Not entirely sure how much the register thinks it costs.
To design the first ever commercial man made star. But 220 m for such new science. Designed by researchers and specialists in a brand new field. Seems pretty bloody cheap to me.
As for building it being a pipe dream. We are far more prepared for it then we were the first fission power plants. Without some risk progress stops.
Will it cost more. Of course. But it is also the future of energy independence. And based on the first successful smaller design. So far from a pipe dream.
Man, just when I’d bought all those solar panels.
Solar is still worth it. More so at current prices.
Fusion or fission is the cleanest safest way to match demand when wind or sun do not. At least in a nation we’re we lack the space to build gravity fed storage.
Only joking. We’re offgrid anyway, so unless they can figure out a tiny, cheap and quiet one I can buy off the shelf some time soon I will be solar for a while to come!
Panels have become ridiculously cheap per kwh. I was looking for some more recently and they had halved in price in the space of a few years while everything else has almost doubled.
I’d love to see more innovation in mechanical storage.
I’d love to see more innovation in mechanical storage.
Yep most of it is dams and moving water ATM. And while that is efficient. It takes way more space then the UK can spare.
There has been a lot of work using heat storage of late. As we develop more materials etc. I can see this becoming more common. Will always have more loss then gravity. But is much more practice to multi use the land. And build on smaller scale. It is popular in factory situations where heat is often the energy needed. Generate during the day from solar or wind store in huge heat absorbing blocks and release on the night shift.
But use of land is the main problem with all natural renewables. Except maybe tidal. But even that has negative effects on land use. Wind turbines need space beyond the structure. While much can still be farmed. Farming land is also where they are best situated. Due to lack of nearby structures. Solar is a huge land hog. And moving it into our cities. Should happen but to be effective takes a complete redesign,
But the fact that a single car park structure exists that doesn’t have the roof covered. Show how little effort has been pushed. Open land car parks should do more. But effect on others light will be an issue. But if you own a building that just parks cars on the roof. It is insane that nothing has motivated you to build out solar over the last 40 years of climate change acceptance.
Spent £280 for 800w for my small boat a year ago. Thinking it was cheap so grab quick. Now half that for the same panels.
It’s great isn’t it. The panels are getting denser as well which must be great for sailors. What sort of boat do you have?
25ft narrowboat. If not in UK that is a 7ft wide boat/barge designed for our narrow canal system. My brother and I are both visually impaired so the longer ones are not really doable for us.
We spend the summers travelling the 2000 miles of canal network swapping over ever few weeks. I purchased the panals last year thinking they were as cheap as they were gonna get. But we are leaving the boat home to redo the interia over this and next summer. So they are filling my brother living room ATM. 1.7x1.qm each. So will cover most of the free roof of our little boat.
Honestly it’s a total guess. But the density of new panals is why I think the price has dropped. All the cheap panals are around 20% efficent but we know 25 of higher has been possible for a good while.
My guess is the price of making those has dropped to the point many chinese etc factories are planning to reequip. And they are selling of the glass 20% stuff while folks are looking.
Once 25% is the price these were 2 years ago. Commercial use will likely move over entirely. Can’t imagine the big factories wanting to be stuck on the larger panals then.
But it’s just a guess.
That’s great you’re on the water. I know a few people who have lived on the canals and I have a lot of respect for it. I’m on bit of a mission to sail the seas - wish me luck!
I don’t live in it. Although I also know many who do.
My brother and I use it to travel the network for leisure. We are both retired due to health and vision. So we each take it for a few weeks. Moving around the nation. Then get bk us or train to swap over. While the other spends time at home.
Be that as it may, I’ve been hearing that (cold) fusion is just 30 years away for about 40 years now. I appreciate the effort but simply burning money would probably have generated lots more energy than fusion.
Grumpy whining aside, the problem here isn’t the expensive research per se, but more that STEP can’t explain where all the money is going into:As for what STEP has done to encourage that added investment, that’s anyone’s guess - by all accounts it doesn’t seem like a lot has happened with the project of late.
Cold fusion is a different and entirely mythical idea.
And step was the first successful positive output from a fusion (hot they run a 1pp to 150million c).
The money went on the design stage of a full size reactor. As expected and exactly as the original plan in 2022 indicated. And as the article admits. They just seem to think designing the first ever of a tech should be cheep. Rather then requiring loads of uniquely skilled and well paid researchers.
The register is missing important understanding. Early 1950 small scale fission reactors also had negative true input to output. They only produced a true positive result at full scale. But the maths proved that scale.
The maths of the NIF STEP reactore are the same.
There is a reason SMR fission reactors are only now starting to be built. Profitable ones were impossible until the 90.
Cold fusion is a different and entirely mythical idea.
And I agree, I meant that I’ve heard both hot and cold fusion predicted.
No you did not. Cold fusion has never been predicted by anyone sane. There was a hoax at a uni in Oxford in the early 90s. That was very quickly discovered to be a chilish student hoax. It was fun to them. Because all science theory says it’s impossible.
Come on dude fusion is the very reason stars are hot.
Not to mention cold fusion would be fairly useless for power generation. As the heat is exactly how electricity is created. You need steem.
Hot fusion has been achieved. For the first time as self sustaining in 2022. But at a scale that is not profitable. IE takes huge energy to get the initial heat while only generating 1% of that energy after the heating is supported by the fusion itself. Due to the size of the resulting star(contained fusion result).
This project has designed a full scale plant to hold a much larger star using the same STEP design. This mathematically is predicted to be able to feed it’s own growth after creation. Untill it is then contained( by complex magnetic fields),in a 100mw steem generating plant. Once it is created the huge lasers needed to initiate the heat are turned off. And the size of the plant allows the process to grow.
Will it work. Likely but it is also. Just like early fission power plants likely to take time to perfect.
Also, I think the Register’s point was not about feasibility or profitability even, but more that no one at STEP can explain where the money is going at all; it might be research and reactor, but just as well shiny new macbooks as a New Year’s present for everyone and ’is mum.
STEP is a fusion method not the organisation.
And the money was spent on designing a full scale reactor that uses that method. The register seems to think paying loads of researchers and professers to design the first ever of a new design is free. When in reality it takes huge amounts of computing power and in this case new AI systems to develop the algorithms to magnetically control.
A man made fucking star at 150million c.
Yes such design is expensive. Even when it has been done on a much much smaller scale. How much inflation adjusted do you think the first fission full scale power station cost to design.
The register is being dumb. Not to mention the 2.5b has been approved because the designers achieved exactly what the promised for 220m under budget.
Just point them at the fusion reactor once it’s ready.
what is that a picture of? some generated sloppy shit? I don’t see it anywhere in the actual article.
No idea was not me but auto added.
If you hit the science tab. You will see the register uses the image to top Thier headline.
