How is it possible that you made a video about Tokamak fusion without mentioning ITER? The biggest experiment in fusion the world has ever seen? HL-2M is only a feeder program into that larger international project, of which China is a member.
Nuclear fusion research is worldwide. Every country which join ITER project exchange their studies and papers each other. So the opinion that ONLY China has advance technology in nuclear fusion is not true, I think.
@@User-nu6km The people who eat the fish as well then the flowers on their graves then the animals who eat the flowers then the people who eat the animals, but don't worry, GE made a killing on these outdated reactors for their stockholders.
@@marczhu7473 china is part of it. And ITER is an experiment, never intended to be money effective. ITER will never really produce electricity. Just like China, the French company will need to build two more tokamaks before being able to produce sellable electricity.
iter... too slow. china has no time to wait. and we should remember the GLONASS navigation system, china was one of those founders, but china has been refused to share technologies, western countries just want money from china.
Why call it an artificial sun instead of a fusion reactor? Isn’t there also talk of a Chinese satellite with a giant mirror to reflect sunlight down to light up the night? The title confuses the two.
the mirror is just a stunt by chengdu gov, it just on paper. Such scale of operation just to replace 1 city's lighting and is not a national level project is a dead giveaway for a pr stunt. Also that project is called artificial moon.
Tokamaks are always called artificial sun, because they engineer the same process (H+H=He ). There are many other kinds of fusion reactors (mentioned in other comments ). Artificial sun is much less ambiguous about the kind of fusion.
In this video: After more than half a century of our most intelligent scientists working on fusion, we still put more energy in than we get out of it. Nobody has proven that they can do otherwise. Conclusion: Fusion will solve all our energy needs in the future... (?!)
I'm skeptical that there'd be enough helium made from many fusion reactors to supply demand. Nuclear doesn't use a lot of material, that's it's big selling point.
@@BigCroca nuclear fission is mot an issue in itself. All research topic produce a good amount of toxic wastes. Nuclear fission is an issue when 500+ plants over the world produce massive amounts of wastes we don't know what to do with. Fusion is pretty much similar. As long as it remains a research thing, for fur an curiosity, wastes it produces are negligible. When 10+ plants will be in commercial use, and In industrial size production, they will produce massive amount of helium, to the point the helium percentage in breathable air will significantly rise, reducing the O2 ratio. It's not an urgent topic, but it's a critical issue we must solve before going industrial scale production. 10 years ago, we were looking for ways to store helium any way we could, but the gas is inert by essence, and refuses to merge with any heavy other material, or react In any way. The low cost of falcon 9 is a serious solution to ship he away from earth. Maybe toward the side of the planet that is away from the sun, so that solar wind can push them away from earth when they are released. ( israelit probe have reached the moon (technically crashed, but that's not the point ), launched by falcon 9, so with appropriate gravity assistance, F9 is sufficient to exit attractions of earth ).
Just go thorium and be happy, fusion is still 10 years away as it has been for the last 70 years. Also thorium with a mouton salt reactor is not going to melt down.
@@debadityasaha1684 the point of the show was to illustrate that the Soviet's weren't honest and open about the failings and short falls of the things they did, that these lies made Chernobyl happen. I can't help feel you've missed that point.
We met the scientists that were involved with the international Fusion project near Monique in northern Provence. They said they hoped to have a Fusion Power station up and running by 2025 at the latest. They told us that the heat generated would destroy nuclear waste. For a country the size of France, they figured they could produce all the power the country needs for everything, with 4 or maybe 5. This is the first time I have seen anything produced about this form of energy in the media.
I wonder what the price per MW/h is for the power station construction, and its yearly maintenance cost. since I expect this will limit the scalability of the tech once its available.
For now, in ITER, the cost of maintenance is around several hundred thousand euros every 3 days of work to renew all the Carbon plates on the walls. Atm it's the most unsolved issue.
I have to join the other commenters on calling you out on this video. The biggest thing in the short time will probably be MSRs and thorium based nuclear fission, while fusion is still at embrional stage at best. Also i feel like talking about China's experiment and not ITER as a whole is quite partial.
a few called him ou to be fair - I suggest that China is more advanced in this area as well as solar electric panels solar- electric cars and batteries environmental priorities to the deregulating polluting American capitalistic system of money over people in the Trump demonstration - American is going by the wayside to the illusion of ever a MAGA
You sound young. I'm not, I've heard this kind of talk about fusion literally for decades. It's always "just around the corner" or new group from whatever country have "a new technique" or my personal favorite "In five years" Fusión is a pipe dream, in time you'll see.
