Posted on 01/30/2024 2:50:48 PM PST by ckilmer
The interview with David Kirtley, founder of Helion Energy, dives into the development of fusion energy as a sustainable and efficient future power source with Helion's approach focusing on rapid iteration, efficiency in direct electricity generation, and addressing the challenges and regulatory aspects of commercializing fusion energy.
Key Takeaways
They make H3 by fusing two deuterium atoms that come from water.
They convert the fusion directly into electricity. No steam needed.
Their first power plant already is contracted with microsoft to produce power in 2028.
They believe they will be able to produce electricity and make it available to the grid for .01@kwh--when they can mass produce these power plants. They're already planning for that.
Or are they converting investor dollars into science junkets, hotel stays, and free meals?
If you can’t sell it, then it’ll go the way of Tesla?
“If you can’t sell it, then it’ll go the way of Tesla?”
Two million units per year?
“If you can’t sell it, then it’ll go the way of Tesla?”
Two million units per year?
I’m guessing that they are about 25 years away ...
Nicolas Tesla, not the car.
Yeah, that’s the traditional view.
but it appears there’s new stuff going on fusion r&d
Or are they converting investor dollars into science junkets, hotel stays, and free meals?
/////
the big thing is that they have shifted from public money to private money.
private money is not patient money like federal money.
I figured you’d come for this to comment without listening to anything, thereby using you expertise to its greatest effect.
“I figured you’d come for this to comment without listening to anything, thereby using you expertise to its greatest effect.”
Are you the same one that was only listening to this guy last year and ignoring the truth of reality last year?
“the big thing is that they have shifted from public money to private money.
private money is not patient money like federal money.”
You ignore that a lot of these private donors know they are throwing their money away!
“but it appears there’s new stuff going on fusion r&d”
Not new, just bigger than the cold fusion scams.
A penny per kwh. In the 50s they promised us that nuclear energy would produce electricity “too cheap to meter.” Guess we’ll see.
Canadian CANDU reactors can produce power at the busbars for very close to one cent per kWh. Their fuel costs are in the fractions of a cent per kWh. With life extensions to 60 or 80 years with midlife pressure tube replacements they do go sub one cent per kWh at the busbars. Nuclear power is cheap it is the distribution, wholesale,retail marketing that turns one cent into 15 or more. Texas has four nukes they are PWR plants they also have sub one cent per kWh fuel costs and 1.6 cent O&M plus capex recovery costs for just over two cents to the busbars. The distribution operator puts a 5.9 cent distribution fee per kWh having generated zero kWh themselves. Then the retail power provider who job is to buy wholesale power and market it up to retail sales puts another 5 to 8 cents then the state says they we want sales taxes and so does the city and county too. By the time those electrons get to your plug it’s ten times the production busbar price.
If the USA was serous about energy independence for the long term as in centuries we would build out nukes in the hundreds of 4 to 8 reactor pad sites. Those would crank out 1.5 cent at the busbars all day every day for 80 years plus. Sit right next to them synthetic fuel plants that take water salty or fresh it.doesn’t matter which and turn it into hydrogen gas then feed that hot hydrogen directly to oil refinery sized catalyst reactors where you add in nitrogen from the air to make ammonia NH3. Large diesels run very well on ammonia with zero particulate emissions and zero NOx or SOx with SCR cats behind them. If you are using salt water from the ocean it’s loaded with CO2 gas 150 times as much as air. The electrolysis process yields H2 gas and all the CO2 as well with no energy penalty since the gibbs energy is lower for CO2 vs H2 you get the carbon for “free” the Navy is using this very process to make jetfuel from seawater. They will have on the new nukes carriers the ability to make jetfuel at sea using reactor power. The Navy has already flown jets on this synthetic fuel it’s denser than normal jet fuel as a bonus more MJ per liter is always good for aircraft. Nukes to synfuels is the long-term answer for resource depletion with a ever expanding human population numbers. No need to give up high density liquid fuels just make them from thin air and seawater using cheap high capacity factor nuclear power.
And they only need a few billion in tax dollars to make it happen
In other news, a cure for cancer is “just around the corner”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.