Such patent protection could help to secure market share in the nuclear fusion power industry of the future. It could also open the door to other market opportunities where technologies with similar high-performance attributes could bring commercial benefits.
Jump to page content Accessibility. Log in or Register. Is fusion moving closer? Insights from an analysis of global fusion patent applications filed. By Andrew Thompson. Fusion patent applications. Privacy Policy. We have updated our privacy policy. In reality, the Q ratio only speaks to what happens deep inside the reactor when fusion occurs, not the total amount of energy it takes to run the whole operation, or the actual usable electricity the fusion reaction could produce.
So the first thing he did was get in touch with the scientists at JET, the U. He wanted to find out the ratio for total electrical power input versus total electrical power output had the test reactor been connected to the grid. That means if JET were hooked up to the grid, the reactor would lose almost all the power it used to operate. Everywhere the Q ratio was discussed, others seemed to understand it the same way Krivit had. He pointed to articles in the New York Times, Nature, the Wall Street Journal, and other outlets that conflated the amount of power injected directly into the fuel inside the reactor with the total rate of electrical power to operate ITER.
It appears lawmakers might have believed the same. A Q-physics ratio of 10, but a Q-engineering ratio of one. Henderson doubted whether actual engineers who work on fusion sites correctly understood this difference, let alone the public. Zero extra power that would be available to use for any practical purposes. Krivit noted that if ITER were hooked up to the grid, it would effectively be a massive, expensive, complicated, scientifically remarkable extension of electrical wire.
But, of course, ITER was never going to be hooked up to the grid anyway. To Krivit, the issue was one of misrepresentation. Henderson said that if there was confusion, it was all just a misinterpretation. There was no purposeful misrepresentation. Though that claim is technically true, did the audience of non-physicists know he was referring to directly injected energy and thermal power? Or did they assume he was talking about overall electrical power?
These designs use powerful magnetic fields to confine a cloud of plasma, or ionized gas, at extreme temperatures, high enough for atoms to fuse together. Your physics questions answered. If it succeeds, SPARC would be the first device to ever achieve a "burning plasma," in which the heat from all the fusion reactions keeps fusion going without the need to pump in extra energy.
But no one has ever been able to harness the power of burning plasma in a controlled reaction here on Earth, and more research is needed before SPARC can do so. The SPARC project, which launched in , is scheduled to begin construction next June, with the reactor starting operations in This is far faster than the world's largest fusion power project, known as the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor ITER , which was conceived in but not launched until ; and although construction began in , the project is not expected to generate a fusion reaction until SPARC will use so-called high-temperature superconducting magnets that only became commercially available in the past three to five years, long after ITER was first designed.
In comparison, Earth's magnetic field ranges in strength from 30 millionths to 60 millionths of a tesla. These powerful magnets suggest the core of SPARC can be about three times smaller in diameter, and 60 to 70 times smaller in volume than the heart of ITER, which is slated to be 6 meters wide. In seven new studies, researchers outlined the calculations and supercomputer simulations underlying SPARC's design.
SPARC is expected to generate at least twice as much as 10 times more energy as is pumped in, the studies found. The heat from a fusion reactor would generate steam.
This steam would then drive a turbine and electrical generator, the same way most electricity is produced nowadays. In contrast, renewable energy sources such as solar and wind "are not accommodated well by the current design of electric grids.
Most experts are confident the idea will work, but many believe that it is a matter of scale. To make it work, you have to go large. Getting to that point requires a rapid decarbonisation of the energy sector.
The UK has committed to Net Zero emissions by which will require the deployment of wind and solar on a massive scale. Some argue this is should be a greater priority for Britain, rather than spending large sums on experimental fusion reactors. Others involved in the fusion industry take a different view. Follow Matt on Twitter. Image source, BBC Sport.
An artist's impression of how a fusion reactor might look. But huge hurdles remain, say critics. Oxfordshire fusion project gets EU funds China aims for nuclear fusion breakthrough 'Skunk power' fires fusion confusion.
So what exactly is fusion? Fusion is the process that drives our Sun. Image source, ITER. The giant Iter site in southern France aims to have its first plasma generated in Giant step forward or a white elephant? Image source, General Fusion. General Fusion believe their approach to fusion will work within five years. How will the UK make fusion work?
So where is the excitement about fusion coming from?
0コメント