion as to whether it’s a net energy gain for the whole system, or just based on the laser energy being input.

A little bit like a startup turning an operating profit (incremental revenue) vs being profitable overall.

Still, exciting stuff and looking forward to hearing more tomorrow!

 

[Veritas super omens]

There is the second problem: Even with net energy gain, can that energy be collected and converted to electricity with a net gain?

At prices competitive with the other kinds of fusion generated resources (wind and PV)?

Also note the issues Ukraine is having with Russian targeting of generation and distribution using the traditional systems. Something that would be much more difficult it with thousands of renewable interconnected micogrids. Don't get me wrong I am all for fusion research but I suspect it will never be more than a specialty siting electricity source. The same SMR fission reactors.

 

[Cobalt Jacket]

Of all the various fusion facilities around the world this is the last one I would have expected a breakthrough to happen at. It shows sometimes science does happen unexpectedly. I wonder if they even fully understand why output spiked so high. From reports of damaged equipment it seems nobody would expecting it when it happened.

It would seem to explain why the US did not take a leading role in ITER (though we are a participant.) The DoE caught flak for that at the time.

 

[Eldorito]

There is the second problem: Even with net energy gain, can that energy be collected and converted to electricity with a net gain?

If the first quote in this is accurate (although it says 1.8MJ instead of 2.1MJ) there's a few more problems to overcome.

But it's a good step, just we'll need a lot more steps still. As they say, we need to hit the point of double the total energy going into the system, we're miles off that but it's another step.

 

[rtrefz]

I love how much "if confirmed" shows up in the article. Very in-line with the scientific method.

 

[xoe]

The statement is usually that it has been 20 years away.

That being said, the original estimates were before we found out just how complicated the plasma physics and containment would be. Right now things like the results of this test along with others indicate that we likely finally have a good enough undrstanding to actually progress into practical reactors now that the theoretical work has progressed far enough.

I actually googled it with different numbers to be sure, and the 10 year number got the most results.

 

[tjukken]

I suggest people read the WP article for some perspective.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/12/11/fusion-nuclear-energy-breakthrough/

 

[KingZarkon]

Is there any even slightly practical path towards useful power production from inertial confinement? I thought the “green power” aspect of NIF was basically just greenwashing PR for its true purpose of nuclear weapons research (as this article mentions).

It would please me greatly to learn that my cynicism is wrong, so if anyone’s in a position to explain how wrong I am, please do so.

Even having demonstrated a positive energy gain, that doesn’t mean inertial fusion can be turned into a practical power plant. Is there any way to actually capture the net energy and keep the cycle going?

Honestly, even if ICF never works out for a power plant, it COULD be used in a fusion-powered rocket if it can provide enough of a surplus of energy.

 

[Statistical]

Is there any even slightly practical path towards useful power production from inertial confinement? I thought the “green power” aspect of NIF was basically just greenwashing PR for its true purpose of nuclear weapons research (as this article mentions).

It would please me greatly to learn that my cynicism is wrong, so if anyone’s in a position to explain how wrong I am, please do so.

Even having demonstrated a positive energy gain, that doesn’t mean inertial fusion can be turned into a practical power plant. Is there any way to actually capture the net energy and keep the cycle going?

It is early days but probably not. Not even sure they know why output spiked so high yet given the reports of damaged equipment.

Also the science aspect of Nova Laser & NIF is largely green washing but science is sometimes random and unexpected.

 

[Dark Jaguar]

There is the second problem: Even with net energy gain, can that energy be collected and converted to electricity with a net gain?

Just run the heat through some pipes to make steam that turns some turbines. It's... what pretty much all our generators do. I swear even Star Trek warp cores probably end up making energy via a boiler room at some point.

 

[rojcowles]

Great news and exciting but not entirely surprising as far as I can tell getting to break even or significant net gain with terrestrial, controlled, nuclear fusion so a power plant could provide net energy to the electricity grid has been a question of engineering rather than physics for a few years now.

Brutally hard engineering challenges to be fair and doubly so in that any solutions that would achieve fusion conditions on demand for power generation also have to be affordable so that the capital cost of the plant, fuel, running costs, safety and decommissioning mean that a MWh from a fusion plant is at least somewhat price competitive with natural gas, solar/wind+storage, hydro, coal or fission and might still require government subsidies as a low carbon energy source to get the market for fusion providers / operators somewhat de-risked and established.

Still news like this might spur further investment in the current crop of commercial fusion companies, even if they are pursuing alternate approaches to inertial confinement, which makes me happy and could improve the chances of someday seeing compact fusion reactors rolling off shipyard like production lines to go into power plants or cargo ships and slowly ease civilization away from burning giga-tons of carbon based stuff annually to make electricity.

Also looking forward to pointing to my EV and saying to someone "See? It's fusion powered just like that DeLorean" though might be a much different car than my current Leaf before that happens.

 

[oldwiseman]

Net energy gain is still a LONG way off from net usable electricity gain... They are just accumulating all of the heat energy they observed still. They are no where near getting usable electricity out of system like this, and that doesn't even begin to account for input costs. My read shows they are using lasers with highly refined fuel beads that costs a lot of money to make and are HIGHLY precise in their construction. I hope I'm wrong, but this still seems 30 years away.

