[video=youtube;UlYClniDFkM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlYClniDFkM#t=31[/video]
[quote](Reuters) - Lockheed Martin Corp said on Wednesday it had made a technological breakthrough in developing a power source based on nuclear fusion, and the first reactors, small enough to fit on the back of a truck, could be ready for use in a decade.
Tom McGuire, who heads the project, said he and a small team had been working on fusion energy at Lockheed's secretive Skunk Works for about four years, but were now going public to find potential partners in industry and government for their work.
Initial work demonstrated the feasibility of building a 100-megawatt reactor measuring seven feet by 10 feet, which could fit on the back of a large truck, and is about 10 times smaller than current reactors, McGuire told reporters.
-------------
Lockheed sees the project as part of a comprehensive approach to solving global energy and climate change problems.
Compact nuclear fusion would produce far less waste than coal-powered plants since it would use deuterium-tritium fuel, which can generate nearly 10 million times more energy than the same amount of fossil fuels, the company said.
Ultra-dense deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen, is found in the earth's oceans, and tritium is made from natural lithium deposits.
It said future reactors could use a different fuel and eliminate radioactive waste completely.
McGuire said the company had several patents pending for the work and was looking for partners in academia, industry and among government laboratories to advance the work.
Lockheed said it had shown it could complete a design, build and test it in as little as a year, which should produce an operational reactor in 10 years, McGuire said. A small reactor could power a U.S. Navy warship, and eliminate the need for other fuel sources that pose logistical challenges.
[/quote]
[url]http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/15/us-lockheed-fusion-idUSKCN0I41EM20141015[/url]
[url]http://sploid.gizmodo.com/lockheed-martins-new-fusion-reactor-design-can-change-h-1646578094[/url]
other sources on google
I've heard about this. it's a skunkworks project.... really curious to see what they have, because a little fusion reactor like that would be crazy
idk about you, but if lockheed says they can do it, i'll take their word for it
[editline]15th October 2014[/editline]
i love how they bring up atoms for peace, you can't really take this and turn it into a nuclear bomb, like everybody in the atoms for peace program did
imagine container sized fusion generators. That would change everything. Holy shit.
If a conglomerate of decadent American capitalist war-profiteering gets this thing figured out before a country which now helps to lead the struggle against western imperialist excess I will be really... depressed.
[QUOTE=OvB;46241580]imagine container sized fusion generators. That would change everything. Holy shit.[/QUOTE]
the whole notion that fusion would bring about free energy, not far off when the generators are the size of a semi, of course the second part is, the navy wants to replace its nuclear reactors with fusion reactors, a reactor that small would easily slot into the engine compartment of a navy destroyer, and generate more than enough to fire lasers and railguns
[editline]15th October 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=WhollyRufus;46241740]If a conglomerate of decadent American capitalist war-profiteering gets this thing figured out before a country which now helps to lead the struggle against western imperialist excess I will be really... depressed.[/QUOTE]
???
does it really matter? once the tech is shown to work everybody will be sharing it or copying it
Could we have microfusion batteries like in Fallout now?
[QUOTE=WhollyRufus;46241740]If a conglomerate of decadent American capitalist war-profiteering gets this thing figured out before a country which now helps to lead the struggle against western imperialist excess I will be really... depressed.[/QUOTE]I'd love to see you cry :v:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/E8MCY8w.gif[/IMG]
[QUOTE=WhollyRufus;46241740]If a conglomerate of decadent American capitalist war-profiteering gets this thing figured out before a country which now helps to lead the struggle against western imperialist excess I will be really... depressed.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, fuck technological progress!
So how long till we get a warp core?
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;46241837]Arrange a pyscholigist appointment then, you are going to get depressed, it might help[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;46241851]I'd love to see you cry :v:[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Sitkero;46241911]Yeah, fuck technological progress![/QUOTE]
But in all seriousness; no one should celebrate that such an important step in mankind's energy development will be in the hands of a... defense contractor.
Regardless of your opinion on Russia and China.
[QUOTE=WhollyRufus;46241940]But in all seriousness; no one should celebrate that such an important step in mankind's energy development will be in the hands of a... defense contractor.
[/QUOTE]
Oh come on, it's not like military technology never reaches the civilian market.
[QUOTE=WhollyRufus;46241940]But in all seriousness; no one should celebrate that such an important step in mankind's energy development will be in the hands of a... defense contractor.
Regardless of your opinion on Russia and China.[/QUOTE]
I agree, which is why I shun most modern technological advancements like the internet and GPS.
[QUOTE=Sableye;46241752]
does it really matter? once the tech is shown to work everybody will be sharing it or copying it[/QUOTE]
Or upgrading it. Yeah.
If they will really manage to get this small thing working with ITER's output and\or make it at least relatively cheap, it would be like a new era of energetics.
[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;46241919]So how long till we get a warp core?[/QUOTE]
they start after they finish up the teleporter.
[QUOTE=Sableye;46241542]idk about you, but if lockheed says they can do it, i'll take their word for it[/QUOTE]
They're still saying 10 years away. Who knows what could go wrong in that time.
