I worked on reactors in the Navy. If done properly, it can provide hundreds of years of energy, and the waste is not as bad as people think if handled judiciously and carefully. The problem is the MSM amplified the accidents more than was necessary and didn't look at the overall picture regarding earth's energy resources.
Via electrolysis, we can crack water into H2 & O. What if there are certain Very High Frequencies (VHF) that excite water molecules that cause them to crack?
Amazing plan God provided for us. A planet covered in 70% water and a continuous source of energy free for everyone.
Strange that everyone who invented cars that run on water had bizarre deaths.
I'm glad you asked. Growing up my dad had all sorts of analog electronics that he let me play with. Fluke Oscilloscopes, Bruel & Kjaer Beat Frequency Oscillator (generator), multi-range power supplies, etc.
The digital ones of today can be held in your hand and can produce 120 MHz (MegaHertz). Which is 120,000,000 cycles per second.
The entire process can be condensed into an small pressure vessel that fits into your hand (like a CO2 cartridge for BB guns). A positive displacement pump keeps things from blowing up in your face and a reaction vessel (combustion zone) with a check valve in-between.
Well ok! Is this the same dealio that Bob Lazar used to make hydrogen for his corvette? He used solar panels to create electricity for the water cracking.
The Car would go about 400 miles on a fill up of hydrogen.
I followed his efforts to create a hydrogen car company. He said China was the only place to get the (metal hydrides?) for the hydrogen to be compressed in.
He gave up trying to produce these cars but still sounds pretty simple.
Especially if we had something to do the conversion from water.
Yes, and in the article they bash the discovery saying that it won't be a viable option for a long time. Maybe it was a legitimate discovery from our side, so the media is trying to downplay the innovation.
I suspect they've had fusion technology for decades but kept it for themselves. This is either a White Hat release, or the cabal realizes they're losing control and are desperately trickling this out to try and get us back in line and reliant on them for access to the new technology.
These points are nonsense, which I learned from workers in the field when I was in grad school, 50 years ago.
Pollution/waste: The deuterium-tritium (D-T) reaction produces most of its energy in the form of 14 MeV neutrons, which transmute the elements of the reactor structure into radioactive isotopes. This has long been called the "first wall problem," and it necessitates the periodic removal of the first wall of the reactor and its complete replacement. The removed wall is radioactive waste. We wouldn't have this problem if we could achieve the D-D reaction---but the current fusion technology cannot attain the temperatures necessary.
Cheap/widely available "stuff": Deuterium is commonly available from heavy water. Not a problem, but... Tritium essentially does not exist in nature and must be produced by the irradiation by neutrons of lithium, so it will break down into tritium---which is a radioactive isotope. I hope you realize that there is only so much lithium in the world, and it is being currently sought and acquired for "green" electric propulsion. The interesting question is whether we will run out of lithium before we can run out of uranium and thorium. There is plenty of the latter; the seawater alone carries phenomenal quantities in solution.
The real answer is that there is no "global warming" problem requiring the abandonment of hydrocarbon fuels. And no nuclear waste problem requiring the abandonment of nuclear power. And the use of nuclear power can permit the synthesis of hydrocarbon fuels from carbonaceous material and water, should there be any geological shortage.
Wait a minute, carbonaceous material, like the calcium carbonate produced in the billions of tonnes in the sea by Coccolithophores that settles, ends up miles under subsequent layers, and gets subducted to regions of high temperature and pressure along with the water.... and produces... dinosaur juice?
Crude oil isn't produced by pressing any sort of former living things. The element profiles are very different, after you get past the common elements C, O, and H. There are a number of elements that appear in crude, but not in any living thing. There are also elements that appear in almost all living things, but doesn't appear in crude.
"Dinosaur juice" I thought was non-sequitur enough to signal sarcasm. Not to worry, the meaning is the understanding so I will take the blame for not including a /s
Yeah, I agree. I think there must be more than one source for oil. Some oil must come from coal itself, as coal is often wet with oil, but I like the abiotic theories too.
Does it? I've never thought of petroleum as "dinosaur juice." I'm more taken by Vladimir Larin's theory that it is the result of hydrogen gas percolating upward through the mantle, scavenging carbon by reduction chemistry. (The hydrogen comes from degassing metallic hydrides at the core of the Earth.)
But, yeah, with available nuclear heat one could make hydrocarbon fuel from limestone and water.
I'm not a geologist. Where would I have heard of "the dominant theory," and did you just describe it? I asked a simple question and you could have answered it, but all you did was question my question. Not a very straightforward conversational manner. I do recommend reading Larin's book. He makes a very detailed case for consideration.
