Skip to main content

How America’s latest attempt at fusion power fizzled

How America’s latest attempt at fusion power fizzled By Andrew Grant Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory If all goes according to Mike Dunne’s plan, the United States will build its first nuclear fusion power plant by the end of the next decade. Sixteen times a second, as the National Ignition Facility's program director for laser fusion energy envisions it, a two-millimeter-wide capsule of cryogenic hydrogen will drop into a steel chamber and get zapped by a 384-beam laser. Matter will transform into energy, driving a turbine that injects up to a gigawatt of clean power into the electrical grid. But all is not going according to plan. To be viable, a fusion power plant would need to generate more energy than it consumed. Yet except in nuclear weapons, scientists have never produced a fusion reaction that does that. For a half-century they have strived for controlled fusion and been disappointed, only to adjust their theories, retry and be disappointed again. http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/349381/description/Ignition_Failed

Comments

Anonymous said…
LLNL can't be trusted to run a large program for the government. They are far too comfortable with lying to congress, the media, their NNSA sponsors, and the public, about the failures in the science programs under NIF.
Anonymous said…
The Russians will get ignition first, and not through laser based ICF.
Anonymous said…
Sorry, but LANL got ignition first. There is no award for second place.
Anonymous said…
Sorry, LANL didn't, but LASL did!
Anonymous said…
Poor taste warning!!!

I don't know, I think the Japanese got bot 2nd and 3rd place awards.
Anonymous said…
I don't know, I think the Japanese got bot 2nd and 3rd place awards.

April 25, 2013 at 12:48 PM


Wrong. Both were fission-only devices.

Thank you for playing.
Anonymous said…
And not even boosted.
Anonymous said…
In the late 1940's, it was known as the "Los Alamos Weapons Laboratory." LASL came later.
Anonymous said…
1951:Greenhouse George and Item 1952:Ivy Mike
LASL
Anonymous said…
To think that NIF managers and employees were actively talking about winning the Nobel Prize and how people there would be the progenitors for future generations of fusion scientists and engineers.

They have absolutely no incentive to throw in the towel, or even to admit even the smallest defeat or failure, considering how high they set the expectations for themselves. That's an invitation for confirmation bias right there.
Anonymous said…
Bruce Goodwin is out.
Anonymous said…
So is Ed Moses.
Anonymous said…
Buh-bye, NIF thread (again). Yay!
Anonymous said…
But it won't be gone for long. NIF can't stay out of the news. Too many screw-ups.
Anonymous said…
NIF can't stay out of the news. Too many screw-ups.

April 30, 2013 at 2:44 PM

NIF hasn't been in the news. Just on the blogs. If you confuse the two, you are under 30 years old. And very naive.
Anonymous said…
NIF is in the news all the time. The failed milestone was mentioned on the radio today in conjunction with Ed's move. They even referred to it as a demotion on the radio.
Anonymous said…
Local news only. No one else gives a crap.
Anonymous said…
Local to LLNL. That's all that matters.
Anonymous said…
Pretty sure that posters are saying that NIF news is unimportant purely for the purpose of evoking a response and wider interest, readership and engagement on these subjects. And it is clearly working. You deserve kudos for your efforts to bring more attention. Very nice.
Anonymous said…
NIF is irrelevant to the world. Or else the world would know what it is.
Anonymous said…
I am new to the blog and llnl. Please explain to me all the failures that NIF has been complicit in?

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...

Trump is to gut the labs.

The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.

Why Workplace Jargon Is A Big Problem

From the Huffington Post Why Workplace Jargon Is A Big Problem http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/25/work-words_n_5159868.html?utm_hp_ref=business&ir=Business When we replace a specific task with a vague expression, we grant the task more magnitude than it deserves. If we don't describe an activity plainly, it seems less like an easily achievable goal and more like a cloudy state of existence that fills unknowable amounts of time. A fog of fast and empty language has seeped into the workplace. I say it's time we air it out, making room for simple, concrete words, and, therefore, more deliberate actions. By striking the following 26 words from your speech, I think you'll find that you're not quite as overwhelmed as you thought you were. Count the number that LLNLs mangers use.  touch base circle back bandwidth - impactful - utilize - table the discussion deep dive - engagement - viral value-add - one-sheet deliverable - work product - incentivise - take it to the ...