CHINA JUST ACHIEVED FUSION WEST BTFO

>>57392516
Is it at least energy neutral?
If not fusion has been done before.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor

32 seconds of plasma, world record

>>57392600
That was the previous record in 2012. This went for 'over one minute'.

>believing anything the Chinese say
>taking the Chinese seriously

>>57392516
good lord that tokamak is way too small.
you need a bigger plasma torus to keep that Bremmstrahlung in check, chinks.

And then it broke and they threw the whole thing away and purchased another.

>>57392516
hyperbole

>>57392516
>Rickety Chinese fusion
sounds nice

>>57392541
> If not energy neutral/positive, fusion has already been done before.

No kidding. if you don't care about yield and efficiency, you can literally do sonofusion in your kitchen for like $10 in parts plus whatever deuterated acetone costs.

>>57392557
looks like a jamiroquai video

File: china.jpg (230KB, 766x510px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 766x510px

>>57392557
>>57392924

>>57392924
topkek

>>57393027
10/10

>>57393027
:)

Chinese only country trying to push science.
>eu fucked after the lhc
>usa using 20+ tech
>canada too poor
>japan unconcerned

>>57392516
Yeah, sure...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7FXeaahRsg

>>57393135
well China is run by scientists and engineers.
I don't think its really for the best in the long term because the USSR was basically a technocracy as well and it only hurt them, though compared to us they are far better off.

ideally you need to have that balance like the USA did in the 50s-80s

>>57393135
Japan is one of the major contributors in ITER.

>>57392516
>no source

Sure they did anon.

>>57393196
this basically.

>>57393278
Fuck off netouyo

>>57392516
Thats one complicated looking steam engine

>>57392516
this is to make electricity, right?
so how do you harness the energy?
is it still steam turbines?

"Chinese scientists have successfully obtained high-confinement plasma for a record length of time, which experts believe will promote the development of international thermonuclear fusion research."
It's not fusion, just contained plasma. And containing plasma is a lot easier than containing plasma at fusion temperatures, so I'm not convinced the hype is justified.
Also:
>tokamak
>not stellarator

File: wat.png (40KB, 682x301px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 682x301px

>>57393347
It can be steam of course, any reaction lets off heat.
p + B11 = high energy brotons though, that would be a direct to electric method. Have the ionized/energized protons land on a grid, or sail by a wire and induce a mag/electric field. No one has figured out the "low hanging fruit" of fusion with T + D or D + D or T/D + He3, and the proton + boron-11 is a lot harder to do.

>>57393401
>not bussard polywell
>in the year two thousand and sixteenths

File: 1469041877733.png (123KB, 315x300px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 315x300px

>>57393347
>this is to make electricity, right?
Eventually and probably with steam engines. However we have to:

1. Get to the point where the energy released from fusion is greater than the energy required to create the conditions for fusion.

2. Start thinking about the system as a whole. Can you generate more usable energy, most likely electric, than you put in. Once you do that you can run the generator using the power from the generator. Just add fuel.

3. Start thinking about making this useful. This means the cost(both of operation and the opportunity cost of investing in this instead of literally anything else) has to be less than the value of the power generated. Once you have that you have a society that will transition to using electricity generated from the most common material in the universe through economic forces alone.

Getting past point 1 will be a major signal to investors to pay attention. I think at that point private companies will start throwing money at it at this point and it will no longer take government grants to improve the state of the art. Wikipedia is saying the fusor linked earlier takes at least 100,000 times more energy to run than the energy released by the fusion. I'm having trouble finding info on what kind output/input ratios are possible with the more complicated methods. If it ever hits 1 it will be in the news and will be historic.

>>57392516
>CHINA JUST ACHIEVED FUSION WEST BTFO
THen why isnt "china" or "fusion" showing anything in the news?

>>57392516
>implying Chinese are smart to come up with they're own technology

And they achieved it by using stolen technology that they have obtained from other countries.

File: interior_of_w7-x_stellarator.png (2MB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x800px

>>57394299
Same reason why you didn't see the South Korea thing that much. It's the election season, and all eyes are on that. Yes, even non-americans, like myself, are observing it.

>>57392516
>CHINA
Such an awful country.

>>57394408
Thing is, they'd do great if they weren't commies.