[QUOTE=WhollyRufus;46241940]But in all seriousness; no one should celebrate that such an important step in mankind's energy development will be in the hands of a... defense contractor.
Regardless of your opinion on Russia and China.[/QUOTE]
Most of the major technological advances in the past hundred years have been tied to military advancement, especially anything involving energy
The original nuclear research was for the purpose of war as well, it's just how it is.
[QUOTE=WhollyRufus;46241940]But in all seriousness; no one should celebrate that such an important step in mankind's energy development will be in the hands of a... defense contractor.
Regardless of your opinion on Russia and China.[/QUOTE]
You're right. We should protest against Lockheed until they stop working on the technology, and then no one can have it.
[QUOTE=antianan;46241961]Or upgrading it. Yeah.
If they will really manage to get this small thing working with ITER's output and\or make it at least relatively cheap, it would be like a new era of energetics.[/QUOTE]
well, it'll kick off a new era of fuel hunting, there's not really a large stockpile of fuel isotopes lying around, someone calculated that ITER would burn up the entire world's supply of deuterium and tritium in only a year
[QUOTE=WhollyRufus;46241940]But in all seriousness; no one should celebrate that such an important step in mankind's energy development will be in the hands of a... defense contractor.
Regardless of your opinion on Russia and China.[/QUOTE]
And what do you think Russia and China were going to do with it? Use nuclear fusion to power everyone's Easy Bake oven and bring about world peace? Give me a break. They would adapt it for military applications just as much as the U.S. would.
[QUOTE=Falubii;46241978]They're still saying 10 years away. Who knows what could go wrong in that time.[/QUOTE]
Knowing everything Lockheed does these days it will have the following
-Massive cost overruns
-over designed
-way off schedule
Meanwhile they forgot they put there schematics for a prototype on an open network and suddenly china has a crappy one for 1/10th the price and claims victory :v:
[QUOTE=Falubii;46241978]They're still saying 10 years away. Who knows what could go wrong in that time.[/QUOTE]
true, ITER is still 20 years off from making a powerplant even if it works right the first time
[editline]15th October 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=WhollyRufus;46241940]But in all seriousness; no one should celebrate that such an important step in mankind's energy development will be in the hands of a... defense contractor.
Regardless of your opinion on Russia and China.[/QUOTE]
please watch the video, they've said repeatidly that the current project is paid for by lockheed themselves and not for military purposes yet, when they get it to work though thats another thing but by then it wouldn't matter anyways
[QUOTE=Sableye;46241997]well, it'll kick off a new era of fuel hunting, there's not really a large stockpile of fuel isotopes lying around, someone calculated that ITER would burn up the entire world's supply of deuterium and tritium in only a year[/QUOTE]
Deuterium can be made from seawater, so it's not exactly scarce. Tritium is rare, yeah, but the nuclear fusion process would generate more tritium than it consumes. They're also both isotopes of hydrogen, which is one of the most abundant materials in the universe. Not exactly hard to come by.
The only reason the 'world supply' is so small is because no one makes the stuff out of a crippling lack of demand. No sane company would invest in creating more deuterium and tritium when there's such a narrow market niche.
The fact fusion reactors are in the news makes me a happy man.
[QUOTE=Cheshire_cat;46242027]Deuterium can be made from seawater, so it's not exactly scarce. Tritium is rare, yeah, but the nuclear fusion process would generate more tritium than it consumes. They're also both isotopes of hydrogen, which is one of the most abundant materials in the universe. Not exactly hard to come by.
The only reason the 'world supply' is so small is because no one makes the stuff out of a crippling lack of demand. No sane company would invest in creating more deuterium and tritium when there's such a narrow market niche.[/QUOTE]
i wasn't really saying they're hard to find, but the infastructure to provide fuel for a lot of reactors just isn't there, it would have to be a large investment to build it up
[QUOTE=WhollyRufus;46241940]But in all seriousness; no one should celebrate that such an important step in mankind's energy development will be in the hands of a... defense contractor.
Regardless of your opinion on Russia and China.[/QUOTE]
You know the internet was basically built and is as stable as it is today thanks to defense contracts.
[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET[/URL]
You must be depressed all the time then.
[QUOTE=Falubii;46241978]They're still saying 10 years away. Who knows what could go wrong in that time.[/QUOTE]
5 years for the prototype, and 5 more for productional work.
That's pretty fast given the scale of complexity this device has.
[QUOTE=Sableye;46242086]i wasn't really saying they're hard to find, but the infastructure to provide fuel for a lot of reactors just isn't there, it would have to be a large investment to build it up[/QUOTE]
That's the same argument everyone makes about electric cars, too. If the technology is physically and economically sound - and it very much is - then investors will come.
[QUOTE=WhollyRufus;46241940]But in all seriousness; no one should celebrate that such an important step in mankind's energy development will be in the hands of a... defense contractor.
Regardless of your opinion on Russia and China.[/QUOTE]
Military innovation leads to civilian technological revolutions.
Airplanes, radios, microwave ovens, the internet. All of these things and many many more were the result of, or became commonplace, because of the military or government programs.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