I like the abiotic theory too, which is why I was mocking the dino-juice theory (all oil is from organic matter) by proposing a possible alternative abiotic theory (albeit that the carbonate could come from phytoplankton)
We are in general agreement, although some oil clearly does come from buried organics, such as oil that leeches out of coal deposits. Nevermind no hard feelings.
The Secretary General of ITER (hot fusion) has admitted last month that hot fusion does not produce more energy than it consumes, its a complete lie from start to finish..
The reaction always produces net energy (see any thermonuclear bomb test). The problem is that the reactor technology consumes energy in order to produce the energy. Now, this is true of essentially every power plant. A coal-fired plant or a hydroelectric dam require electric power for the lights, the offices, and the power-generating machinery. But it is a trifle compared to the power that is produced, so there is no harm. The problem with fusion is the challenge to attain "net" power production---power in excess of that required to sustain the reaction.
So, it is not really a lie---it was a mistaken statement. Unless it was made with deliberate prevarication, which would have to be proven. The devil is in the details. According to energy accounting, maybe they did, maybe they didn't. It is easy to get misled by enthusiasm.
I tip my hat. I got only 7 pages into the 37, but this fellow seems to have caught them red-handed. Sadly, as I said, the devil is in the details---and they chose to cook the books.
What I think is more telling, however, is the desperation for funding that this reveals, the willingness of scientists to be corrupt and dishonest, and the huge distance fusion is from any practical application. Truly, it will always be 30 years away. Fusion proponents need to digest this prevarication and learn a lesson.
Thanks for proving your point. Most excellently done.
If we were serious about "zero emissions" vehicles, we could have CNG filling stations all over the country. CNG works perfectly fine and we know how to make vehicles that use it.
We are not a serious country, with all of this windmill bullshit.
Unfortunately people have been brainwashed into believing CO2 is a pollutant.
Nuclear power is true zero-emissions. NOTHING is released to the environment except the water that was used to power the turbines - and that NEVER had any contact with any Nuclear materials. The water that touches the rods is kept under high pressure and does not leave the system.
"For avoidance of doubt", I am super-pro Nuke, provided we do the pebble bed blah blah. What you say here is why the original designs were always solid. But the new pebble bed can't melt down reactors is a new level of "peace of mind" and something that I believe we could market to Johnny Dumbshit.
But also-also, I believe that CNG is a good solution for home heating and vehicles. And we are being clowntastic about it. Frankly I am pro-unleaded gasoline, but that is a bridge too far for the Wokies, so give them something with "zero farts", like CNG, so they can feel like they extracted their pound of flesh.
EDIT: I should add also that I am pro-Diesel. Because I am not a moron. :)
What? So now they're going to go back and pretend none of what they've done to us matters so they can save their on hides. They're not getting off that easy. No way.
They will,like all other political elites, try to tack their name onto the accomplishment, but the Globalists will not like what Fusion energy will do. It will allow for decentralized power distribution. Thus making it harder for them to gain control over energy supply.
For fun, check out "Crack in the World" (1965). Scientists decide to punch into the core of the Earth with a nuclear missile! Kind of an eerie scene when the officials drive past the launch site and see a missile suspended, pointing down. The "Uh, what the fuck?" factor is strong in this one.
Something about this doesn't smell right... I don't know about you guys, but I'm suspicious as hell about this. I'm sure their angle with this will come into view soon. They are setting up for something.
You need to clean your nose. This is just physics, and they have been going at exactly this objective for decades. This is news, but long awaited and no surprise. And it is a breakthrough to nowhere, because there is a whole lot left to do before it can be used in any practical way.
Well, I cleaned my nose, and now it's my gut. Either way, I still can't help but be suspicious. For example, they say that fusion would be the answer to "the climate problem". Which would mean that they would lose that angle of control over us. So, what do they do about that? Pretend to harness fusion so that they can then pretend that "it doesn't work like we thought it would", and that we should just drop the whole idea and go back to shutting farms down, and making people eat bugs and starve to death, if they don't freeze first. I dunno, just my own opinion, and I know that it could be wrong.
I'm curious though Anon, I've read some of your other responses and you seem to really enjoy science and physics. Do you mind sharing what you do for a living?
Right now, I am retired, but I used to be a system engineer for advanced space and military systems.
