Fusion power a step closer to being feasible

[Syzygy23]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24429621

I LOVE LIVING IN THE FUTURE!

Now all we have left on the "Officially the future" checklist are mechs, robot butlers, flying cars, jetpacks, standard infantry armed with laser/plasma guns instead of caveman-bullet-spewers, viable FTL that doesn't involve any stupid time dilation where everyone I know and love ages and dies during a round trip to Betelgeuse IV, and Brain-in-robot-body technology.

Doesn't this just make EVERYONE happy?

 

[ShipofFools]

A single, manly tear rolls from my eye every time fusion power is getting nearer.

Maybe there won't be an energy crisis in the future...

 

[Anachronism]

That is pretty awesome. If they can get it working on a large scale, it would be absolutely incredible. Just have to hope we don't need Doc Ock to get it working properly, because we all know how that turned out.

Now all we have left on the "Officially the future" checklist are mechs, robot butlers, flying cars, jetpacks, standard infantry armed with laser/plasma guns instead of caveman-bullet-spewers, viable FTL that doesn't involve any stupid time dilation where everyone I know and love ages and dies during a round trip to Betelgeuse IV, and Brain-in-robot-body technology.

You forgot powered exoskeletons. Still, going by your list we have a long way to go yet. Although fusion energy probably would make a lot of those things more viable.

 

[Realitycrash]

SWEET! Now we might get warp-capable ships!
..On a more depressing note, if this advances fast enough, the odds are that Big Oil simply buries it, like they have with inventions in the past.

 

[KarmaTheAlligator]

Finally, some good news! Maybe there is hope for the future.

 

[Esotera]

It's still several decades off unfortunately - all they did was demonstrate that you could get more power out than what you put in. We will need alternative sources of energy far sooner than fusion can become commercially viable (if it ever can). It's also likely to cost a lot in the early stages, and there's no guarantee it'll get cheaper as technology improves.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

It's still several decades off unfortunately - all they did was demonstrate that you could get more power out than what you put in. We will need alternative sources of energy far sooner than fusion can become commercially viable (if it ever can). It's also likely to cost a lot in the early stages, and there's no guarantee it'll get cheaper as technology improves.

We've kind of got that in natural gas for the next few decades, that's why the UK are so desperate to get fracking for it: Oil will only go up in price as it gets harder and harder to extract, but the natural gas reserves that can be got from fracking are relatively cheap and plentiful.

(of course this is bad news for the environment, but honestly we're already pretty much screwed in that department anyway)

 

[Heronblade]

SWEET! Now we might get warp-capable ships!
..On a more depressing note, if this advances fast enough, the odds are that Big Oil simply buries it, like they have with inventions in the past.

There are things that fusion power simply cannot replace, at least for the next hundred years or so, there will always be a need for high energy hydrocarbons. Also, if fusion becomes a profitable investment for energy production, the smart move for big oil will be to just expand their repertoire, not bury it.

P.S. The only currently working model for a warp engine requires far more energy than any fusion generator can provide. In fact, in order to travel across the milky way galaxy, a ship using such a drive would burn through approximately the equivalent of all of the energy contained within all of the matter in the observable universe. Just so you have a better sense of scale, the blast unleashed by the bomb dropped on Hiroshima converted the equivalent of about 12 grams of matter to energy

 

[Thaluikhain]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH LASER GUNS! PLASMA?!

HAHAHAHAH!!!!

Give me my Fusion powered slugthrower... here, have a bullet to the face at c fractional...

Strictly speaking, existing weapons fire bullets at a fractional amount of c.

Fusion power isn't going to, in of itself, improve that, the power source is irrelevant if you mean a railgun or something.

And then you have to deal with a nasty amount of recoil.

Having said that, yeah, plasma and laser guns are very silly. Maybe you could get one to work, but a more conventional bullet spewing contraption is going to be better. I have no doubt a device that hurls frogs at people could be made into an effective weapon, but an assault rifle is still going to be much better in more or less every way.

 

[Gorrath]

There are things that fusion power simply cannot replace, at least for the next hundred years or so, there will always be a need for high energy hydrocarbons. Also, if fusion becomes a profitable investment for energy production, the smart move for big oil will be to just expand their repertoire, not bury it.

