# Apparent nuclear fusion power breakthrough -- net energy gain (breaking news 11 Dec 22) **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Tags:** breaking-news, science-math\ **Created:** [December 11, 2022, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349 "2022-12-11T22:43:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![smithsb](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smithsb/32/12107_2.png) [@smithsb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smithsb)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/21 "2022-12-12T14:40:20Z")
I guess we’re still twenty years away - sigh. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/22 "2022-12-12T15:17:31Z")
Has Pons and Fleischmann weighed in on this yet? ---
**Author:** ![kenobi\_65](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kenobi_65/32/13178_2.png) [@kenobi\_65](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kenobi_65)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/23 "2022-12-12T15:20:14Z")
Now that’s cold. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/24 "2022-12-12T15:29:50Z")
Applause 👏 ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Duality](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.duality/32/4098_2.png) [@Mr.Duality](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Duality)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/25 "2022-12-12T15:31:03Z")
I cracked up. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/26 "2022-12-12T16:07:54Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Pons and Fleischmann This always makes me think of a brainstem covered in margerine. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/27 "2022-12-12T16:20:40Z")
ASSUMING that the technologic challenges of achieving net energy gain are all overcome, there is still a major issue that prevents the plane from taking off. Not enough of the fuel needed for the tank. [https://www.science.org/content/article/fusion-power-may-run-fuel-even-gets-started](https://www.science.org/content/article/fusion-power-may-run-fuel-even-gets-started) > [@](#): > > … that achievement could be a Pyrrhic victory, fusion scientists are realizing. ITER is expected to consume most of the world’s tritium, leaving little for reactors that come after. > > Fusion advocates often boast that the fuel for their reactors will be cheap and plentiful. That is certainly true for deuterium: Roughly one in every 5000 hydrogen atoms in the oceans is deuterium, and it sells for about $13 per gram. But tritium, with a half-life of 12.3 years, exists naturally only in trace amounts in the upper atmosphere, the product of cosmic ray bombardment … > > … there may not be enough tritium to jump-start the first generation of power plants. The world’s only commercial sources are the 19 Canada Deuterium Uranium (CANDU) nuclear reactors, which each produce about 0.5 kilograms a year as a waste product, and half are due to retire this decade. The available tritium stockpile—thought to be about 25 kilograms today—will peak before the end of the decade and begin a steady decline as it is sold off and decays, according to projections in ITER’s 2018 research plan. … > > … Throughout the decades of fusion research, plasma physicists have been single-minded about reaching the breakeven point and producing excess energy. They viewed other issues, such as acquiring enough tritium, just “trivial” engineering, Jassby says. But as reactors approach breakeven, nuclear engineers like Abdou say it’s time to start to worry about engineering details that are far from trivial. “Leaving [them] until later would be hugely mistaken.” ---
**Author:** ![Horatius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/horatius/32/3572_2.png) [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/28 "2022-12-12T16:23:05Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Has Pons and Fleischmann weighed in on this yet? Not them personally, but I know the various patent offices 'round the world are still getting patent applications in which the applicants allege they’ve finally figured it out. ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/29 "2022-12-12T17:16:01Z")
Lots of other new sources repeating the news: > **[US scientists reach long-awaited nuclear fusion breakthrough, source says |...](https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/12/politics/nuclear-fusion-energy-us-scientists-climate/index.html)** > > For the first time ever, US scientists at the National Ignition Facility at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California successfully produced a nuclear fusion reaction resulting in a net energy gain, a source familiar with the project... > **[Nuclear fusion apparently achieves net energy breakthrough](https://www.axios.com/pro/climate-deals/2022/12/12/nuclear-fusion-breakthrough-net-output-lawrence)** > > The expected news will spur further investment in the space. > **[Subscribe to read | Financial Times](https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/12/fusion-energy-breakthrough-by-us-scientists-boosts-clean-power-hopes/)** > > News, analysis and comment from the Financial Times, the worldʼs leading global business publication > **[Nuclear fusion: Has there been a breakthrough and what will it mean?](https://www.newscientist.com/article/2350921-nuclear-fusion-has-there-been-a-breakthrough-and-what-will-it-mean/)** > > Rumours suggest the US National Ignition Facility has made a significant advance in nuclear fusion, though there are still many hurdles to overcome > **[Fusion power is 'approaching' reality thanks to a magnetic field breakthrough...](https://www.engadget.com/fusion-power-magnetic-field-ignition-study-195200137.html)** > > Scientists have made a magnetic field discovery that could help make fusion reactors a practical reality.. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/30 "2022-12-12T17:58:10Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > Second, I can’t read the _Financial Times_ article but I’m assuming that this is either the [Nuclear Ignition Facility (NIF) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories (LLNL)](https://wci.llnl.gov/facilities/nif) or the [Z Pulsed Machine (ZPM) at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL)](https://www.sandia.gov/z-machine/). National Ignition Facility: [https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2014.14710](https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2014.14710) Important to note that this is only above breakeven in the sense that 2.1 GJ of laser energy went into the pellet, and 2.5 GJ supposedly came out. But lasers are very inefficient, and it took a hell of a lot more than 2.1 GJ of energy to generate 2.1 GJ of laser power. Lasers can be as little as 1% efficient in converting input power to laser energy. That, plus the problem of neutron bombardment of the structure means this is probably not a path to a feasible power plant. It’s important to show that it’s possible to to get above unity gain, but it doesn’t get us much closer to practical fusion. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/31 "2022-12-12T20:24:51Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > In short, even if the _Financial Times_ article is completely accurate (unlikely; if this were a verified event one would expect notes in _Physical Review Letters_, _Journal of Fusion Energy_, _Nature_, _Science_, et cetera) Someone leaked an internal communication. The fusion folks at DOE find it impossible to keep this stuff to themselves, to the point where I (neither a fed nor a fusion guy) hear about it before public release half the time. I expect Granholm will announce something in a couple days based. ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/32 "2022-12-12T20:37:47Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > Someone leaked an internal communication. The fusion folks at DOE find it impossible to keep this stuff to themselves, to the point where I (neither a fed nor a fusion guy) hear about it before public release half the time. I expect Granholm will announce something in a couple days based. Granholm will speak tomorrow: _Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm, NNSA Administrator Jill Hruby and LLNL Director Kim Budil will hold a press conference tomorrow, Dec. 13 at 7 a.m. PT/10 a.m. ET, where they will make a special announcement about a major scientific breakthrough at LLNL. Following the press conference, a panel of LLNL experts will discuss details of the announcement._ > **[Livestream](https://www.energy.gov/livestream)** > > Watch live events from Energy Department headquarters in Washington, D.C. … Is it at all meaningful that the Secretary of Energy is taking time to address this? At a layman’s level, I understand that this doesn’t mean “ **Free energy tomorrow!!!** ” But how about “ **Free energy in 2072!** ”? Or is it more like “ **Free energy in 2272!** ” ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/33 "2022-12-12T20:45:24Z")
> [@bordelond](#): > > But how about “ **Free energy in 2072!** ”? Or is it more like “ **Free energy in 2272!** ” In Excel, it’s ="Free energy in " & Year(Today()+365.25\*20) There are so many practical problems that remain, I don’t think it’s even estimable. ---
**Author:** ![Pardel-Lux](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pardel-lux/32/20182_2.png) [@Pardel-Lux](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pardel-Lux)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/34 "2022-12-12T20:48:12Z")
Probably free energy when we no longer need it. Renewables will cover all our needs before fusion can. I hope, because otherwise we are not going to make it. By _make it_ I mean survive as a technological species and save the planet at the same time. Fusion will not be enough (as **Stranger** has brilliantly explained it, thank you!) and it will come to late. ---
**Author:** ![Mk\_VII](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Mk\_VII](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mk_VII)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/35 "2022-12-12T21:16:18Z")
“_So cheap, it won’t even have to be metered_”, they told us. Hasn’t happened yet. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/36 "2022-12-12T21:22:20Z")
> [@Pardel-Lux](#): > > Probably free energy when we no longer need it. Renewables will cover all our needs before fusion can. I hope, because otherwise we are not going to make it. > By _make it_ I mean survive as a technological species and save the planet at the same time. We can hope, at least. Renewables (which on a global scale are really limited to solar, offshore wind, and wave) certainly can provide all of the energy that is needed for terrestrial applications, provided that it can be collected, stored, and transferred from where it is collected to the end user. We have a lot of challenges in that today but none that really require great technological advances; it is mostly a problem of infrastructure and logistics. The ultimate renewable energy source would be a glucose-based economy where solar is converted to the carbohydrate that can be used in biologically-based or biomemetic industrial infrastructure but that is certainly a future development. Regardless, we shouldn’t be expecting nuclear fusion as any kind of replacement for fossil fuels to mitigate climate change or depletion of known energy supplies. Where fusion is actually needed is as an energy source for exploration of the outer solar system (and likely for permanent habitation on Mars or the Moon, if you think that’s a good idea) where insolation levels are too low for solar power to be practical. Right now we use radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTG) for small, low power probes, and will probably use compact nuclear fission for advanced propulsion and energy for larger probes, but for any kind of crewed exploration beyond Mars the use of nuclear fusion for both propulsion and the energy required to sustain habitation is a _sine qua non_ technology. There is no particular need for this capability in the foreseeable future and so no reason to pour enormous amounts of money into crash programs to develop it even if it was practicable to overcome the known issues with extensions of current technology. It would be better to continue to develop high temperature superconductors, radiation-resistant materials, ‘alternative’ nuclear fission technologies that provide better utilization of fissionable materials and full burnup of actinide products to reduce the waste issues, et cetera than to focus on trying to make fusion power production work. The much delayed and problematic ITER has been a case study in trying to bring a capability to fruition before the technology really exists, and while there will probably be a lot learned from operating ITER whenever it finally comes on line, as a ‘Big Science’ project it has consumed the lion’s share of funding in plasma and fusion physics that could have gone to other high energy physics projects in its member nations. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![E-DUB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/e-dub/32/403_2.png) [@E-DUB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-DUB)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/37 "2022-12-12T21:22:34Z")
Cross your fingers, folks. We get this rolling and we reduce OPEC to lubricants salesmen. Can’t wait for my Mr. Fusion home reactor. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/38 "2022-12-12T21:26:12Z")
This could be awesome. Emphasis on the word “could.” ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/39 "2022-12-12T21:44:18Z")
> [@E-DUB](#): > > We get this rolling and we reduce OPEC to lubricants salesmen We’ll need to cut back on plastics and fertilizer first. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2022, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349/40 "2022-12-12T21:50:08Z")
Plastic actually uses only a very small percent of petroleum used. In the US it is less than 2.3% that is used for plastics & fertilizer. > **[petroleum\_spaghetti\_2021.pdf](https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-products/images/petroleum_spaghetti_2021.pdf)** > > 590.45 KB Honestly I thought fertilizer was a bigger slice of the pie. But I knew plastics was a very tiny sliver. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apparent-nuclear-fusion-power-breakthrough-net-energy-gain-breaking-news-11-dec-22/976349.md?page=3)