>>57392800
Underrated, and checked.

>>57394423
No, they would have done great if they weren't one country.

>>57394441
No, they would have done great if they didn't chow down on pooch meat, pollute, and over publish with junk scientific articles to the Academy of Science.

:^[)

>>57394474
>>57394441
>>57394423
>>57394408
HAHA NOT LIKE AMERICA RIGHT GUYS?

GO' BLESS
GO' BLESS
GO' BLESS

>>57394407
out of curiosity or fear?
Where are you for context

>>57394521
Indonesia.
To answer your question, it may be both. Whoever ends up in charge of the most economically-powerful country will definitely have an impact on the rest of the world in one way or another.

>>57392516
>>57394407
The amount of sources are very limited on first sight. This is the original article: http://www.scmp.com/tech/science-research/article/1909796/new-dawn-chinese-scientists-move-step-closer-creating

so it's fair to remain skeptical.

>Meanwhile, physicists in Japan and Europe have been able to reach the same temperature as the Chinese team, but not for longer than a minute due to concerns of provoking a reactor meltdown.

>The EAST was invented by Soviet scientists to control nuclear fusion for power generation.

Nothing new here..

>>57392672
>believing anything the Chinese say
>taking the Chinese seriously

Ayyyye.

What about that "over the traffic" bus that turned out to be a fraud. And their 5th gen fighter jets that turned out to be really shitty with shitty Russian engines. And their air craft carrier that doesn't even work.

>>57394559
>most economically-powerful country
if it's not china already it'll be china pretty soon

better get your ass to australia. western living standards and an economy secured by coal exports to china. if china keeps growing or plateus, demand will stay or grow. if china takes a dump there's enough ties to the west to stay comfy

can't lose

File: Vostok1_big.gif (146KB, 427x492px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 427x492px

>>57392516
Why only soviet/communist or ex-soviet/ex-communist technology captures the cyberpunk aesthetic?

Why is capitalist/imperialist technology so uninspired?

>>57393027

This makes me very happy.

>>57392516

Yeah, as everyone is saying...it's China. Take it with a grain of salt. Waiting for replication and peer review (from someone outside of China's control).

I read in an interview in TIME the most pessimistic person they could find claimed fusion will go from a scientific problem to an engineering one in a few decades. Basically, we'll live to see that it's real, but many of us won't see the benefits. Our children will. Their children will see the ozone layer repaired completely.

File: 1241231211.jpg (5KB, 117x159px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 117x159px

>>57392516
Achieving fusion has been done before, the question is, did it create more energy than it costed?

Not even one source
Ridiculous even by gs shit standards

>>57392924
too soon ;_;

>>57394407
how are you supposed to run it while there's some tiny chink dude stuck in there? wouldn't he die?

The chinese are serial liars. Believing their chinky lies will basically make you extremely poor.

>>pieces of metal
>>fusion
make me laugh more feggets

>>57395102
Because nixie tubes? I agree the low-tech/high-tech combination to be associated with russian technology has a pleasing aesthetic, but regardless of what's fashionable, in modern technology practicality comes first.

File: thorium-waste-comparison.jpg (98KB, 978x656px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 978x656px

Fusion will always be a meme. Even if its possible, it will always be too expensive. These experimential fusion reactors cost billions of dollars to build. It isnt feasible until we have room temperature superconductors. Molten salt Thorium reactors is the future of energy. We have a billion years worth of Thorium in reserves around the world and its the safest form of Nuclear tech, abd cant be used to proliferation purposes.

>>57395102
>cyberpunk aesthetic
You speak as if that is good. I prefer the F-35 and Zumwalt aesthetic just fine, thank you.

>>57395650
I've been reading more and more about thorium reactors.

It seems like the way to go until we can get solarpower at efficiency levels for it to become cheaper

>>57395813
Solar is already efficient (Tesla vehicles, Gigafactory 1, Power Wall, etc). Nuclear is a good business model for someone else's bottom line.

>>57395650
Seconded. Not to mention its presence in the earth's crust being around 3 times higher than that of Uranium 238, to say nothing of its presence over Uranium 235. But don't forget that breeder reactors can also breed plutonium from U238.

