Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on June 29, 2017
MIT Scientist Asserts That We Will Have Fusion Energy by 2030
Fusion on the Horizon
In the continuous pursuit of a truly renewable and clean energy source, nothing compares to nuclear fusion. Although scientists have already found ways to harness the energy from the reaction that powers stars, it hasn’t been an easy feat. Despite the advances in research pertaining to nuclear fusion, there still isn’t a stable — not to mention cost-efficient — way to power the electric grid with it.
![Fusion Energy: A Practical Guide [Infographic]](https://futurism.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/fusion-energy_home_v1.jpg)
According to the head of MIT’s Alcator C-Mod tokamak fusion project Earl Marmar, we may not have to wait long. Speaking to Inverse, Marmar said that we could potentially have nuclear fusion powering electric grids by the 2030s — that is, if we’re dedicated to continued research. “I think fusion energy on the grid by 2030 is certainly within reach by this point,” Marmar said. “2030 is probably aggressive, but I don’t think it’s wildly out of range.” This would be a timetable similar to what a Canadian collective is currently working towards.
The physics of nuclear fusion is actually something we understand pretty well at this point and it isn’t too hard to explain. At the most basic level, it’s the reverse of nuclear fission. In other words, instead of splitting atoms to release energy in fission, nuclear fusion combines small hydrogen atoms into a plasma that produces energy. In fact, that plasma produces several times more energy than what fission produces. This can’t just happen anywhere, though: it requires an environment with temperatures over 30 million degrees Celsius.
Tinkering with Technology
MIT’s tokamak reactor — named for its donut-shaped chamber — is no longer active. But, its more than 20 years of experience in fusion technology has left us with enough data to figure out how to sustain fusion reaction. That’s what we still don’t understand about using fusion: not knowing how to sustain is the only thing holding us back, according to Marmar. “So we know that fusion works; we know that the nuclear physics works. There are no questions from the nuclear physics,” he explained. “There are questions left on the technology side.”
There have been solutions proposed to to stabilize nuclear fusion, many of which are currently in the works. Marmar mentioned two of them in his interview: Tokamak Energy in the U.K. opted to decrease the size of the donut hole in their reactor to harness more plasma. The other effort comes from MIT where researchers have been working on increasing the strength of the magnetic field that sustains the plasma. An international effort funded by 35 countries is also working on ITER, the world’s largest fusion experiment.
For Marmar, the pressure exists even outside the reactors. “We need to get going, because the need for fusion energy is very urgent, specifically in view of climate change,” he told Inverse. He thinks there’s still room to push nuclear fusion further — and if we don’t at least try, it could delay progress by another decade. Marmar does concede that even if there’s committed research, the 2030s still could be a fairly aggressive timeline to adhere to. Of course, a little pressure and healthy competition to meet a deadline might be just the motivation that’s needed.
25 Comments on "MIT Scientist Asserts That We Will Have Fusion Energy by 2030"
bobinget on Thu, 29th Jun 2017 9:43 pm
I already tap fusion energy with solar panels.
Speaking of distant predictions, who in 2030 will remember MIT much less Prof Marnar.
Our Dear Leader’s latest Tweet is so much more important.
dave thompson on Thu, 29th Jun 2017 10:46 pm
I was told this power is only 10 years away.
Anonymouse on Thu, 29th Jun 2017 11:47 pm
Oh thank goodness, just in the nick of time. We are in desperate need of the most expensive, complex, and likely un-reliable source of electrical energy ever conceived. And its only 13 years away.
Whew!
Its a good thing we can crank nuclear fission plants so reliably. We can use that expertise and competence gained from building those and apply it to FUSION plants.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/01/daily-chart-22
https://safeenergy.org/2015/08/03/vogtle-at-65-billion-and-counting/
Or maybe not….
Cloggie on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 2:55 am
We need to get going, because the need for fusion energy is very urgent, specifically in view of climate change
Who cares about this eternal promise that never gets materialized.
Far more interesting is this:
https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/06/30/china-to-install-403-gw-new-wind-capacity-in-a-decade/
China is forecasted to install a gigantic 403 GW of new wind power capacity between 2020-2030. As a reminder: total current EU electricity production is an average 360 GW.