The answers are probably more banal than you expect. The DoE has long "supported" fusion research under the rubric of being a magical power source---which is a convenient cover for simply doing the research to understand fusion physics and get a better grip on thermonuclear weapon design. Occasionally, they have to announce some "breakthrough" to prompt further congressional support. And the road show keeps on rolling, with no sense of urgency. I was told all this in grad school back in the 70s by those who were working government grants.
It's a great way to hinder the further exploitation of fission power. ("The perfect is the enemy of 'good enough'.") Especially when claims of no radioactive waste and cheap energy are thrown around. Complete prevarications. Some of these claims could be true if we had deuterium-deuterium (D-D) fusion, but we are as far from that as we were from the present kind decades ago.
Has anyone been paying attention to Toyota? They never went full in on billions into the EV crap. They tested those waters 20 yrs ago. But recently went 60 billion into….something. Everyone assumed finally, EV. Nope.
According to reports, which are not yet backed up by published research, over the past two weeks, a process at the federal Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California has achieved net energy gain through a process called “inertial confinement fusion”.
"Inertial confinement [con?]fusion" sounds like codespeak to me for Lockdowns and their social impact.
But this is just imho. An opinion about the words used.
I have not yet figured an opinion of the meaning of codespeak "net energy gain". I do note however, that there were a lot of opportunities for transfer of energy (+wealth) during Lockdowns that did result in gain to some.
Again, just revealing myself and my imperfect nature through opinions.
Then, again, my bias against science [abuse] is showing.
Could this be instead seeking a graceful exit from ESG nd ESG policies?
"Inertial confinement" is the technique of obtaining the fusion reaction conditions of temperature and density and duration by a process that occurs so fast, the reaction constituents are "inertially confined" by the inertia resistance of their own mass (instead of by difficult to produce and control electromagnetic fields). This was a technique somewhat employed by the implosion design for nuclear weapons.
"Net energy" means that the energy left over from the reaction less all the energy required by the process is a positive value. Up to this point, it took more energy to create the process than the process would produce (net energy loss).
There is no "codespeak." There is just the common lingo of the fusion physics field, known for half a century by anyone who has studied it.
It is a justification for Biden to kill off oil and coal. And a further justification for government to begin trillion dollar giveaways to an entirely new industry ... with the same old backchannels for kickbacks and bribes.
Rinse and repeat. They will continuously find new ways to spend all our tax dollars - and increase our taxes while doing it - on anyone who will reward them for it.
Also not just a new industry, it also means they will try to take over the Moon ASAP competing with China and perhaps some other players. Trillions more for the Space industry. I.e. finding a way to justify the Artemis Senate Launch System boondoggle.
Reason they need to take Moon is He3 is on surface of moon and more readily available there than on earth. He3 is fuel for fusion.
I can't imagine fusion energy being good for the Cabal. The potential exists for this to allow for decentralization of power distribution. The Globalists cannot have decentralization of any kind.
Not likely to be decentralized, considering how complex a fusion reactor is.
But fear not: fusion power has been "only 30 years away"...for the past 50 years. Small gains are not big steps.
Fission power, however, can be decentralized. Companies are now offering modular nuclear reactor powerplants down to the 10s of megawatts. But there are economies of scale for large powerplants and they work just fine.
Don't get me wrong, keep building fission infrastructure until fusion is ready. I think when it is, it won't be long before they scale it down to local power plants.
My point, though, is that the idea that fusion is superior to fission rests on assumptions that are not true. If we run out of lithium, we run out of fusion. And we still have the radioactive waste problem.
This reminds me of a show I saw a long time back, part of a series called Phenomenon: The Lost Archives. I found that the series is available free online.
Episode six is very interesting.
In 1989, two respected chemists made an announcement that rocked the world of science. Their experiments with heavy water yielded enormous amounts of heat energy, now known as cold fusion
One time was even the same lab. With the same output reading.
So it’s either ”scientists” trying to get more funding, or it’s signaling something.
One of the “breakthroughs” was reported on August 17, 2021.
This was three days after the big Haiti earthquake. We were in the middle of the Afghanistan withdrawal disaster.
Two days later, on August 19, 2021, that weird guy parked his truck in front of the Library of Congress and ~threatened to blow it up.~
Another was June 13, 2018. This time it was the exact same lab also claiming double yield like this announcement.
Guess what happened on June 12? From Wikipedia
U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean Chairman Kim Jong-un meet for a historic summit on Sentosa Island in Singapore. This marks the first time that the leaders of both countries have met. (BBC) (The Guardian)
Both sign a joint statement that North Korea will work towards "complete denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula", and the U.S. will provide "security guarantees". The two sides agree to recovering and repatriating the remains of prisoners of war and those missing in action.