>>57395650
>liquid fluoride

do you have any idea how corrosive that shit is? unless your pipes are made out of gold, you'll have to change out the whole setup in no time

not saying fusion is better; the neutron flux is so high it's going to transmute the reactor materials over time. any standard engineering materials is going to loose the properties that make them function. and there isn't enough space to put a huge lead shield between the magnets and the plasma

>>57395650
How many liquid fluoride thorium reactors have been built?
Or are they just an untried theoretical possibility?
Fluoride, in its active state, is a nightmare element. It's what chemists use when they need to find something that will react with noble elements. Containment issues would be insurmountable.

>>57395850
>efficient
>less than 50%
>require high maintenance
>only work on cloudless days
>open to elements
>resource scarcity for panels and for batteries
See what Germany are doing with their new solar infrastructure? Building coal plants.
Give it 20, 30 years.

>>57395870
>>57395875
fluoride, not fluorine. fluoride refers to the ion, and liquid fluoride refers to a molten salt. Flouride salt (like what is in your toothpaste) is very inert, while fluorine is one of the strongest oxidants out there and you shouldn't brush your teeth with it.

File: wrong.png (476KB, 1000x895px) Image search: [Google]

476KB, 1000x895px

[spoiler]CHINA[/spoiler]

File: Homemade_fusion_reactor.jpg (921KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

921KB, 1600x1200px

>>57392516
Are you living under the rock?
Everyone can achieve fusion these days.

>>57392516
No they didn't.

>>57395650
>room temperature superconductors
Like, maybe, solid metallic hydrogen? Because that's a thing, now.

https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.01634

File: c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636[1].jpg (35KB, 636x421px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 636x421px

>>57396011

[spoiler]ching ching, chong chong chong, ching ching[/spoiler]

>>57392516
And?

The sun achieved fusion yonks ago. This isn't news

>>57396107
>studied at a pressure of 495 GPa
wow, such practical, much super

>>57396075
looks cool, where can I get one

>>57395850
>solar power
>efficient
lol at this fag

>>57392893
Fusion ain't achievable without special equipment.

>>57395232
Russia already did this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87OhpPQ-244

Im not buying bleeding edge technology coming out of a country that desperately needs to rampantly steal other country's technology just to stay out of the stone age.

>>57398063
Sounds to me he unlocked the secrets to immortality. Just don't hit your brain with it.

>>57394869
>>>57394559
>>most economically-powerful country
>if it's not china already it'll be china pretty soon
>better get your ass to australia. western living standards and an economy secured by coal exports to china. if china keeps growing or plateus, demand will stay or grow. if china takes a dump there's enough ties to the west to stay comfy
>can't lose
Except coal exports are failing to meet projections because countries are starting to realise it's literally cancer.
Mining makes up for only about 15 percent of Australia's industry as well, government won't tax it and more jobs are being automated in that industry every day.
It's quote possibly the worst industry to back as far as long term goes.

>>57395650
You do know that relatively less superconductors are needed for a bigger fusion reactor right? You get to have more mass inside the magnetic field for less superconductors(same principle as the inverse square law)

This means if you scale the reactor up the efficiency goes up.

>>57392516
>CHINA JUST ACHIEVED FUSION WEST BTFO
you say this like we havn't "achieved fusion" since the 50s

>>57398317
You're talking about thermonuclear fusion anon. He is talking about controlled fusion but I doubt it.

>>57398802
there have been a large number of controlled fusion devices in the US, Japan, etc. And this is thermonuclear fusion. They just havn't reached ignition, theyre all "controlled"
thermonuclear fusion doesn't mean anything other than high temps are used to initiate fusion

>>57396225
Yes, that's what you need to make it right now. Now they've made it, it's just sitting there in a dewar full of LN2, perfectly happy with itself.

Cold fusion is easy. It's making it work at temperatures that don't require specialist cryo units (read expensive) that's the hard part.

>>57398868
cold fusion is make believe.

>>57397742
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5_WvmQiqz0

>>57396075
>muh pretty glow
unless he's got a neutron detector to confirm output, he dont got fusion

>>57395894
It works incredibly well if placed in the arid areas of africa. The challenges are obvious, but surprisingly, transporting the power isn't the biggest issue. Additionally, molten salt will even out energy production, and excess could theoretically be stored or compensated for using conventional means.

