Maybe No Longer Forever 20 Years Away?
October 7, 2013 5:38 PM Subscribe
National Ignition Facility (NIF) achieves fusion break-even "...The latest achievement has been described as the single most meaningful step for fusion in recent years, and demonstrates NIF is well on its way towards the coveted target of ignition and self-sustaining fusion."
Ok, I'm going to read the attached article. I will. Dammit, my head is going to hurt, isn't it? (Yes, I've done multiple classes on math and quantum mechanics which have lots of parallels to nuclear physics, and have worked in a nuclear physics research group. That doesn't make my head not hurt when I hit the higher levels of it.)
posted by Canageek at 5:59 PM on October 7, 2013
posted by Canageek at 5:59 PM on October 7, 2013
mygoditsbob: "So now it's only forever 10 years away"
...I came in here to post that.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 6:08 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
...I came in here to post that.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 6:08 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
Wow, break-even is a pretty huge milestone -- but there's an awful lot more between here and usable, reliable fusion energy. If I had to guess the over/under I'd peg it around 2050-2070 for the first generation plants to go online.
posted by chimaera at 6:09 PM on October 7, 2013
posted by chimaera at 6:09 PM on October 7, 2013
Doesn't the NIF, and other inertial confinement fusion reactors, face a lot of practical problems with reloading fast enough after each shot, though? It's one thing to break even in the short time one fuel pellet lasts, but to get it to cycle and fire again fast enough, is that even theoretically possible with that design?
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 6:10 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 6:10 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
It would be nice* if it's true, but I'm skeptical. Anonymous source, for one thing. But more importantly, just two months ago, they announced a record yielded 8000 J of neutron energy.
Rough calculation (correct me any physicists out there if I'm wrong): 8000 J of neutron energy means roughly 16,000 J total energy produced. (I believe that more than 50% of the energy is carried out by neutrons -- maybe 70% or so, but for the sake of argument, say 50%.
We've got 1.8 MJ laser. 16 kJ/1.8MJ = approx 1% of breakeven. And that was two months ago.
Aha! But that's for the definition of breakeven that everybody expects!
We can subtly redefine breakeven not to the amount of energy delivered by the laser, but to the amount of energy that's delivered to the pellet. About 15% of the laser energy winds up on the pellet... let's be charitable and call it 10%. That would mean that 16 kJ/0.18 MJ = 10% of breakeven. Still a full order of magnitude away.
No, that definition won't suffice either. Note that the breakeven condition described in the article is the "amount of energy absorbed by the fuel" which -- I'm just guessing here -- will prove to be a factor of five or 10 less than the amount of energy incident on the pellet.
Voila! Breakeven!
So... I suspect that this is a lie -- they just moved the goalposts by a factor of 50 to 100. We'll have to wait until the paper comes out to find out.
* Nice-ish, but not hugely significant. Breakeven (in the common-sensical definition I gave above) is already a factor of, oh, about 50 less than genuine breakeven -- considering the power that goes into generating the laser beam, not just the energy of the laser beam itself. It's a milestone -- but a fairly meaningless one. Even with 100% efficiency collecting the energy created, you still need to pour in 50x that to produce the energy in the first place. Not exactly a real "breakeven" condition.
posted by cgs06 at 6:14 PM on October 7, 2013 [16 favorites]
Rough calculation (correct me any physicists out there if I'm wrong): 8000 J of neutron energy means roughly 16,000 J total energy produced. (I believe that more than 50% of the energy is carried out by neutrons -- maybe 70% or so, but for the sake of argument, say 50%.
We've got 1.8 MJ laser. 16 kJ/1.8MJ = approx 1% of breakeven. And that was two months ago.
Aha! But that's for the definition of breakeven that everybody expects!
We can subtly redefine breakeven not to the amount of energy delivered by the laser, but to the amount of energy that's delivered to the pellet. About 15% of the laser energy winds up on the pellet... let's be charitable and call it 10%. That would mean that 16 kJ/0.18 MJ = 10% of breakeven. Still a full order of magnitude away.
No, that definition won't suffice either. Note that the breakeven condition described in the article is the "amount of energy absorbed by the fuel" which -- I'm just guessing here -- will prove to be a factor of five or 10 less than the amount of energy incident on the pellet.
Voila! Breakeven!
So... I suspect that this is a lie -- they just moved the goalposts by a factor of 50 to 100. We'll have to wait until the paper comes out to find out.