After the summit, President Trump says that the U.S. will halt joint military exercises with South Korea. (CNN) (BBC)
The U.S. Department of Justice publishes a 568-page report by Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz on the FBI's handling of its investigation of Hillary Clinton's email practices. The report is critical of former FBI Director James Comey, accusing him of being "insubordinate", but finding that his actions were not politically biased.
Maybe there is a unlimited energy solution around the corner that is ALSO decentralized--like hydrogen engines--something regular people could have around the house. So they'll push a centralized alternative--something they could control--as a compromise.
"Meanwhile, over the seven decades scientists have spent working to replicate the same process that powers the sun,"... except the sun isn't a free energy fusion device...
And there is nothing "free" about terrestrial fusion energy either. It costs a lot of time and money to produce essentially nothing.
The "Meanwhile" quotation is fatuous. We've replicated the fusion process since the detonation of the first thermonuclear weapon. Getting power from it is a different problem.
These tokamak style reactors have a lot of problems still. They do not scale well.
Heat waste system extraction using memory metals are one viable side alternative.
Low power electrolysis using HF, as another anon mentioned.
Classic nuke reactors are ok, thorium salt has the best long term option of the families as the material is cheap, available and the waste is not very toxic.
but according to “two people with knowledge of the results” who spoke to the Financial Times
There is no doubt, the prize is worth the effort. Success, however long it takes, would be transformational.
This is a grift, why would you speak to the Financial Times and not Scientific American? When will your investment pay off you may ask, well "however long it takes", just keep investing, we are on the brink! They are fishing for investors who want to get in on the ground floor.
Yes, but all of a sudden, that ebb and flow has supposedly dramatically sped up leaving many think that the flow is going to destroy them like in the next few days.
Because, you know, idiots. And the MSM.
I saw one idiot on Reddit screaming about a highway project here in NJ. They were widening the highway to alleviate traffic. Said Reddiot started screaming "WHY ARE WE WIDENING HIGHWAYS? BAN CARS. HELLO, THERE'S A CLIMATE CRISIS GOING ON." As if it were going to happen tomorrow.
Listen everyone, their is not enough lithium and cobalt in the WORLD, to make batteries for your battery driven car/truck. I repeat IN THE WORLD. To power your fantasy of an all electric world. Even your fing windmills use thousands of gallons of oil. All while killing thousands of birds and filling entire landfills with toxic windmill blades. Long story short. While awesome the only reason they are talking about this is to Distract you. Unlimited energy destroys their control. They will never give you your freedom or happiness
You will have to demand it
The professor’s comments seem to indicate that despite the recent success, which should be applauded, viable power from fusion remains a considerable way off, and all the time, the emissions going into the atmosphere are continuing to rise.
These clowns messing around with this stuff are bound to blow up the planet long before "climate change" will do anything.
We already have cheap, zero pollution energy.
It's called nuclear energy, and it is a proven technology.
People who pretend they will accept "newer" tech but also reject nuclear tech are idiots.
They can heat their home with dried cow chips.
I worked on reactors in the Navy. If done properly, it can provide hundreds of years of energy, and the waste is not as bad as people think if handled judiciously and carefully. The problem is the MSM amplified the accidents more than was necessary and didn't look at the overall picture regarding earth's energy resources.
Energy Engineer here:
What if we already have it?
Via electrolysis, we can crack water into H2 & O. What if there are certain Very High Frequencies (VHF) that excite water molecules that cause them to crack?
Amazing plan God provided for us. A planet covered in 70% water and a continuous source of energy free for everyone.
Strange that everyone who invented cars that run on water had bizarre deaths.
Edit: Harry Cockburn, really?
Electromagnetic waves cost energy to make. The higher the frequency, the higher the cost.
I like the optimism, but… until you have something to show for that idea all I can say is “good luck”.
I'm glad you asked. Growing up my dad had all sorts of analog electronics that he let me play with. Fluke Oscilloscopes, Bruel & Kjaer Beat Frequency Oscillator (generator), multi-range power supplies, etc.
The digital ones of today can be held in your hand and can produce 120 MHz (MegaHertz). Which is 120,000,000 cycles per second.
The entire process can be condensed into an small pressure vessel that fits into your hand (like a CO2 cartridge for BB guns). A positive displacement pump keeps things from blowing up in your face and a reaction vessel (combustion zone) with a check valve in-between.
Here is a patent were they propose that hyper frequency vibrations (into the billions and trillions of cycles per second) can be used to make a vehicle levitate and travel in the atmosphere just by exciting the air molecules around the craft.
