Just for a change of pace. While our coal loving president tries to establish a steampunk United States of America, scientists and engineers are working on the alternatives. A standard joke in the energy techie world is that Controlled Fusion power will always be ten years in the future. But there's recently been a spate of articles on this technology that seem to be hopeful that a number of problems might be solved. There's a collaboration of companies with MIT in the mix that are betting they can build a demo reactor that can put out more energy than is put in. The approach they are pursuing is based on the Tokomak. A hollow doughnut shaped superconducting magnet confines a writhing 100M degree plasma snake in ouroboros. If it works, atomic nuclei will be smashed into each other, overcoming the repulsive electric force until they fuse, spitting out high energy neutrons in the process. These neutrons are absorbed by molten salt which is used to heat water and we're back to steampunk. Energetic neutrons beat the crap out of everything and the reactor will have to be periodically replaced. It also has to be put in a swimming pool until the radioactivity goes down.. Well, I hope they are right but I'll believe it when I see it. In the movie "Aliens", the biggest science mistake was the runaway fusion reactor. They can't runaway. The history of exploration of this technology shows it doesn't want to work. If they are successful and it's economical, it'll be an unbelievable boon. But, in the meantime, my strongest mmediate hopes are for the commercialization of tandem silicon/perovskite solar panels and the eventual replacement by cheap perovskite only. Definitely NOT steampunk.
https://futurism.com/mit-commercializing-fusion-power/
https://www.perovskite-info.com/oxford-photovoltaics
Stanley, interesting! I hadn't heard of Perovskites. Interesting, too, that it's the Brits who are working on that technology. Time was when we were cutting edge in science. But that was before we were making ourselves great again. Anyway, whoever perfects it, it will be a boon to the planet.
ReplyDeleteInteresting too, about the advances in fusion. I think we'll eventually get there, but agree with you that the perovskite thing will probably come first.
My #3 son is in a solar paneled house and garage in Dallas, and he is fueling two Teslas through his outlets. He told me his November electric bill was $9. I am not sure whether that is what he owed or is a credit. King Canoodle can order the coal to flow like the tides, but I don't think coal is paying attention to his commands.
ReplyDeleteBut didn't some folks in Utah claim they were on the verge of fusion a few years ago? What happened to that?
Tom: King Canoodle can order the coal to flow like the tides, but I don't think coal is paying attention to his commands.
DeleteYou are right. I read an article today in Reuters that there have been more shut-downs of coal powered plants in two years of Trump than during eight years of Obama.
Coal costs too much - among other things. Sometimes the market does work.
Kathleen, perovskite are a class of chemicals that have a certain structure. They can be artificially made. Eventually, it is hoped that they can be painted onto substrates without the need for vacuum equipment. The purity of silicon is not required either. Reduced costs, if achieved, will kill fossil fuels.
ReplyDeleteTom, glad your son is hooked up to the sun. Texas is actually heavily into renewables. I think I know which fusion news you're talking about. There was a flurry of news activity a couple years ago about some company that claimed they could build fusion reactors on flatbed trucks. All I could say was "huh?" Hopefully, with MIT in the mix, this latest flurry has more credibility.
Sorry, Katherine. Brain glitch and I know too many Kathlerns.
ReplyDeleteNo problem, Stanley. I've been called worse!
DeleteKing Canoodle may be even better than the Orange Poltroon. Stanley, I wish I was an engineer so I knew more about what the heck you're writing about here, but I hope you continue to write about this topic. Personally, I think what's realistic if our children and grandchildren are going to sustain our way of life during a time of climate change is three parts human adaptability, three parts technological innovation such as what you're posting about here, two parts sheer luck, and one part political will, probably manifesting itself nationally rather than internationally.
ReplyDeleteThe Germans seem to have the will to move to renewables. The French were rioting last month at the prospect of taxes that would make carbon fuels more expensive. And I'm extremely pessimistic about the prospects of a Paris Accord-type solution - I think the two alternative outcomes of something like that is either (a) like the US under Trump, a mation flips the rest of the world the bird; or (b) the leaders sign onto the accord and then proceed to cheat, cut corners and otherwise ignore the commitment whenever it doesn't coincide with their country's self-interest.
Jim, just to address one point. Apparently Macron's edict fell heavily on the less than rich. There are parts of France as inaccessible to public transportation as we are and that is a problem for the working class. Inequality and social justice must be addressed along with the environment. Apparently these folks are already feeling squeezed by cutbacks in social services and anti-union moves.
DeleteStanley, I had read that also. The edict fell heavily on agricultural people, who may have had a slim profit margin to begin with. As is true here. Was talking to family yesterday who had sold cattle recently, and had barely made expenses. Politics and international trade wrangling are affecting the ag markets adversely, maybe abroad as well as here.
DeleteI like the idea of worldwide agreement on emissions controls and any number of things, but, like Jim, I am pessimistic. Within our own country, people are deeply divided on these things. I laud communities and states that are moving forward with initiatives to pursue alternatives despite getting no encouragement from the feds.
ReplyDeleteBrief historical note: A nuclear power plant was proposed for Dow Chemical, in the town where I grew up. One of the citizens groups opposing the plant talked then (early 1970s) about fusion being cleaner and more efficient than fission energy. So this idea has been around for awhile.
As I understand it, fusion is what is happening in the sun. So it is possible (already done under lab conditions, but at a net negative as far as energy).I am hopeful that eventually it could be developed in a commercially viable way.
DeleteI think expanding nuke plants much beyond what is being done now is a nonstarter; everybody thinks of Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima.
I may be more sanguine (news!!) than either Jim or Jean. I think $9 electric bills or refunds will create a tipping point. The problem is getting from here to there. I just looked up the history of the solar panels Jimmy Carter put on the White House roof. Ronald Reagan took them down. W. Bush gingerly put in a small-scale solar for a cabana and things like that. Barack Obama put solar panels back on the roof. The current administration is too busy threatening war with Iran and Turkey (and the FBI and Congress)(but not with Russia) to know they are up there.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFusion power would be a wonderful gift to the human race. Its wonderful twin would be a room temperature superconductor. Carrying power over great distances without loss, electrical energy storage, powerful magnets for everything from MRI to magnetic levitation trains. It is hard to figure how humans could screw things up after that but I'm sure they'd give it the old college try.
ReplyDelete