Category: Fusion

Posted on

The Danger of Hype – Why Fusion is getting a bad name

It’s unfortunately when good science is spun to create bad press.

Fusion is nowhere near a solution. In the very same article Qout (thermal and not electrical) is 11 MW. Qin is 1 GW. Hence Q = 0.011.

It’s just media hype, BBC style. Europe’s ITER has collected Euro 65b of public money on the fusion lie. Well not a lie, but misinformation. To maintain funding. If politicians – and the handful of duped investors – really new the science it would be given a few million, but that’s a digression…

From the data in the BBC/Oxford/JET article the ratio of energy out to energy in is only 1.1%, and only for 11 seconds…

Q= 0.011

Hype.

One suspects BBC/Oxford trying something similar to collect some of the billions going into UK fission projects for the JET project. There’s 300 scientists working on JET after all.

(Point to note: 14,000 people worked on the first molten salt project in 1954. It’s not because they didn’t have iPads).

The downside of hyping such projects is it delays public acceptance of fission (the same way the fossil fuel industry plays the green renewable card to the public).

Most investors are more savvy – it’s their purpose to be savvy. Eg, now Bill Gates, and of course the Turkish, Chinese, Russians and French.

Note that ITER is aiming for Q-Plasma parity. Not Q-Total… A small detail even the director of ITER opening ignores, and I am sure an ignorance he promotes. What’s his budget after all? Watch the YouTube in this article:

Fusion is here, today, tomorrow, maybe…

Here’s the original BBC article:

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-60312633

#fusion #ITER #jet #fission #science

Whilst it’s not our focus – ours is production of energy using Molten Salt Fission Energy technology and Thorium – we’ve found it appropriate for a couple of focused articles – this one on JET and one on ITER – to highlight the inappropriate gap between the science and the spin.  Both articles are be found here.

This spin on fusion distracts from real progress on carbon free power production for our societies. It diverts attention from real technologies. It confuses the public. It diverts public money – and a few duped private investors – who, given full knowledge, would provide their support to such projects more judiciously.

For more comprehensive study on the inadequacies of fusion for power production we refer you to the work of Steven B. Krivit and this site New Energy Times.

Posted on

Fusion is here, today, tomorrow, maybe…

ITER Tokamak and plant systems 2016

So, are you up on your p’s & Q’s: Qtotal and Qplasma? Do you know the difference? If your taxes are being used on fusion energy efforts in your region then you better have a good talk to your representative about the details. Because as you’ll see in this video, even as recently as 2016, the head of the USD 65 billion ITER fusion project, Dr. Bigot, is telling little porky pies about the realty of their projects’ ultimate outcome. Why on earth would be be doing that? Oh, might have answered that in the previous sentence. It’s a big budget production.

Full credit to the efforts of all involved at ITER to create such an incredible feat of international collaborative scientific and engineering marvel. But will it get to the end once the cat is out of the bag (watch the video) and the mainstream realise they’ve been duped by clever scientific distinctions into funding a massive science experiment?

Also disappointing are the delays inevitably caused to other demonstrably viable technologies – like Molten Salt Fission – because of these deceptions. Tsk-tsk, Dr. Bigot.

Post note: ITER will be testing fuel “breeder blankets”, which may include a molten salt shielding and fuel production blanket of fluorine, lithium and beryllium (a “FLiBe” salt). The blanket is to produce the all important – but very, very rare – tritium fuel to make it all work. The Lithium needs to be Lithium-6. For Molten Salt Fission, Lithium-7 is necessary, because you do NOT want tritium production in Fission machines (in the thermal spectrum). We are very aware of that distinction and the implications for Lithium supplies around the world.

Ask us at SAFE Fission ConsultTM if you need help understanding all of this. We have experts from all sectors ready to help.

Whilst fusion is not our focus – ours is production of energy using Molten Salt Fission Energy Technology and Thorium – we’ve found it appropriate for a couple of focused articles – this one on ITER and one on JET – to highlight the inappropriate gap between the science and the spin.  Both articles are be found here.

This spin on fusion distracts from real progress on carbon free power production for our societies. It diverts attention from real technologies. It confuses the public. It diverts public money – and a few duped private investors – who, given full knowledge, would provide their support to such projects more judiciously.

For more comprehensive study on the inadequacies of fusion for power production we refer you to the work of Steven B. Krivit and this site New Energy Times.