Not saying I know how to do it, but it is nonetheless intriguing .
"If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration." - Nikola Tesla.
Well ok! Is this the same dealio that Bob Lazar used to make hydrogen for his corvette? He used solar panels to create electricity for the water cracking.
The Car would go about 400 miles on a fill up of hydrogen.
I followed his efforts to create a hydrogen car company. He said China was the only place to get the (metal hydrides?) for the hydrogen to be compressed in.
He gave up trying to produce these cars but still sounds pretty simple.
Especially if we had something to do the conversion from water.
Yes, and in the article they bash the discovery saying that it won't be a viable option for a long time. Maybe it was a legitimate discovery from our side, so the media is trying to downplay the innovation.
I suspect they've had fusion technology for decades but kept it for themselves. This is either a White Hat release, or the cabal realizes they're losing control and are desperately trickling this out to try and get us back in line and reliant on them for access to the new technology.
(See: petro dollar)
Thank you for your service pede!
You're welcome fren. 👍
Fusion energy IS nuclear energy. It is better because it does not produce pollution or waste of any kind and runs on cheap, widely available stuff.
These points are nonsense, which I learned from workers in the field when I was in grad school, 50 years ago.
Pollution/waste: The deuterium-tritium (D-T) reaction produces most of its energy in the form of 14 MeV neutrons, which transmute the elements of the reactor structure into radioactive isotopes. This has long been called the "first wall problem," and it necessitates the periodic removal of the first wall of the reactor and its complete replacement. The removed wall is radioactive waste. We wouldn't have this problem if we could achieve the D-D reaction---but the current fusion technology cannot attain the temperatures necessary.
Cheap/widely available "stuff": Deuterium is commonly available from heavy water. Not a problem, but... Tritium essentially does not exist in nature and must be produced by the irradiation by neutrons of lithium, so it will break down into tritium---which is a radioactive isotope. I hope you realize that there is only so much lithium in the world, and it is being currently sought and acquired for "green" electric propulsion. The interesting question is whether we will run out of lithium before we can run out of uranium and thorium. There is plenty of the latter; the seawater alone carries phenomenal quantities in solution.
The real answer is that there is no "global warming" problem requiring the abandonment of hydrocarbon fuels. And no nuclear waste problem requiring the abandonment of nuclear power. And the use of nuclear power can permit the synthesis of hydrocarbon fuels from carbonaceous material and water, should there be any geological shortage.
Wait a minute, carbonaceous material, like the calcium carbonate produced in the billions of tonnes in the sea by Coccolithophores that settles, ends up miles under subsequent layers, and gets subducted to regions of high temperature and pressure along with the water.... and produces... dinosaur juice?
Crude oil isn't produced by pressing any sort of former living things. The element profiles are very different, after you get past the common elements C, O, and H. There are a number of elements that appear in crude, but not in any living thing. There are also elements that appear in almost all living things, but doesn't appear in crude.
So there's no such thing as "dinosaur juice."
Bless you Aspie.
"Dinosaur juice" I thought was non-sequitur enough to signal sarcasm. Not to worry, the meaning is the understanding so I will take the blame for not including a /s
I don't catch those sometimes with the sarc tag. As an old Aspie, I've learned enough rules to seem normal most of the time, but I still have lapses.
BTW, "fossil" fuel is a pet peeve. The only real fossil fuel is coal.
Yeah, I agree. I think there must be more than one source for oil. Some oil must come from coal itself, as coal is often wet with oil, but I like the abiotic theories too.
Does it? I've never thought of petroleum as "dinosaur juice." I'm more taken by Vladimir Larin's theory that it is the result of hydrogen gas percolating upward through the mantle, scavenging carbon by reduction chemistry. (The hydrogen comes from degassing metallic hydrides at the core of the Earth.)
But, yeah, with available nuclear heat one could make hydrocarbon fuel from limestone and water.
You never heard of the dominant theory? ok
I'm not a geologist. Where would I have heard of "the dominant theory," and did you just describe it? I asked a simple question and you could have answered it, but all you did was question my question. Not a very straightforward conversational manner. I do recommend reading Larin's book. He makes a very detailed case for consideration.
Confused now. What question?
I like the abiotic theory too, which is why I was mocking the dino-juice theory (all oil is from organic matter) by proposing a possible alternative abiotic theory (albeit that the carbonate could come from phytoplankton)
We are in general agreement, although some oil clearly does come from buried organics, such as oil that leeches out of coal deposits. Nevermind no hard feelings.