* Nice-ish, but not hugely significant. Breakeven (in the common-sensical definition I gave above) is already a factor of, oh, about 50 less than genuine breakeven -- considering the power that goes into generating the laser beam, not just the energy of the laser beam itself. It's a milestone -- but a fairly meaningless one. Even with 100% efficiency collecting the energy created, you still need to pour in 50x that to produce the energy in the first place. Not exactly a real "breakeven" condition.
posted by cgs06 at 6:14 PM on October 7, 2013 [16 favorites]
It doesn't appear to be talking about a break-even over the entire life of the reactor including ignition, right? Just a break-even in the ongoing energy cost that means "the amount of energy released through the fusion reaction exceeded the amount of energy being absorbed by the fuel"... so I guess, not even a break-even on the cost of powering the lasers themselves over time, just on the the energy actually absorbed by the fuel pellet?
posted by XMLicious at 6:14 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by XMLicious at 6:14 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
Just to spoil everyone's fun clarify slightly:
posted by Skorgu at 6:15 PM on October 7, 2013
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.(Notably there's no indication what the delta between "break-even" and "ignition" is. It could easily be orders of magnitude)
posted by Skorgu at 6:15 PM on October 7, 2013
This is certainly news, but perhaps not BIG news. The high priests at Livermore are notorious handwavers and over-sellers of their abilities (which I was reminded of recently when watching The Americans' depiction of the Star Wars fiasco).
IIRC, the "inefficiencies" in the system the article refers to are hardly trivial. Because NIF uses 'indirect drive' to collapse the fuel pellet, the lasers never actually strike the pellet, but the interior of the casing it sits in (the hohlraum), which then re-radiates the energy to collapse the pellet. Much (most?) of the energy goes to waste. I don't remember how much goes to waste--could someone chime in?--but I believe it's a significant proportion. And indirect drive can only be improved a little bit.
The point is, to achieve ignition, NIF's explicit mission, the energy produced must exceed not the energy absorbed by the pellet, but the energy contained in the laser. And since most of that energy goes to waste, Livermore needs to extract a shitload more energy out of the pellet.
They may well be able to do this. I've read that once you start getting a bit of bang out of the pellets, it gets a little easier. But if history is any guide, expect more BS from Livermore.
And in any case, (IIRC) indirect drive will never never never work for any kind of fusion reactor--too inefficient.
So let's be clear about what we're celebrating here. An achievement, but not really a milestone.
posted by Zerowensboring at 6:21 PM on October 7, 2013 [3 favorites]
IIRC, the "inefficiencies" in the system the article refers to are hardly trivial. Because NIF uses 'indirect drive' to collapse the fuel pellet, the lasers never actually strike the pellet, but the interior of the casing it sits in (the hohlraum), which then re-radiates the energy to collapse the pellet. Much (most?) of the energy goes to waste. I don't remember how much goes to waste--could someone chime in?--but I believe it's a significant proportion. And indirect drive can only be improved a little bit.
The point is, to achieve ignition, NIF's explicit mission, the energy produced must exceed not the energy absorbed by the pellet, but the energy contained in the laser. And since most of that energy goes to waste, Livermore needs to extract a shitload more energy out of the pellet.
They may well be able to do this. I've read that once you start getting a bit of bang out of the pellets, it gets a little easier. But if history is any guide, expect more BS from Livermore.
And in any case, (IIRC) indirect drive will never never never work for any kind of fusion reactor--too inefficient.
So let's be clear about what we're celebrating here. An achievement, but not really a milestone.
posted by Zerowensboring at 6:21 PM on October 7, 2013 [3 favorites]
Err, what cgs06 said.
posted by Zerowensboring at 6:22 PM on October 7, 2013
posted by Zerowensboring at 6:22 PM on October 7, 2013
Oh, it wasn't a paper, just a news article. So no peer review or proof.
On the other hand, no physics to wade through.
On the third, mutant hand, now the facility in Vancouver has more time to try and be the first.
posted by Canageek at 6:25 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
On the other hand, no physics to wade through.
On the third, mutant hand, now the facility in Vancouver has more time to try and be the first.
posted by Canageek at 6:25 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
I was reminded of ... the Star Wars fiasco.