It needs to be reminded though that wind power name plate capacity is NOT real capacity, but far less (think 25%). But nevertheless the increase is gigantic.
Note to Davy: the rise of China will be the single most important factor as to why Paris-Berlin-Moscow is going to happen, for reasons of geopolitical balance.
Davy on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 3:54 am
“It Can Power a Small Nation. But This Wind Farm in China Is Mostly Idle.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/15/world/asia/china-gansu-wind-farm.html
“JIUQUAN, China — On the edge of the Gobi Desert, the Jiuquan Wind Power Base stands as a symbol of China’s quest to dominate the world’s renewable energy market. With more than 7,000 turbines arranged in rows that stretch along the sandy horizon, it is one of the world’s largest wind farms, capable of generating enough electricity to power a small country. But these days, the windmills loom like scarecrows, idle and inert. The wind howls outside, but many turbines in Jiuquan, a city of vast deserts and farms in the northwest province of Gansu, have been shut off because of weak demand. Workers while away the hours calculating how much power the turbines could have generated if there were more buyers, and wondering if and when they will ever make a profit. “There’s not much we can do right now,” said Zhou Shenggang, a manager at a state-owned energy company who oversees 134 turbines here; about 60 percent of their capacity goes unused each year. “Only the state can intervene.”
“More than 92,000 wind turbines have been built across the country, capable of generating 145 gigawatts of electricity, nearly double the capacity of wind farms in the United States. One out of every three turbines in the world is now in China, and the government is adding them at a rate of more than one per hour. But some of its most ambitious wind projects are underused. Many are grappling with a nationwide economic slowdown that has dampened demand for electricity. Others are stymied by persistent favoritism toward the coal industry by local officials and a dearth of transmission lines to carry electricity from rural areas in the north and west to China’s fastest-growing cities. That has left China unable to generate enough renewable energy to make a serious dent in air pollution and carbon emissions, despite the state-driven building spree. Even with its unmatched arsenal of turbines, China still lags the United States. Wind power now accounts for 3.3 percent of electricity generation in China, according to the nation’s National Energy Administration, compared with 4.7 percent in the United States.”
Davy on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 4:02 am
“Note to Davy: the rise of China will be the single most important factor as to why Paris-Berlin-Moscow is going to happen, for reasons of geopolitical balance.”
Note to Cloggie: P-B-M is a figment of your imagination currently. When it starts to gel into a reality get back to me. In the mean time you are just getting ahead of yourself with your geopolitical revisions. Your anti-Americanism feels good but it is not based on reality. A more “real” reality is China and the US are collapsing economically together and this will wag the global system’s Euro Tail into decline. The geopolitical balance is a rebalance into smaller entities. Euro land is a tard too and the PBM a mirage.
Cloggie on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 4:42 am
A more “real” reality is China and the US are collapsing economically together
And why the hell would that happen?
You are intellectually lazy. You embraced this low-hanging fruitcake Richard Heinberg idiot around 2005, told your family, wife, friends and everybody who wanted to listen that the world is going to “collapse”… and now there is no way back for you without major loss of face. Your CV is exemplary for most here… dug themselves in a 6 feet hole, unable to see the real world.
Thanks to the Rockman I retreated from the edge of this intellectual grave in December 2012.lol
Davy on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 5:27 am
Clog, decline is happening along with growth so relax. Maybe you will enjoy your golden years but the kids have real dangers ahead that you arrogantly dismiss. “Why” you say, who is intellectually lazy? You can blame and complain but the reason you are on a doom site is you are unconsciously worried and fighting that worry with your Eurotard techno optimism.
I have moderated my doom. Peak oil is not the immediate force I thought it may be a few years ago, IMA, a very legitimate worry then. I am in no way discarding doom because I am not a science denier. I see the reality of decline and decay. I see fake growth and extend and pretend. You on the other hand have gone into permanent party mode which is nothing more than extremism. Extreme optimism in times like ours is surely a sign of personality conflicts because anyone who does not embrace reality has them.