The Secretary General of ITER (hot fusion) has admitted last month that hot fusion does not produce more energy than it consumes, its a complete lie from start to finish..
https://news.newenergytimes.net/2022/11/15/new-head-of-iter-organization-withdraws-reactor-net-energy-claim/
The reaction always produces net energy (see any thermonuclear bomb test). The problem is that the reactor technology consumes energy in order to produce the energy. Now, this is true of essentially every power plant. A coal-fired plant or a hydroelectric dam require electric power for the lights, the offices, and the power-generating machinery. But it is a trifle compared to the power that is produced, so there is no harm. The problem with fusion is the challenge to attain "net" power production---power in excess of that required to sustain the reaction.
So, it is not really a lie---it was a mistaken statement. Unless it was made with deliberate prevarication, which would have to be proven. The devil is in the details. According to energy accounting, maybe they did, maybe they didn't. It is easy to get misled by enthusiasm.
There is this, its not complete proof that they lied but it look quite likely that some of them did.
https://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/iter/The-Dark-Side-of-ITER-20200615.pdf
I tip my hat. I got only 7 pages into the 37, but this fellow seems to have caught them red-handed. Sadly, as I said, the devil is in the details---and they chose to cook the books.
What I think is more telling, however, is the desperation for funding that this reveals, the willingness of scientists to be corrupt and dishonest, and the huge distance fusion is from any practical application. Truly, it will always be 30 years away. Fusion proponents need to digest this prevarication and learn a lesson.
Thanks for proving your point. Most excellently done.
Thanks, have a great Christmas!
Fantastic knowledge. Thanks, Fren!
**This is probably a white hat technology declass/release.
https://youtube.com/@Suspicious0bservers Sorry had to
Like banana peels and coffee grounds and leftover beer? Like Doc Brown's Mr. Fusion?
I do want me one of those. Seriously.
Fusion is nuclear...current nuclear is fission
If we were serious about "zero emissions" vehicles, we could have CNG filling stations all over the country. CNG works perfectly fine and we know how to make vehicles that use it.
We are not a serious country, with all of this windmill bullshit.
Unfortunately people have been brainwashed into believing CO2 is a pollutant.
Nuclear power is true zero-emissions. NOTHING is released to the environment except the water that was used to power the turbines - and that NEVER had any contact with any Nuclear materials. The water that touches the rods is kept under high pressure and does not leave the system.
"For avoidance of doubt", I am super-pro Nuke, provided we do the pebble bed blah blah. What you say here is why the original designs were always solid. But the new pebble bed can't melt down reactors is a new level of "peace of mind" and something that I believe we could market to Johnny Dumbshit.
But also-also, I believe that CNG is a good solution for home heating and vehicles. And we are being clowntastic about it. Frankly I am pro-unleaded gasoline, but that is a bridge too far for the Wokies, so give them something with "zero farts", like CNG, so they can feel like they extracted their pound of flesh.
EDIT: I should add also that I am pro-Diesel. Because I am not a moron. :)
Nothing will replace diesel and gasoline. It's too much power, safely packaged in a small amount of mass.
I always say: bring me your solution that has a superior K than gasoline/diesel.
I plan on waiting a looooong time.
What? So now they're going to go back and pretend none of what they've done to us matters so they can save their on hides. They're not getting off that easy. No way.
They will,like all other political elites, try to tack their name onto the accomplishment, but the Globalists will not like what Fusion energy will do. It will allow for decentralized power distribution. Thus making it harder for them to gain control over energy supply.
Its bollocks. Fusion has been 5 years away for 60 years now, its a scam.
https://news.newenergytimes.net/2022/11/15/new-head-of-iter-organization-withdraws-reactor-net-energy-claim/
My guess is they are about to blow a hole in the planet.
Not even remotely possible.
Oh well. ;o)
For fun, check out "Crack in the World" (1965). Scientists decide to punch into the core of the Earth with a nuclear missile! Kind of an eerie scene when the officials drive past the launch site and see a missile suspended, pointing down. The "Uh, what the fuck?" factor is strong in this one.
<'Crack in the World' has entered the chat.>
Something about this doesn't smell right... I don't know about you guys, but I'm suspicious as hell about this. I'm sure their angle with this will come into view soon. They are setting up for something.
You need to clean your nose. This is just physics, and they have been going at exactly this objective for decades. This is news, but long awaited and no surprise. And it is a breakthrough to nowhere, because there is a whole lot left to do before it can be used in any practical way.
