You’re telling me that Humanity is able to understand what goes on at the heart of stars, and is on the brink of being able to harness that power (“Soon TM”), and the best we can come up with is a big tea kettle? I’m not buying it.
There’s got to be a better way of capturing all that energy - like, solar panels but for other types of radiation? Or if that’s not possible because wavelengths or something , maybe make something glow and use normal panels? Or like, can’t we take a particle accelerator and flip it around and pull energy from the particles that go zooming?
I’m sure there’s a reason why all of that is hard, but surely not impossible?
We’ve gotten really, really good at extracting energy from steam, steam turbines can be incredibly efficient, I can’t recall exact figures but Wikipedia cites 90% as the top end.
True, but that’s just one part of the process, and it’s not comparing to the initial energy in the source fuel.
If nothing else, there’s an absolute efficiency limit from Carnot’s theorem, but in reality it’s much lower, even for the most modern and efficient gas plants, the limit seems to be ~60%, and for nuclear or coal, it’s even lower at around 30-40%.
The majority of the energy released will be heat, relatively few high energy photons are released so ‘solar’ isn’t a viable option and your suggestion about a particle accelerator just doesn’t make any sense.
Boiling water is literally the best way to capture the energy released.
I’m not disputing what the current gold standard is, I’m looking for theoretical possibilities.
When you say heat, in fusion, most of the energy would be a neutron moving really fast, right? It sucks that it doesn’t have a charge because then it would be really easy, but there’s options here if we get creative.
Maybe there’s some sort of material yet to be invented that can be slapped by a neutron and “deformed” in a way that causes electrons to shift/make holes and exploit that to make electricity.
And that free neutron will eventually decay into a proton and electron, and those have a charge, so if we keep them going around a loop until that happens perhaps we could harness it.
You identified the solution. Use a solar panel and let the reactor in the center of our system do the work. Add a batteries to make up for being blocked. Today, solar AND batteries are cheaper than fission reactors. Fusion has promise, but why over invest in a maybe when you can use the technology we have today? Is it because It has an end game where you don’t infinity extract resources? Who would want that?
I believe there is a generator with functional prototypes in the US and China that uses supercritical CO2? I mean its basically a steam engine but using a different medium and potentially even more efficient.
Make alternator spin. Is only way.
I refuse to believe this.
You’re telling me that Humanity is able to understand what goes on at the heart of stars, and is on the brink of being able to harness that power (“Soon TM”), and the best we can come up with is a big tea kettle? I’m not buying it.
There’s got to be a better way of capturing all that energy - like, solar panels but for other types of radiation? Or if that’s not possible because wavelengths or something , maybe make something glow and use normal panels? Or like, can’t we take a particle accelerator and flip it around and pull energy from the particles that go zooming?
I’m sure there’s a reason why all of that is hard, but surely not impossible?
We’ve gotten really, really good at extracting energy from steam, steam turbines can be incredibly efficient, I can’t recall exact figures but Wikipedia cites 90% as the top end.
True, but that’s just one part of the process, and it’s not comparing to the initial energy in the source fuel.
If nothing else, there’s an absolute efficiency limit from Carnot’s theorem, but in reality it’s much lower, even for the most modern and efficient gas plants, the limit seems to be ~60%, and for nuclear or coal, it’s even lower at around 30-40%.
The majority of the energy released will be heat, relatively few high energy photons are released so ‘solar’ isn’t a viable option and your suggestion about a particle accelerator just doesn’t make any sense.
Boiling water is literally the best way to capture the energy released.
And to be clear, it’s harnessing the energy released by state changes in materials.
Water is just the most abundant, cleanest, and most effective material to state change and harness.
I’m not disputing what the current gold standard is, I’m looking for theoretical possibilities.
When you say heat, in fusion, most of the energy would be a neutron moving really fast, right? It sucks that it doesn’t have a charge because then it would be really easy, but there’s options here if we get creative.
Maybe there’s some sort of material yet to be invented that can be slapped by a neutron and “deformed” in a way that causes electrons to shift/make holes and exploit that to make electricity.
And that free neutron will eventually decay into a proton and electron, and those have a charge, so if we keep them going around a loop until that happens perhaps we could harness it.
You identified the solution. Use a solar panel and let the reactor in the center of our system do the work. Add a batteries to make up for being blocked. Today, solar AND batteries are cheaper than fission reactors. Fusion has promise, but why over invest in a maybe when you can use the technology we have today? Is it because It has an end game where you don’t infinity extract resources? Who would want that?
I believe there is a generator with functional prototypes in the US and China that uses supercritical CO2? I mean its basically a steam engine but using a different medium and potentially even more efficient.