We don't talk about the Holiday Special here.
posted by zippy at 6:44 PM on October 7, 2013 [3 favorites]
We don't talk about the Holiday Special here.
posted by zippy at 6:44 PM on October 7, 2013 [3 favorites]
Hi, my name is FuturisticDragon. I've been a long time lurker here (as well as occasional poster and comment maker). I feel strongly compelled to make a lengthy comment in this particular thread as I have been working at LLNL in one form or another (grad-student, post-doc, staff scientist etc …) for over 12 years now and NIF has (indirectly) been a part of this all along. First things first, its very important that everyone understands what has actually happened. All of the comments above regarding the interpretation / scrutiny of the results are on the right track -- if the data holds up, this is break-even in terms of the percent of laser energy delivered to the capsule, not net energy delivered to the whole target (including hohlraum), and not net energy in terms of what is required to fire all of the lasers. I say *if* the data holds up because these results are still under scrutiny. Frankly, I was very surprised to see this article in the BBC given the preliminary status of everything. The long and storied history of the pursuit of fusion energy is littered with the careers of scientists who got caught up in the publicity of it all at the expense of good and proper science. Big science rarely happens in large spectacular leaps, its the little steps we take as a community that ultimately get us to our goal. So while healthy scientific skepticism and debate are certainly warranted; make no mistake, this is one of those important steps that takes us forward.
But that is not really why I want to leave a comment. You would think that the all hands meeting we had today at LLNL was to discuss these exciting new results and celebrate in our shared victory as a laboratory. Nope. Instead, today's all hands was about how we would survive the current government shutdown and what our plans are for getting through the end of this month on the limited carry-over funds we have. The somber discussion our director lead us through was anything but celebratory, and was just another example of how the lack of certainty from congress in the funding of science can completely destroy morale. Between uncertain budgets (low budgets are hard, but manageable -- uncertain budgets are much worse), involuntary separations, a misguided change in management structure (from University of CA to a consortium of private companies) it has been a rough several years at the lab, for all of us. So for everyone who works at LLNL, I just want to say congratulations, and don't give up.
posted by FuturisticDragon at 7:02 PM on October 7, 2013 [70 favorites]
But that is not really why I want to leave a comment. You would think that the all hands meeting we had today at LLNL was to discuss these exciting new results and celebrate in our shared victory as a laboratory. Nope. Instead, today's all hands was about how we would survive the current government shutdown and what our plans are for getting through the end of this month on the limited carry-over funds we have. The somber discussion our director lead us through was anything but celebratory, and was just another example of how the lack of certainty from congress in the funding of science can completely destroy morale. Between uncertain budgets (low budgets are hard, but manageable -- uncertain budgets are much worse), involuntary separations, a misguided change in management structure (from University of CA to a consortium of private companies) it has been a rough several years at the lab, for all of us. So for everyone who works at LLNL, I just want to say congratulations, and don't give up.
posted by FuturisticDragon at 7:02 PM on October 7, 2013 [70 favorites]
FD, dang, we had a meetup (of two) at LLNL a couple of years ago. Had we known we could have, I dunno, gotten to grab souvenir pellets from the hohlraum, or maybe a chunk of plu...
excuse me, there's a knock at the door.
Seriously, LLNL meetup should be on the agenda again.
posted by zippy at 7:08 PM on October 7, 2013
excuse me, there's a knock at the door.
Seriously, LLNL meetup should be on the agenda again.
posted by zippy at 7:08 PM on October 7, 2013
There is a lot of fusion research going on at the moment, public and private. The private funds are the most telling - it's like reading the Vegas line for a big game. VC's and Angels hire people to read the papers, and I think the '90s flurry of research proving fusion was impossible just underlined the places where practical work could be done.
This is the big one, tho. Once we get fusion up and running, it's just a matter of battery research and embedding wireless recharging coils in highways and local thoroughfares. Rugged outdoors types will have hydrogen fuel cell backups for "off the grid 4-wheeling."
Hell, we already have microwave x-mitters and computer controlled hyper-focus antennas. Rocket fuel? Whats that?
posted by Slap*Happy at 7:22 PM on October 7, 2013
This is the big one, tho. Once we get fusion up and running, it's just a matter of battery research and embedding wireless recharging coils in highways and local thoroughfares. Rugged outdoors types will have hydrogen fuel cell backups for "off the grid 4-wheeling."
Hell, we already have microwave x-mitters and computer controlled hyper-focus antennas. Rocket fuel? Whats that?
posted by Slap*Happy at 7:22 PM on October 7, 2013
if the data holds up, this is break-even in terms of the percent of laser energy delivered to the capsule, not net energy delivered to the whole target (including hohlraum)
FD, thanks for chiming in! So, if I understand you correctly, this really does seem to be a claim of an advance of a factor of 5-10 over what LLNL announced in August. If so, congratulations! Are you seeing evidence of alpha heating, then?