Well, I cleaned my nose, and now it's my gut. Either way, I still can't help but be suspicious. For example, they say that fusion would be the answer to "the climate problem". Which would mean that they would lose that angle of control over us. So, what do they do about that? Pretend to harness fusion so that they can then pretend that "it doesn't work like we thought it would", and that we should just drop the whole idea and go back to shutting farms down, and making people eat bugs and starve to death, if they don't freeze first. I dunno, just my own opinion, and I know that it could be wrong. I'm curious though Anon, I've read some of your other responses and you seem to really enjoy science and physics. Do you mind sharing what you do for a living?
Right now, I am retired, but I used to be a system engineer for advanced space and military systems.
The answers are probably more banal than you expect. The DoE has long "supported" fusion research under the rubric of being a magical power source---which is a convenient cover for simply doing the research to understand fusion physics and get a better grip on thermonuclear weapon design. Occasionally, they have to announce some "breakthrough" to prompt further congressional support. And the road show keeps on rolling, with no sense of urgency. I was told all this in grad school back in the 70s by those who were working government grants.
It's a great way to hinder the further exploitation of fission power. ("The perfect is the enemy of 'good enough'.") Especially when claims of no radioactive waste and cheap energy are thrown around. Complete prevarications. Some of these claims could be true if we had deuterium-deuterium (D-D) fusion, but we are as far from that as we were from the present kind decades ago.
Harry Cockburn? Is this for real?
Came here to say the same thing! Sounds like a chafed willy...
Chafed willy, a funny description👍
Has anyone been paying attention to Toyota? They never went full in on billions into the EV crap. They tested those waters 20 yrs ago. But recently went 60 billion into….something. Everyone assumed finally, EV. Nope.
Hydro.
Is this progress?
"Inertial confinement [con?]fusion" sounds like codespeak to me for Lockdowns and their social impact.
But this is just imho. An opinion about the words used.
I have not yet figured an opinion of the meaning of codespeak "net energy gain". I do note however, that there were a lot of opportunities for transfer of energy (+wealth) during Lockdowns that did result in gain to some.
Again, just revealing myself and my imperfect nature through opinions.
Then, again, my bias against science [abuse] is showing.
Could this be instead seeking a graceful exit from ESG nd ESG policies?
"Inertial confinement" is the technique of obtaining the fusion reaction conditions of temperature and density and duration by a process that occurs so fast, the reaction constituents are "inertially confined" by the inertia resistance of their own mass (instead of by difficult to produce and control electromagnetic fields). This was a technique somewhat employed by the implosion design for nuclear weapons.
"Net energy" means that the energy left over from the reaction less all the energy required by the process is a positive value. Up to this point, it took more energy to create the process than the process would produce (net energy loss).
There is no "codespeak." There is just the common lingo of the fusion physics field, known for half a century by anyone who has studied it.
They have a YouTube channel explaining the concept.
It is a justification for Biden to kill off oil and coal. And a further justification for government to begin trillion dollar giveaways to an entirely new industry ... with the same old backchannels for kickbacks and bribes.
Rinse and repeat. They will continuously find new ways to spend all our tax dollars - and increase our taxes while doing it - on anyone who will reward them for it.
This^^^
Also not just a new industry, it also means they will try to take over the Moon ASAP competing with China and perhaps some other players. Trillions more for the Space industry. I.e. finding a way to justify the Artemis Senate Launch System boondoggle.
Reason they need to take Moon is He3 is on surface of moon and more readily available there than on earth. He3 is fuel for fusion.
Does this mean that people will stop dying suddenly of unknown causes due to climate change?
I can't imagine fusion energy being good for the Cabal. The potential exists for this to allow for decentralization of power distribution. The Globalists cannot have decentralization of any kind.
Not likely to be decentralized, considering how complex a fusion reactor is.
But fear not: fusion power has been "only 30 years away"...for the past 50 years. Small gains are not big steps.
Fission power, however, can be decentralized. Companies are now offering modular nuclear reactor powerplants down to the 10s of megawatts. But there are economies of scale for large powerplants and they work just fine.
Don't get me wrong, keep building fission infrastructure until fusion is ready. I think when it is, it won't be long before they scale it down to local power plants.
My point, though, is that the idea that fusion is superior to fission rests on assumptions that are not true. If we run out of lithium, we run out of fusion. And we still have the radioactive waste problem.
As an alternate theory, this could be comms.
Fusion = Different DS factions coming together.
Climate crisis = the sheep are waking up and the "climate" is changing. Houston, we have a problem...
Yeah, Fusion seems like the "bivalent" jabs.
Could be an agreement was reached on what to do with the Bankman.
