Last weekin a historic first, the team at the National Ignition Facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory announced that they had successfully create a surplus of nuclear fusion energy while bombarding hydrogen isotopes with powerful lasers.
now, scientists, clean energy Advocates and nerds alike around the world are wondering what’s next.
The bigger question is when will this help bring clean energy to our homes and businesses? In order to nuclear fusion energy – an emission-free and potentially abundant source of energy – to supply the country with electricity, we would need power plants to increase production and provide a constant flow of juice.
Months before scientists managed to realize a net gain in fusion energy, the White House had already sketched out a to plan to commission such a plant within the next decade.
But is it possible? Well, that depends on who you ask. To paint a picture for our readers, Reverse spoke to three nuclear fusion experts about the long road to power plants.
What advantage does nuclear fusion energy have over other renewable energies?
You might be wondering how nuclear fusion power compares to sources like solar, wind and geothermal. Unlike some of these forms of power, “it can be deployed where and when you need it,” he says. Troy Carterplasma physicist at the University of California at Los Angeles.
The ingredients can come from all over the world: there is a lot of deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen, in sea water and fresh water, and lithium seawater can be used to make the tritium isotope. “Just looking at seawater, there’s enough fusion fuel to power all of humanity’s needs for hundreds of thousands of years,” Carter adds.
Nuclear fusion power plants could also operate more often than other forms of clean energy that depend on sunny or windy days to collect energy.
Taken together, however, all of these renewables could complement each other to ensure an emissions-free future. “All solutions must be explored,” he says Michael Cuneoelectrical engineer at Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
How do you prepare lasers for prime time?
At LLNL, the most energetic laser in the world projected 192 beams onto a gold cylinder containing a frozen pellet of the hydrogen isotopes deuterium and tritium. Then the cylinder heated up to over 5 million degrees Fahrenheit and imploded, triggering a meltdown reaction that generated tons of energy (3.15 MJ, the equivalent of about three sticks of dynamite) .
Despite this impressive feat, the experiment relied on technology from the 1980s that is less than 1% efficient, meaning that 1% of the energy from the power grid reaches the laser beam, Carter says.
Today, lasers have efficiencies of 20% or more, but they must be tailored specifically for inertial fusion power generation, he adds.
And while the LLNL team achieved a net energy gain of 1.5, that number must reach somewhere between 10 and 100 for a fusion producing electricity. Power plant. “There’s a promise of this happening because the record NIF shot only burned a small fraction of the fusion fuel (less than 10%),” says Carter. “If you can ignite more fuel, the gain can increase extremely quickly.”
Even with recent improvements in laser technology, a power plant would need some serious upgrades. A laser should fire about 10 to 20 pulses per second, Cuneo explains. Currently, the LLNL laser can only fire a few times per day.
But the recent achievement could kick-start major improvements to the laser system, according to Carter.
“LLNL researchers have already demonstrated that they are on a steep curve for fusion power – optimizing the target and increasing the laser input energy (perhaps modestly) can drive up gain,” he said.
What would a nuclear fusion power plant look like?
It might look somewhat like today’s nuclear power plants in terms of size and infrastructure, he says Ariana Gleason, a scientist at the Department of Energy’s SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory. There, the process of nuclear fission forces uranium atoms to split apart and generate energy (essentially the opposite of nuclear fusion, which combines the isotopes of hydrogen).
Cuneo agrees that “fission power plants are at least within the range of what to expect (cost, look, feel). They have all the basic components and have a nuclear island to provide the heat.
It is currently unclear whether power plants will rely on laser techniques or magnetic confinement, a process where devices use magnetic fields to trap hydrogen isotopes so that they heat up to the temperatures required to initiate fusion. Director of LLNL Kim Budil Noted at a recent press conference that this technology is more advanced in research and is perhaps closer to commercialization. Ultimately, though, power plants can use some sort of combination of the two.
All in all, a range of ideas are currently swirling. “Some would say it probably has to be a larger plant (about a GW of electrical capacity), but there are ideas for smaller scale plants (up to 100 MW electrical or maybe be less) than startups are offering,” Carter said. . .
As for what those plants would actually power, Gleason says Department of Energy and university labs are focused on developing power sources that can be widely used in power grids.
Cuneo also believes that nuclear fusion energy should be sent to the grid. If the entire transport sector becomes electrified (to move away from fossil fuels as we should), the power generation capacity may have to triple,” he says. “Any growth in power generation capacity must be green and cannot come from fossil fuels – fusion is an option that needs to be developed.”
As for other specific uses, Carter notes that fusion energy could be used to produce hydrogen, a fuel that could accelerate the transition to electric vehicles.
How much will nuclear fusion power plants cost?
Future research and development could cost tens of billions of dollars, Gleason estimates.
Until now, most nuclear fusion research has focused on proof-of-concept scientific work, and very little funding has been available to actually develop the technology involved, Cuneo says.
“It’s hard to be specific about the cost of a technology development program,” he says. “There are a lot of problems to solve and technologies to develop and mature. The problems are also difficult, and they are not just for engineering.
Yet, Carter points out, nuclear fusion must compete in price with other types of energy, which means both the private and public sectors must invest to succeed. And in recent years, investors have poured nearly $5 billion into merger startups.
Is the White House’s goal for the 2032 fusion plant realistic?
All of this begs the question: When will we be able to get electricity from nuclear fusion power plants? A white house plan announcement In March, it will spend $50 million on fusion research with the hope of building a pilot plant in 10 years. But not everyone is convinced that this vision is realistic.
“Unfortunately, no, as the history of fusion research shows. But that’s just my opinion,” says Cuneo. “Ten years is a very short time. It’s still a good vision to invest more in this technology (and others) to go faster.
Even if things work on this timescale, it usually takes about 40 to 50 years to widely adopt a new energy source, Cuneo says.
Carter is more optimistic about the 2032 timeline and adds that recent scientific breakthroughs like the NIF result could put researchers in a position to deploy fusion quickly enough to mitigate the impacts of climate change.
“It will take hard work and innovation, but that’s what we’re doing in the United States – so I think it’s possible to achieve this goal and the fusion research community is ready to roll up our sleeves and make it happen,” Carter said.
0 Comments