How did China manage to beat Germany researching about nuclear fusion? Last time I checked Germany was doing well with a twisted toroid called Stellarator similar to the Tokamak.
Fission at all is now safest source of energy, solar and wind are much more dangerous than current fission plant in daths per PWh of energy produced. Also we know three nuclera power disasters and only one killed people Chernobyl because qute stupid and paranoid Soviet goverment. In video is bit missinformation about considering fission as not safe energy source.
Batteries are not the problem, they are the solution to the biggest flaw of renewable energy. If you mean the shortage, don't worry, Tesla is working on it. Tesla just acquired Maxwell Technologies, which will soon allow it to get rid of Panasonic and make it's batteries fully in-house. That will likely speed up the growth of production volume. Also Elon recently said they might get into the mining business too, to ensure adequate supply of raw materials. With the Boring Company that's a very logical and expected step.
András Bíró batteries are not the solution. The issue is storage. To build billions of batteries is unreadable etc ok tech is getting better, but it still won’t fill this gap. Pumped storage is prob the best, but there is also a tech called pressure tech, where air is compressed and forced through a turbine etc. We get it batteries are great but they are not the short term or long term solution. They are part of it, not the whole solution.
nice video, I have something to add though. - Nuclear fission is safe enough. After Fukushima safety requirements shot up insanely. I do trust existing nuclear power plants. New generation of fission reactors is on the way too, see Terapower and Thorium molten salt reactors. - as others said, ITER is the biggest nuclear fusion test in construction. Please, make a video about it, it is beyond awesome. - At the end you showed many pics of many different fusion approaches. Do not mix them up please, show the differences, they are interesting. - Fusion does not bring electricity to poor countries, unfortunately. Fusion power plants will probably need to be large scale in the beginning and will be extremely expensive for quite some time. Huge power plant can not reach faraway locations because of power losses in transmission. My vision is fusion for large cities and agglomerations, 4th gen of nuclear reactors + pumped hydro storage for smaller, but stil dense enough areas and solar + wind + batteries for rural, developing and remote areas. (Hydro and geothermal when applicable). Of course, it will always be energy mix, I only stated the dominant energy source.
Nuclear fission is expensive, dangerous and dirty (radioactive). Fusion is safe, clean and abundant, thing is we still haven't achieved a working and practical fusion energy.
@@rap3208 I agree with nuclear fission being expensive. It is radioactive of course, but not dangerous in comparison to other energy sources by any metric. We have developed systems to deal with security and radioactivity decades ago and new designs are even better. Nuclear power plants are so secure you can literally slam an airplane right into the reactor and no radioactive material will be released. Fusion is superior, but: - as you said, we dont have it working commercially yet - depending on the type of fusion there will still be some radioactivity (only aneutronic fusion is completely non-radioactive) - general rule is that bigger machine is more efficient than small one. With fusion we are chasing all the efficiency we can get, therefore first power plants will likely be very expensive, complex and really big. That is why I said what I said in the original comment.
@@martintirpak1033 Please read more and acquire more knowledge and wisdom. What you said is embarrassing. "Bigger machine is more efficient than small machine"? Do you know that "Raspberry Pi Zero" is thousands, million times more powerful than the mainframes of yesteryears? I don't want to talk to you.
Not saying we shouldn't try to achieve cleaner energy. But Fossil fuels aren't depleting fast. Huge discoveries being made every day, and we have a huge surplus. Just wanted to throw that out there
This video is not up to your usually high standards. 1. ITER is by far the most advanced nuclear fusion project today (China is a part of that). 2. Calling fusion plants "artificial suns", while being somewhat accurate, is very simplistic and childish. 3. Nuclear plants are the SAFEST means of power generation we have today.