We're just not doing it because we don't need to put any more money into the current system to keep it going, and you need a lot of money to start something like this off. That said, you would be producing a crazy amount of energy without any end in sight, but again, you need money to start off with.

>>57398837
Controlled thermonuclear fusion reactor
now am I specific enough?

>>57398943
Getting some nucleus to fuse is not that difficult.

>>57398959
you're still talking like this hasn't been done before. they just did it for a little bit longer

>>57392516
didnt germany have working cold fusion reactor prototypes like 4 years ago?

>>57399073
not saying it is but just because you make a plasma doesn't mean you have any fusion.

>>57399098
>cold fusion
seriously stop this shitposting. cold fusion is not a real phenomenon.

File: 1478185059191320776.jpg (545KB, 1600x1477px) Image search: [Google]

545KB, 1600x1477px

>>57398943
>>57399106
This design has been around for ~50 years. See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor

>>57399168
I know that, I'm just saying that example doesn't necessarily show an example of fusion occurring. I got offered a spot on Lockheed's compact fusion team before I graduated, I know a thing or two about plasma physics and fusion devices.
FRC is the master race plasma configuration btw

>>57395850

solar power has improved, but it still not reliable enough to be used exclusively

>>57393027
>>57392924
Oh wow, man, that's the guy that Oasis called "The twat in the hat"

>>57398957
A problem with solar installations in deserts: no water to clean the panels (or mirrors) with. This is actually a huge problem, because dust hurts efficiency.

>>57394364
Science isn't supposed to build off of itself?

>>57399098
>didnt germany have working cold fusion reactor prototypes like 4 years ago?

No.

What Germany build is a Stellarator.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendelstein_7-X

It is far more complex than the Tokamak design of most fusion reactors.
But the fusion itself works the same way and is very, very hot.

Stellarators have some advantages and some disadvantages over Tokamaks.

>>57399885
>solar power has improved, but it still not reliable enough to be used exclusively
Especially at night. And a 1600 Megawatt battery is a terrifying thing.

oh holy shit /g/ there are people in here conflating fission with fusion.

wtf kind of tech board is this anyway?

>>57400582

>Oasis

The band with the crybaby twat?

>>57404429
Some of us are idiots. Some of us are not.

>made in china
No thanks

China FTW

>ITT: 22 Century /g/
Hey guys /φ/ here, I was wondering if 8 petabytes was enough to play a game without lag or chocking or anything.
I'm considering 16 but I don't know if it's overkill

>USA spends trillions on decades of pointless wars in the middle east that they can't even win.
>China avoids useless conflicts and uses it's economic growth to develop useful new technology for the good of mankind.
It's no wonder that west's influence is fading. Anyone can blow up a couple of muslims.

>>57405584
>8 petabytes
sure isn't enough to run Google Chrome

>>57404429
Who in here has said anything about fission? The only thing I've seen in this thread is someone saying thorium fission is better, and someone mentioning the potential "meltdown" of a fusion reactor (which although incorrect terminology, it's clear that they meant the reactor destroying itself through overheating).

/g/ is mainly about consumer tech anyway, stuff like nuclear power and rocketry is usually discussed on /sci/ (and they have their fair share of idiots as well, such as popsci emdrive fags and the guy that allegedly achieved break-even fusion in his basement only to apparently die of radiation poisoning shortly thereafter).

>mfw a non autistic technology thread on /g/

>>57397999
The sun does it without special equipment so you have to elaborate or be wrong.

Is this going to be like Back To The Future where Doc Brown used some fusion generator from the future to power the DeLorean? Extracting energy from waste.

>>57405923
>tfw he's talking about me.
But the EMDrive has been proven to work!

>>57393135
well Australia are going good here are some links to tec they made so far


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-26/australian-researchers-create-first-3d-jet-engine/6262462

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3816411.htm

http://theconversation.com/australias-first-robotic-help-in-a-hip-replacement-operation-57809

>>57395112
>costed

>>57395850

Solar is a joke. Even 100% efficiency would not be good enough. There is literally not enough energy reaching the ground from the sun to compete with nuclear power; you'd have to pave the whole country over with high maintenance panels to make sufficient amounts of energy.