(For the uninitiated: At some point, you expect to see evidence of the fuel getting a reasonable fraction of its energy from fusion byproducts rather than from the laser. This is a very good sign, and with luck, it means you're getting relatively close to ignition.)
It's still a moved goalpost by a factor of 10, that's not as far as I initially suspected. *grin*
My condolences on the morale at the lab. My wife's a fed, and I know how hard it can be -- and even without the shutdown, things have been bad at the DOE labs. Hope you can all hang in there.
posted by cgs06 at 7:32 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
FD, thanks for chiming in! So, if I understand you correctly, this really does seem to be a claim of an advance of a factor of 5-10 over what LLNL announced in August. If so, congratulations! Are you seeing evidence of alpha heating, then?
(For the uninitiated: At some point, you expect to see evidence of the fuel getting a reasonable fraction of its energy from fusion byproducts rather than from the laser. This is a very good sign, and with luck, it means you're getting relatively close to ignition.)
It's still a moved goalpost by a factor of 10, that's not as far as I initially suspected. *grin*
My condolences on the morale at the lab. My wife's a fed, and I know how hard it can be -- and even without the shutdown, things have been bad at the DOE labs. Hope you can all hang in there.
posted by cgs06 at 7:32 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
There's a really important difference between mW and MW.
posted by kiltedtaco at 7:53 PM on October 7, 2013 [8 favorites]
posted by kiltedtaco at 7:53 PM on October 7, 2013 [8 favorites]
Oh hey, I was the other half of that LLNL meetup (hi, zippy!) and it was extremely cool. We should definitely do another one some time. I think about the NIF whenever I see the neat little souvenir magnet on my fridge, and I'm glad to see some hopeful results coming out of the place. 'Bout time my tax dollars went to something I can feel good about.
posted by Quietgal at 7:57 PM on October 7, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Quietgal at 7:57 PM on October 7, 2013 [2 favorites]
Fusion has been "just on the edge of success" ever since I was a kid, and my hair has turned completely white.
Every time there's concern about their funding, they suddenly announce a dramatic breakthrough and confidently announce that it won't be long until they go energy positive. And it's been like that since I was a kid, 50 years ago.
I have more confidence in what a used car salesman tells me than I do in these announcements.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 8:19 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
Every time there's concern about their funding, they suddenly announce a dramatic breakthrough and confidently announce that it won't be long until they go energy positive. And it's been like that since I was a kid, 50 years ago.
I have more confidence in what a used car salesman tells me than I do in these announcements.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 8:19 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
...I came in here to post that.
Wait ten years...
posted by yoink at 8:40 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
Wait ten years...
posted by yoink at 8:40 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
I have more confidence in what a used car salesman tells me than I do in these announcements.
Science is hard. People shouldn't have really been making the "just on the edge of success" announcements, to be sure - but we can't go around assuming we're going to figure everything out before Christmas.
posted by Jimbob at 8:45 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
Science is hard. People shouldn't have really been making the "just on the edge of success" announcements, to be sure - but we can't go around assuming we're going to figure everything out before Christmas.
posted by Jimbob at 8:45 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
Zerowensboring: "The point is, to achieve ignition, NIF's explicit mission"
Huh? Isn't NIF's mission basically to conduct weapons research and do other "fusion-adjacent" research? From what I remember, even the scientists working on NIF admitted that it'd be pretty far-fetched to build any sort of remotely-practical power source around NIF's designs.
Also, hasn't the Z Machine come somewhat close to breakeven energy on a few occasions?
posted by schmod at 8:45 PM on October 7, 2013
Huh? Isn't NIF's mission basically to conduct weapons research and do other "fusion-adjacent" research? From what I remember, even the scientists working on NIF admitted that it'd be pretty far-fetched to build any sort of remotely-practical power source around NIF's designs.
Also, hasn't the Z Machine come somewhat close to breakeven energy on a few occasions?
posted by schmod at 8:45 PM on October 7, 2013
Canageek: "Oh, it wasn't a paper, just a news article. So no peer review or proof.
On the other hand, no physics to wade through.
On the third, mutant hand, now the facility in Vancouver has more time to try and be the first."
