[burger]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/nuclear-fus...1670944595

After being 50 years away for over 100 years, fusion is here.  Now we just need to go from making it net energy positive to making it financially self-sustainable.

BC

I didn't read the article, but the story is somewhat overblown.  Even if there was net positive energy comparing the laser input and the heat released by the fuel, the efficiency of the lasers is only 1-2%.  And if you use the heat generated to make steam and run a turbine, that's not very efficient either.  So we're still 1 or 2 orders of magnitude of fusion energy away from this being close to viable.

It's definitely a positive development, but the media (as usual in science stories) is taking it too far.

Here's an article that's much less sanguine about the new developments: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/a...re/672439/

[burger]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/nuclear-fus...1670944595

After being 50 years away for over 100 years, fusion is here.  Now we just need to go from making it net energy positive to making it financially self-sustainable.

BC

I didn't read the article, but the story is somewhat overblown.  Even if there was net positive energy comparing the laser input and the heat released by the fuel, the efficiency of the lasers is only 1-2%.  And if you use the heat generated to make steam and run a turbine, that's not very efficient either.  So we're still 1 or 2 orders of magnitude of fusion energy away from this being close to viable.

It's definitely a positive development, but the media (as usual in science stories) is taking it too far.

Here's an article that's much less sanguine about the new developments: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/a...re/672439/