You clog are deep into denial and delusion because of this excessive optimism. Like many such personality issues it is acceptable because it is status quo attached. There are lots of fake greens out there to find you a place at the table of bounty. You intellectually challenge people are unable to face a likely pain and suffering ahead. Many of you are well to do pussies who can’t take pain and physical discomfort. It is understandable you optimist would turn away from any thought of pain. Moderate a little clog. Your message will have more staying power. If you choose to be an extremist you will be proved wrong at every turn eventually. Reality is harsh on extremist.
ALCIADA-MOLE on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 5:44 am
Thank you to the excellent scientists and engineers who tackle this seemingly intractable problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjzBioEgcqw [Rush – Manhattan Project]
Cloggie on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 5:51 am
Living in a wind wheel:
https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/06/30/the-dutch-windwheel/
twocats on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 7:26 am
MIT SCIENTIST!!! (asserts) WE WILL HAVE FUSION!!! BY 2030!!!
the article doesn’t lie but there are so many wiggle words in it. its all about securing grant funding. that’s it. that’s the end goal. not fusion energy. grants.
Kenz300 on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 7:59 am
Wind and solar with battery storage are here NOW.
The cost of wind and solar keeps dropping every year.
Safe, clean and cheap. WINNER !
BigMind on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 7:59 am
It seems twocats’ shift key ceased to work after “2030!!!”.
Or is the lack of capitalization of the start of each sentence following that point just an example of the decay that accompanies the decline and collapse of a civilization?
Perhaps soon, using established writing rules will be considered quaint.
Duncan Idaho on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 8:00 am
Fusion is a constant like the speed of light.
Whether one access its availability, be it 1950 or 2017, it is always 20 years away.
rockman on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 8:11 am
twocats – “its all about securing grant funding.” So true. And the bigger truth: always easy for an academic to predict the developmental of any technology since they don’t consider the economics of the its application.
Sissyfuss on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 9:01 am
Davy, what is more apropo than ghost turbines for ghost cities?
Davy on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 10:37 am
Right sis, part of my pitch is let’s invest wisely since we may not have much to invest one day.
Jerome Purtzer on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 1:38 pm
In Norway a group of scientists led by Svein Holmlid has published online not only their research results but pictures and diagrams of their laser pulsed LENR device with which they have 20 times or more energy out compared to the energy input. They may have short circuited the fusion energy discussion. Point of pride for northern Europe Cloggie!
newfie on Fri, 30th Jun 2017 7:15 pm
Limitless energy from nuclear fusion is only 15 years away. And it always will be.
Cloggie on Sat, 1st Jul 2017 4:37 am
MIT Scientist Asserts That We Will Have Fusion Energy by 2030
Translation: send more money.
Cloggie on Sat, 1st Jul 2017 5:50 am
Another small part of the energy solution, that at least works NOW:
https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/07/01/windrail-solar-and-wind-from-a-roof-in-berlin/
Cloggie on Sat, 1st Jul 2017 6:11 am
Most efficient solar cells in 2017:
https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/07/01/most-efficient-solar-cells-and-panels-in-2017/
Cloggie on Sat, 1st Jul 2017 8:44 am
In Norway a group of scientists led by Svein Holmlid has published online not only their research results but pictures and diagrams of their laser pulsed LENR device with which they have 20 times or more energy out compared to the energy input. They may have short circuited the fusion energy discussion.
Thanks, was not aware of that!
https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/07/01/cold-fusion-not-entirely-dead/
https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/07/01/leif-holmnid-ultra-dense-fusion/
(You probably mean Sweden rather than Norway)
Sissyfuss on Sat, 1st Jul 2017 10:35 am
We can have cold fusion by 2030 but I doubt it will have an EROEI above 2:1.
Baptized on Sun, 2nd Jul 2017 11:23 am
Earl Marmar say’s “The physics of nuclear fusion is actually something we understand pretty well at this point and it isn’t too hard to explain. At the most basic level, it’s the reverse of nuclear fission.” So if you get a positive EROEI with fission, so how can you get a positive EROEI from it’s reverse? Is that not a perpetual equation. I.E. machine?