This reminds me of a show I saw a long time back, part of a series called Phenomenon: The Lost Archives. I found that the series is available free online.
Episode six is very interesting.
Phenomenon: The Lost Archives Episode 6: https://www.thearchive.tv/shows/phenomenon-lost-archives/season/1/episode/6
Cold Fusion?
https://mathscholar.org/2019/03/lenr-energy-science-or-pseudoscience/
Its still being studied and good progress is being made.
As for ITER? Not worth bothering about, its just a McGuffin
I think this is comms based on someone on /pol/ pointing out they’ve been reporting this “breakthrough” almost verbatim almost annually since 2014. They skipped 2019 for some reason.
One time was even the same lab. With the same output reading.
So it’s either ”scientists” trying to get more funding, or it’s signaling something.
One of the “breakthroughs” was reported on August 17, 2021. This was three days after the big Haiti earthquake. We were in the middle of the Afghanistan withdrawal disaster. Two days later, on August 19, 2021, that weird guy parked his truck in front of the Library of Congress and ~threatened to blow it up.~
Another was June 13, 2018. This time it was the exact same lab also claiming double yield like this announcement.
Guess what happened on June 12? From Wikipedia
u/#q1450
u/#q1451
The next day, June 14, 2018, look what happened.
Ah yes.... DJT posted a view of Singapore from a tall building back then, some cleverclogs triangulated which building it was.
It was Orchard Towers, the infamous four floors of whores.
Maybe there is a unlimited energy solution around the corner that is ALSO decentralized--like hydrogen engines--something regular people could have around the house. So they'll push a centralized alternative--something they could control--as a compromise.
👆👆👆Underrated theory
The author's name has to be a joke or a pseudonym.
"Meanwhile, over the seven decades scientists have spent working to replicate the same process that powers the sun,"... except the sun isn't a free energy fusion device...
And there is nothing "free" about terrestrial fusion energy either. It costs a lot of time and money to produce essentially nothing.
The "Meanwhile" quotation is fatuous. We've replicated the fusion process since the detonation of the first thermonuclear weapon. Getting power from it is a different problem.
What’s going on with them? DESPERATELY TRYING TO TAKE BACK THE NARRATIVE. Looky here, we have energy for you! Please come back!
These tokamak style reactors have a lot of problems still. They do not scale well.
Heat waste system extraction using memory metals are one viable side alternative.
Low power electrolysis using HF, as another anon mentioned.
Classic nuke reactors are ok, thorium salt has the best long term option of the families as the material is cheap, available and the waste is not very toxic.
According to reports, which are not yet backed up by published research...
This might be the white hats guys.
Once prices start to inflate. You cannot drop them with a click of a button.
In order to drop oil prices now. A viable competitor would need to emerge.
Could this be it?
This is a grift, why would you speak to the Financial Times and not Scientific American? When will your investment pay off you may ask, well "however long it takes", just keep investing, we are on the brink! They are fishing for investors who want to get in on the ground floor.
Wait what crisis ? Am I missing something. Are they talking about the ebb and flow of temperature since the history of the planet ?
Yes, but all of a sudden, that ebb and flow has supposedly dramatically sped up leaving many think that the flow is going to destroy them like in the next few days.
Because, you know, idiots. And the MSM.
I saw one idiot on Reddit screaming about a highway project here in NJ. They were widening the highway to alleviate traffic. Said Reddiot started screaming "WHY ARE WE WIDENING HIGHWAYS? BAN CARS. HELLO, THERE'S A CLIMATE CRISIS GOING ON." As if it were going to happen tomorrow.
Watch out for a "lab leak". Mask up.
Listen everyone, their is not enough lithium and cobalt in the WORLD, to make batteries for your battery driven car/truck. I repeat IN THE WORLD. To power your fantasy of an all electric world. Even your fing windmills use thousands of gallons of oil. All while killing thousands of birds and filling entire landfills with toxic windmill blades. Long story short. While awesome the only reason they are talking about this is to Distract you. Unlimited energy destroys their control. They will never give you your freedom or happiness You will have to demand it
Article clip.........“citing three people with knowledge of the experiment’s preliminary results.”
Plane crash incoming......
It’s cover, a distraction.
I am guessing slight of hand, Look over here, not at what Twitter is dumping!
So they have solved a made up crisis. Sounds about right.
These clowns messing around with this stuff are bound to blow up the planet long before "climate change" will do anything.
The vax shot of energy
Running a GAS GENERATOR ON WATER:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcR6XpF9JH8
It works until the battery runs down.
Portal to hell obviously.