File: fusion generator.jpg (97KB, 1228x991px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1228x991px

>implying we aren't already getting plenty of energy from a perfectly good fusion generator that's been around for billions of years
retarded that we're trying to play around with this shit, it will never be energy positive.

>>57407673
Who says we have to put it on the ground?

Orbital solar arrays are the future. No clouds, or night. Ultimately its the only way to go for fixed power needs.

>>57392516

ITT:

High school physics students pretending to be doctors of nuclear engineering.

File: diploma.jpg (612KB, 1000x808px) Image search: [Google]

612KB, 1000x808px

>>57407923
nope, only a bachelors with a few grad level courses in fusion plasma physics

>>57407920

Even in earth orbit the energy per square meter is not terribly impressive, and now maintenance is dramatically complicated.

A massive dedicated array near the sun itself might work if you can figure out how to beam the power back to earth and maintain the array.

>>57408030
>back to earth
most of the problems with people talking about space being unprofitable arise from thinking we need to get energy and resources back to earth for them to be useful. pretty narrow-sighted.

>>57408030
1kw per square meter isn't bad. The best PV cells today are about 30% efficient, but there are better ways to generate electricity like using mirrors to heat salts.

In the future we'll probably do something drastic like dismantle mercury to build solar arrays in the Venus L1 point to both generate electricity and reduce the solar energy hitting it so that we could cool it down.

File: 1477890981746.png (111KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 625x626px

>>57395850
You're either really stupid and don't know what the term "efficient" means, or you're a decent troll.

Either way, here is your (you).

>>57393027
I like you anon. Have a nice day.

>>57408030
Solar panels in space don't need maintenance. There isn't wear from the weather or heat dissipation problems, and there isn't any gravity force to put stress on parts. The panels will eventually cease to function from nasty radiation, but this will happen long after they've paid for themselves. Just look at the ISS!

>>57408116
I hope orbital solar will incentivise permanent residence in LEO and get a proper space dock built. Once it becomes easy to construct spacecraft in orbit, it will become cheap too.

>>57392516
We've *achieved* fusion like a decade ago.

The milestone is actually getting more energy out than you put into it- that's when it can actually generate power

No, the Chinese haven't done that you gullible fucker.

File: 1360044142150.gif (3MB, 375x250px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 375x250px

>>57408326
>implying there's no gravity in space

>>57395650
>not fast reactors

File: 1031789[1].png (30KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 700x700px

>>57406561
Clever scientists, moronic industry and government.

>>57408139
that wouldn't cool venus down, it would just turn it into an ice planet. That is still TOXIC AS FUCK

Terraforming venus is going to be chemistry, not engineering. Getting rid of the toxic atmosphere, hydrogen sulfide etc, the acid seas and making the air breathable is going to be a lot easier than creating an atmosphere from scratch on Mars

>>57407920
>orbital solar
>cheaper than nuclear
Kek

File: gayfusorsfromouterspace.png (32KB, 573x674px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 573x674px

>>57408381
how about orbital fusion :^)

File: avgycszxtvtxd2wqdyx7.jpg (13KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 480x360px

>>57393027

>>57395650
>abd cant be used to proliferation purposes.
And that's exactly why they never got anywhere

>>57392516
good fuck the west for allowing the sjw/feminist to influencing the scientific community and school. they are too busy wasting money on women who don't even want to enter stem fields instead of giving it to males who want to enter them.

>>57392516
>tokomak
Impressive but not feasible (stable) for energy gathering even if it could operate for far longer. Stellerators are the only way to go in that regard.

File: Capture.png (106KB, 1493x743px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1493x743px

>nuclear
>cheap
Top meme.

>>57408464
Hinkley is the meme here, look at how South Korea does nuclear.

>>57406441
>for certain values of "work".

>>57393401
>>57408450
What's with all the stellarator shilling in this thread?

>>57408464
Nuclear is expensive due to the safety features. I wonder how much they cost over a span of like 20 years or something.

>>57393347
neutrons arent affected by the magnetic field, so they can be used to heat up the walls and generate steam

Instead of trying to do it in a donut with containment problems, why doesn't someone try to do it in a pipe and just make the pipe really really long?

File: Screenshot_2016-11-06-18-32-13.png (655KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

655KB, 1080x1920px

>>57407673
youre wrong. solar energy reaching the ground is 2 orders of magnitude greater than current use

>>57409245
>What are boundary conditions?

