• usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    124
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Firstly, the energy output falls far short of what would be needed for a commercial reactor, barely creating enough to heat a bath. Worse than that, the ratio is calculated using the lasers’ output, but to create that 2.1 megajoules of energy, the lasers draw 500 trillion watts, which is more power than the output of the entire US national grid. So these experiments break even in a very narrow sense of the term.

    It’s so refreshing to see an article at least mention the way these tests are measured are based on the energy just in the laser itself and not the total energy used.

    • FBJimmy@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I agree it’s good that the article is not hyping up the idea that the world will now definitely be saved by fusion and so we can all therefore go on consuming all the energy we want.

      There are still some sloppy things about the article that disappoint me though…

      1. They seem to be implying that 500 TW is obviously much larger than 2.1 MJ… but without knowing how long the 500 TW is required for, this comparison is meaningless.

      2. They imply that using more power than available from the grid is infeasible, but it evidently isn’t as they’ve done it multiple times - presumably by charging up local energy storage and releasing it quickly. Scaling this up is obviously a challenge though.

      3. The weird mix of metric prefixes (mega) and standard numbers (trillions) in a single sentence is a bit triggering - that might just be me though.

      • 4am@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Exactly. These tests aren’t meant to create a practical solution, but to provide knowledge and insight that a) it is possible and b) exactly what is necessary to make it happen, at a physical level. Before this, it (more out than in) was all theory, but now we’re got some hard data to work with.

        That’s a big step we’ve been chasing for a long, long time.