I'm more excited for Helion Energy's fusion generators. It uses a slightly different fuel mixture that produces charged Hydrogen instead of non ionized neutrons in the reaction. They are beginning with the end result of electricity generation in mind.

 

[The Dark]

How is this different from the more energy out than in claim from 8 years ago? Maybe I'm missing something because it's Monday morning and brain no work good, so hopefully someone can explain this in a way that leaves me less confused.

 

[UserIDAlreadyInUse]

January, 2068:

"Ma'am, we have a....bit of an anomaly with Reactor One."
"What is it?"
"Well, we have, well, what can only be described as contamination in the plasma harness. I'm not sure that's the right term, though?"
"Interesting, but unhelpful. Can you be a little more specific?"
"Well, you know we've been getting dust into the reactors over time, yes?"
"Yes?"
"We do our best to keep things clean, but the stuff just accumulates. It hasn't been affecting the output of any of the reactors, so we haven't been too concerned about it. The stuff gets in, yes, but mostly just floats in the harness, away from the fusion core and not interfering."
"All right. Get to the point?"
"Right. Well, the clumps in the reactors have been getting bigger over time....again, not a concern. They're still very nearly microscopic and again, far from the actual reaction." A narrowing of her eyes and the slight sound of a tapping foot under her desk suggested he hurry up and get to the point. "Well, here's the thing. They're in all reactors, but Reactor One has the biggest accumulation of dust to date."
"And...? You know, I do have other things...."
"And..," he hurried on, "one of the dust balls in Reactor One just launched a satellite. An actual satellite! And we're pretty sure what we thought was the glow of crystalline refraction is, in fact....well, there's no easy way to put this...well, is actually an electric grid. That we can see. On what the techs are now calling the 'night side' of the dustball. So...."
"So...?"
"So....what do we do now??"

 

[Dark Jaguar]

Great news and exciting but not entirely surprising as far as I can tell getting to break even or significant net gain with terrestrial, controlled, nuclear fusion so a power plant could provide net energy to the electricity grid has been a question of engineering rather than physics for a few years now.

Brutally hard engineering challenges to be fair and doubly so in that any solutions that would achieve fusion conditions on demand for power generation also have to be affordable so that the capital cost of the plant, fuel, running costs, safety and decommissioning mean that a MWh from a fusion plant is at least somewhat price competitive with natural gas, solar/wind+storage, hydro, coal or fission and might still require government subsidies as a low carbon energy source to get the market for fusion providers / operators somewhat de-risked and established.

Still news like this might spur further investment in the current crop of commercial fusion companies, even if they are pursuing alternate approaches to inertial confinement, which makes me happy and could improve the chances of someday seeing compact fusion reactors rolling off shipyard like production lines to go into power plants or cargo ships and slowly ease civilization away from burning giga-tons of carbon based stuff annually to make electricity.

Also looking forward to pointing to my EV and saying to someone "See? It's fusion powered just like that DeLorean" though might be a much different car than my current Leaf before that happens.

The hard problems are making the failure modes "safe", making the "default" energy generation (rather than practically needing to hand-force every last molecule into just the right place), and then there's the neutron bombardment utterly ruining the material the fusion generator is made out of. If the whole shebang's gotta be replaced every couple years, and we scale that up worldwide, well that's a lot of resources. That said, it's certainly not nearly as much as what goes into all our much dirtier energy generating systems. Speaking of, while some fusion materials result in non-radioactive byproducts, others don't. Unfortunately the ones that have more harmful byproducts tend to generate more energy and use less rare materials to start with.

I'm kinda... going off an amalgam of barely remembered fusion articles I've read over the decades so forgive me if I get any of the details wrong. There's a reason these things are joked about as "eternally ten years away", fusion has never been as "set it and forget it" style of energy production. Still, this is a big step. We just don't know high the staircase is yet. In the meantime, the transition to wind, solar, thermal, and hydro should continue apace. Act like fusion isn't available for now, until it is.

 

[AdamM]

Sadly, the US has an overwhelmingly large number of people (and elected officials) who will fight anything that isn't coal or natural gas, going so far as to appear to setup energy alternatives to fail in order to boost fossil fuel energy production (see: the failure of Texas to properly prepare wind farms to operate in cold temperatures that they have recent historical precedent of experiencing, something that has been done in colder countries and parts of the world for years). What was (or rather, wasn't) done there and the talking points put forward by state officials is really nothing short of intentional sabotage.

Fusion energy could come out of 'alpha' tomorrow with free plans to build power plants to provide unlimited energy cheaply, and there would be elected officials and lobbyists who would try to outlaw the technology in order to bolster their own state's economies.

Sabotage won’t do anything because economics promotes use of cheaper energy sources. Coal use has been falling for years even under friendly administrations. It’s not economical to use and there isn’t a damn thing Texas can do to change that calculation.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/coal/use-of-coal.php
Natural gas use has gone up as have renewables. An energy source like fusion would quickly put natural gas in a similar position as coal.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained...y-in-the-us-generation-capacity-and-sales.php
Believe it or not electric companies don’t like paying more than they have to either and will quickly switch to cheaper energy sources.

Edit: Wording