>>57409245
What if they made the pipe loop back around to the start so it could be more compact and the material would be easier to contain?

>>57408464
nuclear is a lot cheaper when you aren't 100x overboard with unnecessary safety measures.

File: idiocy knows no bounds.png (42KB, 621x352px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 621x352px

>>57409361
>unnecessary
If only

>>57406298
genuinely retarded

File: mr ouchi.jpg (222KB, 1600x1000px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 1600x1000px

>>57409361
>Fuck nuclear safety
What's the worst that could happen?

>>57397999
they're talking about this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubble_fusion

>>57409387
what do you mean? for one thing, your example isn't an example of something bad happening. for another, it's an example of someone making a mistake trying to implement more safety measures. are you retarded?

>>57409398
oh no D::: six guys got cooked we never should have utilized this cheap and efficient source of power!!!

working at a farm or logging is significantly more dangerous. should we stop growing wheat and cutting down trees?

>>57393420
>B11

I just take supplements where I get all my B-vitamins, I don't understand why the Chinese don't just do that

File: c4jt321.png (310KB, 580x282px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 580x282px

>>57409424
>Literally drill a hole in the main containment chamber because of general idiocy
>eyyy what's the problem nothing bad happened you're retard
Seems to me the retard is you. Do you by any chance always drive at 140 km/h while screming "yolo" ?

>>57394407
Ausfag here can confirm.

>>57395870
>unless your pipes are made out of gold, you'll have to change out the whole setup in no time
Wouldnt be a problem if we didnt have so much women on this planet. Gold wouldnt be worth even half as much.

>>57395894
What about Australian outback during the dry season?

>>57409460
140km/h is still a very comfortable travel speed.

>>57409563
Lots of atmospheric dust.
Maintenance is outrageously difficult and expensive.
Generation is a long distance from any load.

>>57393347
Is there no more direct, more efficient way to turn heat into electric energy? Is using heat exchangers, steam, and turbines really the only way?

>>57409563
So you want to install solar panels in bumfuck nowhere and install all the cable infrastructure just to remove it once the dry season is up? Power needs are constant and dynamic, and people don't typically use less power in the wet season. Specifying a particular time at which solar panels work well also specifies the opposite time in which they work less well, reinforcing my original point.
>inb4 solar roadways

>160 posts
>0 sources
ffs

What ever happened to the idea of those solar reflector/molten sodium towers arrays?
Same issue as >>57409691 alluded to with the dust?

>>57395112
No, the question is about sustainability. This thing ran for over a minute, which is a huge breakthrough.

>>57395102
I don't get what you mean aesthetics when it comes to rockets. They are all pointy and look like dicks. What else do they need, a better paintjob?

Idiot.

>>57409741
balls, obviously

>>57409693
There is a more direct way. By direct energy conversion, a charged particle's kinetic energy can be converted into electricity, through the use of probably inductors. This is good because a fusion reactor is full of ions, which are charged particles. Now how you get just the fusion products of a reactor out of the products/reactants mixture at many millions of degrees is another problem.

If you designed some sort of 2-stroke fusion generator that caused fusion only at specific points in the cycle that gives the plasma kinetic energy by virtue of thermal expansion, then you could continually extract this added kinetic energy through coils around the reactor without the need to siphon off any quickly moving products. You'd still need to vent off the products, but they wouldn't have to be moving quickly.

>>57409757
Back before nuclear reactors were mainstream, there was a wide variety of proposed designs. Some were very elegant and efficient.
The current reactors are a result of picking what is cheapest, safe enough, easy to do, and yields materials for weapons.
A lot of physicists were quite disappointed that we didn't built the nuclear cathedrals they envisioned.

>>57409780
>>57409757
Interesting, thanks.

>>57393267
The USSR should had been a technocracy, but it was run after Stalin on pure nepotism

>>57393027
Nice

File: 1464547397538.jpg (58KB, 480x371px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 480x371px

>>57406561
>Australia are going good
Hahaha

>>57409398
>ouchi
this will never mot be funny

>>57409996
well to be fare the wombat has a 5.67 kill death ratio

>>57408464
>>57408780
Nuclear power is the cheapest power we have available, after the plant is built. South Korea and India are building plants that can pay themselves off in ~10 years. In fact, the USA is one of the only countries in the world where hilariously expensive plants have been built.