P.S. The only currently working model for a warp engine requires far more energy than any fusion generator can provide. In fact, in order to travel across the milky way galaxy, a ship using such a drive would burn through approximately the equivalent of all of the energy contained within all of the matter in the observable universe. Just so you have a better sense of scale, the blast unleashed by the bomb dropped on Hiroshima converted the equivalent of about 12 grams of matter to energy

Fusion might be an answer to even more mundane energy needs, depending on how efficient we can make the fusion process. If you have a massive over-production of energy, you can use some of that energy to draw carbon from the atmosphere and create fuel from it, reversing the atmospheric effect of carbon emissions while also creating a 'new' supply of hydrocarbon fuel. This process will take much more energy than it produces, but if you have an over-abundant source of energy to begin with, you're all set. This would allow cars and such to continue to run on hydrocarbon fuels while making the whole process carbon neutral at the same time. Of course this is all predicated on that hypothesized, super efficient fusion process.

 

[Gorrath]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH LASER GUNS! PLASMA?!

HAHAHAHAH!!!!

Give me my Fusion powered slugthrower... here, have a bullet to the face at c fractional...

Strictly speaking, existing weapons fire bullets at a fractional amount of c.

Fusion power isn't going to, in of itself, improve that, the power source is irrelevant if you mean a railgun or something.

And then you have to deal with a nasty amount of recoil.

Having said that, yeah, plasma and laser guns are very silly. Maybe you could get one to work, but a more conventional bullet spewing contraption is going to be better. I have no doubt a device that hurls frogs at people could be made into an effective weapon, but an assault rifle is still going to be much better in more or less every way.

You might be interested in the laser weapons now being tested aboard US naval vessels. With what they've seen so far, they can bring down small craft in the air and on the sea while using energy that would cost less than 1 USD. The primary benefit of laser based weapons is really just cost.

EDIT: I should add that it is also a great benefit with regard to logistics, since the laser weapons are powered by the ship's nuclear power plant and thus you aren't hauling around tons of ammo as well.

 

[Thaluikhain]

You might be interested in the laser weapons now being tested aboard US naval vessels. With what they've seen so far, they can bring down small craft in the air and on the sea while using energy that would cost less than 1 USD. The primary benefit of laser based weapons is really just cost.

Oh sure, mounted on a warship, possibly nuclear powered. The OP mentions them being standard infantry weapons, though I guess you could carry an extension cord along.

P.S. The only currently working model for a warp engine requires far more energy than any fusion generator can provide. In fact, in order to travel across the milky way galaxy, a ship using such a drive would burn through approximately the equivalent of all of the energy contained within all of the matter in the observable universe. Just so you have a better sense of scale, the blast unleashed by the bomb dropped on Hiroshima converted the equivalent of about 12 grams of matter to energy

Current working model for a warp engine?

Oh, and Hiroshima was less than one gram. The yield was about 16 kilotons, and 1 gram equates to a bit more than 21.5 kilotons. Nagasaki was a little bit more than one gram.

(As an aside, you know when Star Trek has replicators and transporters that work by transmuting things into energy, and/or then transmuting them into matter? It is vitally important to get them serviced regularly, 1 gram of conversion going wrong and you've got no ship left)

 

[GamemasterAnthony]

*came in expecting DBZ or Digimon Fusion references*

*sees people talking about things even geekier and more awesome*

*sits down and smiles at this conversation*

 

[Gorrath]

You might be interested in the laser weapons now being tested aboard US naval vessels. With what they've seen so far, they can bring down small craft in the air and on the sea while using energy that would cost less than 1 USD. The primary benefit of laser based weapons is really just cost.

Oh sure, mounted on a warship, possibly nuclear powered. The OP mentions them being standard infantry weapons, though I guess you could carry an extension cord along.

They do have an infantry energy weapon as well, though this is being designed only to inflict temporary blindness, but I did misinterpret your post, I had thought you meant laser weaponry was not feasible as a weapon in any sense. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[snekadid]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH LASER GUNS! PLASMA?!

HAHAHAHAH!!!!

Give me my Fusion powered slugthrower... here, have a bullet to the face at c fractional...

Strictly speaking, existing weapons fire bullets at a fractional amount of c.