Gripping hand, buddy, on the gripping hand. If you want to keep the geek label.
posted by Samizdata at 12:00 AM on October 8, 2013 [4 favorites]
On the other hand, no physics to wade through.
On the third, mutant hand, now the facility in Vancouver has more time to try and be the first."
Gripping hand, buddy, on the gripping hand. If you want to keep the geek label.
posted by Samizdata at 12:00 AM on October 8, 2013 [4 favorites]
Lockheed Martin's Charles Chase "confident in predicting
Ain't Lock-Mart the guys who can't predict when the F-35 will actually be able to fly in combat?
posted by mikelieman at 1:11 AM on October 8, 2013
Ain't Lock-Mart the guys who can't predict when the F-35 will actually be able to fly in combat?
posted by mikelieman at 1:11 AM on October 8, 2013
So let me try a car analogy - it's like when I turn the key and the starter cranks the engine like crazy and the engine produces a series of warm wet farts - is it that kind of ignition?
posted by hat_eater at 2:48 AM on October 8, 2013
posted by hat_eater at 2:48 AM on October 8, 2013
And now I've read FD's comment and want to kick myself in the shins. A bit.
posted by hat_eater at 2:53 AM on October 8, 2013
posted by hat_eater at 2:53 AM on October 8, 2013
I am psyched. It sounds like a (small compared to OMG ignition but) significant advancement. Good job, fusion nerds!
posted by rmd1023 at 3:39 AM on October 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by rmd1023 at 3:39 AM on October 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
It's interesting to compare fusion research to the quest for heavier than air powered flight. That journey begins seriously somewhere around 1400 but little happens until the very late 1700s - early 1800s when Cayley starts seriously investigating the science of flight. Things don't start taking off until the mid 1800s when people start launching unmanned and then manned gliders. By the 1870s things are really taking off with the first documented powered flight (unmanned) and the first wind tunnel for studying lift. Then things progress so fast that only significant hair splitting allows for the Wrights to be the first to perform all of parts of "sustained, controlled, powered, heavier-than-air, manned flight" and 10 years later the Italians are shooting up the Turks with the help of men in planes.
I'm sure there were lots of people saying powered human flight would never be a thing and that scientists had been it promising really soon now for 50 years in 1890.
I really hope that we are closer to 1899 than 1799 on the whole fusion power thing.
posted by Mitheral at 9:32 AM on October 8, 2013 [6 favorites]
I'm sure there were lots of people saying powered human flight would never be a thing and that scientists had been it promising really soon now for 50 years in 1890.
I really hope that we are closer to 1899 than 1799 on the whole fusion power thing.
posted by Mitheral at 9:32 AM on October 8, 2013 [6 favorites]
There's a really important difference between mW and MW.
A fusion-powered USB charger sounds kind of exciting though. Good for travelling at least.
posted by Pruitt-Igoe at 11:22 AM on October 8, 2013
A fusion-powered USB charger sounds kind of exciting though. Good for travelling at least.
posted by Pruitt-Igoe at 11:22 AM on October 8, 2013
It's interesting to compare fusion research to the quest for heavier than air powered flight.
In this comparison I'm pretty sure ITER is the Wright brothers and NIF is some crazy guy working on ornithopters in his basement.
posted by miyabo at 11:46 AM on October 8, 2013
In this comparison I'm pretty sure ITER is the Wright brothers and NIF is some crazy guy working on ornithopters in his basement.
posted by miyabo at 11:46 AM on October 8, 2013
Pruitt-Igoe: "A fusion-powered USB charger sounds kind of exciting though. Good for travelling at least."
Yeah, because that's going to get through the TSA security screening.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 3:23 PM on October 8, 2013
Yeah, because that's going to get through the TSA security screening.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 3:23 PM on October 8, 2013
Anyone seriously interested in the messy history of fusion research would be well advised to read Charles Seife's book Sun in a Bottle: The Strange History of Fusion and the Science of Wishful Thinking.
posted by intermod at 7:23 PM on October 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by intermod at 7:23 PM on October 8, 2013 [1 favorite]
Metafilter's own Charles Seife, cgs06
posted by FuturisticDragon at 7:45 PM on October 8, 2013
posted by FuturisticDragon at 7:45 PM on October 8, 2013
« Older "Good evening, I'm Conan O'Brien, President" | We call them BATs - Big Ass Tablets Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by mygoditsbob at 5:58 PM on October 7, 2013 [11 favorites]