>>57409460
I literally drive that fast to work every day. Must be a europoor thing to go slow.

>>57393027
nice

>>57394045
>I think at that point private companies will start throwing money at it at this point and it will no longer take government grants to improve the state of the art.

This is already happening.

http://trialphaenergy.com/

In stealth mode since 1998 (!) 150 people, got 150 million investment alone in 2014 without even having a website.

>>57409460
>140 km/h
it is safe to drive a modern car at 140 km/h anon

>>57409617
>>57410397
>>57410574
You guys realize that words have meaning and you have to read the whole sentence, right?
>ALWAYS at km/h

>>57405923
>the guy that allegedly achieved break-even fusion in his basement only to apparently die of radiation poisoning shortly thereafter
I need to know more

>>57394045
>I'm having trouble finding info on what kind output/input ratios are possible with the more complicated methods. If it ever hits 1 it will be in the news and will be historic.

IIRC France has one that produces more energy than it consumes.

The major hurdle is the cost of building and maintaining fusion reactors, not the energy ratio.

>>57394364
>they're own technology
>they're

Poo in loo you stupid indian shit eater and get out of here. Nobody wants you.

>>57395894
>See what Germany are doing
>are

It seems like you should better take that poo to the loo

>>57392541
>Is it at least energy neutral?
Energy positive fusion has been done before

>>57394045
>1. Get to the point where the energy released from fusion is greater than the energy required to create the conditions for fusion.
We have gotten there.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-24429621

>>57405923
>and someone mentioning the potential "meltdown" of a fusion reactor (which although incorrect terminology, it's clear that they meant the reactor destroying itself through overheating).
What's this about? I read that fusion reactors are immune to “meltdown” because they only have tiny amounts of fuel and the reaction immediately stops as soon as the conditions are anything other than optimal.

>>57412146
>The BBC understands that during an experiment in late September, the amount of energy released through the fusion reaction exceeded the amount of energy being absorbed by the fuel - the first time this had been achieved at any fusion facility in the world.

>This is a step short of the lab's stated goal of "ignition", where nuclear fusion generates as much energy as the lasers supply. This is because known "inefficiencies" in different parts of the system mean not all the energy supplied through the laser is delivered to the fuel.

>>57407871
Fuck off, solar energy sucks

>doesn't scale
>ugly as shit
>very inefficient, you'd need to cover an extremely large portion of the earth for them to be viable as a main energy source
>requires clearing and covering large amounts of land with toxic materials
>all that equipment requires maintenance

just no

File: 1327195113271.jpg (42KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 720x480px

>>57408326
>Solar panels in space don't need maintenance.
neither do satellites and space telescopes, right?

>>57408464
>Fission = Fusion
>neglecting environmental damages in your operational costs
/g/ in a nutshell

>>57409398
Nuclear is the safest energy source we have by FAR.

More people have died from wind, solar energy etc. than all nuclear disasters combined. Many orders of magnitude more people have died due to coal energy.

>>57409398
>Fission = Fusion
/g/ in a nutshell

>>57408326
>Solar panels in space don't need maintenance.
Nope. I'm done.

Fucking Mars' atmosphere was ripped off the surface via solar WINDs. (charged particles shit out by the sun every single second in every direction)

File: 1478361985198.jpg (173KB, 866x786px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 866x786px

>>57399168
: )

>>57409387
That's not how radioactivity works, but okay?

>>57409398
>"hey let's just skip all these automated procedures and dump this bucket of uranium"
>"cool! everything is glowing!"
Not nuclear reactor safety but what I described above is like smoking in an ammunitions facility

>>57394423
But they aren't commies. They are a combo of commie and capitalist systems, or in other words, whatever works. They use such buzzword labels as tools rather than as some holy book of self-jerking.
And by the looks of things, it does work.

>>57392516
>he fell for the reddit clickbait

you mean that news from february 2016?

Like what the West did decades ago? You mean they copied the West once more?

Fusion is no big deal.
It's how small you can make it, how controllable it is, and how you can get energy out of it. And those three problems haven't been solved yet, least of all by some cheap chinks.