Fusion power isn't going to, in of itself, improve that, the power source is irrelevant if you mean a railgun or something.

And then you have to deal with a nasty amount of recoil.

Having said that, yeah, plasma and laser guns are very silly. Maybe you could get one to work, but a more conventional bullet spewing contraption is going to be better. I have no doubt a device that hurls frogs at people could be made into an effective weapon, but an assault rifle is still going to be much better in more or less every way.

You might be interested in the laser weapons now being tested aboard US naval vessels. With what they've seen so far, they can bring down small craft in the air and on the sea while using energy that would cost less than 1 USD. The primary benefit of laser based weapons is really just cost.

EDIT: I should add that it is also a great benefit with regard to logistics, since the laser weapons are powered by the ship's nuclear power plant and thus you aren't hauling around tons of ammo as well.

I would have pointed out that the far greater benefit of laser weapons is the near instantaneous hit after fire. The one real use for laser weapons would be hitting high speed targets which is possible with lasers when computer guidance is applied. This can be applied mainly to taking down missiles, which is one of the biggest problems in modern warfare(not the shoddy game) because they are really hard to intercept with ballistic weapons even with computer guidance.

That of course makes them nigh useless in the hands of infantry. Plasma is just a wasteful and pointless weapon as explosives work just as well against vehicles and machines and are cheaper, while bullets are more compact and work just fine against squishy humans.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I would have pointed out that the far greater benefit of laser weapons is the near instantaneous hit after fire. The one real use for laser weapons would be hitting high speed targets which is possible with lasers when computer guidance is applied. This can be applied mainly to taking down missiles, which is one of the biggest problems in modern warfare(not the shoddy game) because they are really hard to intercept with ballistic weapons even with computer guidance.

Well...hitting instantly is very useful, yes, though hitting missiles (if you mean ballistic missiles) isn't very difficult. Things that can maneuver are more of a problem.

That of course makes them nigh useless in the hands of infantry. Plasma is just a wasteful and pointless weapon as explosives work just as well against vehicles and machines and are cheaper, while bullets are more compact and work just fine against squishy humans.

You are being much too kind to plasma. It does not work at all, and will not in the forseeable future, at least not in the way it is depicted, as some glowy ball of something that flies straight at a target and burns it when it hits. Exactly how plasma doesn't work.

 

[Gorrath]

I would have pointed out that the far greater benefit of laser weapons is the near instantaneous hit after fire. The one real use for laser weapons would be hitting high speed targets which is possible with lasers when computer guidance is applied. This can be applied mainly to taking down missiles, which is one of the biggest problems in modern warfare(not the shoddy game) because they are really hard to intercept with ballistic weapons even with computer guidance.

That of course makes them nigh useless in the hands of infantry. Plasma is just a wasteful and pointless weapon as explosives work just as well against vehicles and machines and are cheaper, while bullets are more compact and work just fine against squishy humans.

That is certainly a big benefit of course, though the current phalanx system is pretty adept at using ballistic projectiles to shoot down missiles and aircraft. The biggest problem with phalanx, and its land-based counterpart c-ram, is that it shoots 4,500 rounds per minute and those rounds are not inexpensive. The time to target for phalanx is pretty low too, given that the muzzle velocity of the rounds is 1,100 m/s. I don't recall off hand what the maximum range is so I don't know how well it stacks up against the new laser based weapons in that regard.

 

[snekadid]

I would have pointed out that the far greater benefit of laser weapons is the near instantaneous hit after fire. The one real use for laser weapons would be hitting high speed targets which is possible with lasers when computer guidance is applied. This can be applied mainly to taking down missiles, which is one of the biggest problems in modern warfare(not the shoddy game) because they are really hard to intercept with ballistic weapons even with computer guidance.

Well...hitting instantly is very useful, yes, though hitting missiles (if you mean ballistic missiles) isn't very difficult. Things that can maneuver are more of a problem.

Tell that to the militarys of the world, missile interception is still a massive gamble every time even for world powers like the USA.

The problem being that if you don't already have a craft in the air and near the vicinity that can shoot it down when the alert sounds, you're gonna have to rely on the AA which is a crap shoot because as I said, shooting down missiles with ballistics is difficult even with computer guidance. A near instantaneous weapon like a laser could greatly reduce the odds of missing the missile.