@@masaitube While "artificial sun" works well to explain in very simple terms how fusion reactors work, no one calls them that on a regular basis. They're called fusion reactors. Here are some stats on the safety of most power production methods. Remember that a large majority of deaths caused by nuclear is because of Chernobyl, which is entirely to blame on the lunacy of the Soviet Union and doesn't have much to do with the safety of nuclear. Energy Source Mortality Rates; Deaths/yr/TWh Coal - world average, 161 Coal - China, 278 Coal - USA, 15 Oil - 36 Natural Gas - 4 Biofuel/Biomass - 12 Peat - 12 Hydro - world, 1.4 Solar/rooftop - 0.44-0.83 Wind - 0.15 Nuclear - 0.04 Source: www.energycentral.com/c/ec/deaths-nuclear-energy-compared-other-causes
@Takhe opi Yes. Nuclear fusion. That doesn't make fusion reactors actual artificial suns. They just use the same process. "Artificial sun" is a shallow and poor description for fusion reactors, though it is semi-accurate and OK for very basic explanations.
It uses a tokamak. It's also called a magnetic bottle. Strong toroidal magnetic field is used confine the hot plasma is a very narrow region at centre of the cavity which is in. vacuum, so the hot plasma can't radiate any heat to surrounding material
Nothing. Emptyness. The room has no air. And the elements of reaction are held by/in a magnetic donut. And the intense heat produces high level of radiations and infrared that do kill the surface of walls. At the moment it is precisely the issue. All surfaces of walls need to be changed every 3 days what requires to switch experiment down. The expiremnt itself is stable. But they have to turn it off after 48h to change wall plates before ... Radiations and infra red go killing concrete. Also, if a critical failure ever let the magnetic donut die, the matter would fall and melt the floor. It's the only case that can make a tokamak completely dead beyond repair.
Well, whoever achieves a functioning large scale fusion power plant effectively saves mankind and the planet in one go. Within a few decades we can normalise greenhouse gases and stop using coal, uranium and other polluting or risky sources. So bravo and respect to China and any scientists and engineers ANYWHERE that can crack this problem in the next 20 years....because thats about as much time as we have left to do it.
As the saying goes, I have seen this movie. It did not end well for the humans. As for perfectly safe, isn’t that what they told us before 3 mile Island???
ITER estimated completion date is 2015. It will operate at 150 million °C. While the Chinese HL-2M is set to open in late 2019. operating at 200 million °C. following this, another test reactor is to be built in China by 2021
i love the optimism about fusion, but i'm from the eighties and well erm.. fusion was 50 years away then.. and it still is now, i'd bet on LFTR's Love you're channel, but this was definitely you're best vid
Some of the commercial startups are predicting 2030 for first fusion energy supplied to the grid. Speed is related to budget though and China has huge resources so if it spends enough it may overtake them.
I have to agree with you, it's like saying cars aren't safe because 1 type of car is dangerous. There are LFTR reactors, that use thorium, those are pretty safe, you can build these today. Fission is an awesome technology but it is always 30 years away!
G Dols Yes. Fission is an awsome technology that is here. And actually the current generation of it (Gen3) is way safer than cole and oil and even solar and wind. Generation 4 with thorium is a couple of years away, but not decades as fusion still is.
As with others, I think the next "revolution" is more likely to be next gen fission, something that could be on line within the next 5 to 10 years rather than 30 to 50 years down the road. All of our fission plants are loosely based on submarine plants and use water for cooling, molten salt doesn't explode like the current plants do. One could take all of the benefits you list for fusion and equally apply them to next gen fission... which is almost here now. BTW, China is also working on MSR. I am also waiting for fusion power though, fission is great, but in the long run, fusion has the potential to be greater.
What I don't get.. Is why are they not using fissile materials as excellarents. Just trace amounts. Just enough to boost activity and enhance the possibility of surplus fusion.
@@billboyd4051 You also have to invest energy into getting them to plasma and beyond. If some of that energy doesn't have to come from the instruments themselves. Then our end of energy investment can be a bit lower. It doesn't even have to be in the plasmas itself. The shell will be radioactive eventually anyway.. give it a radioactive inner layer. Heck, the plasma itself can be contained in an inner lacework donut that is both magnetic and radioactive. A layer of separation.
@@giovannip8600 You can only lose mass by nuclear fusion if the element is under iron and by fission if the element is over iron. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_binding_energy#/media/File:Binding_energy_curve_-_common_isotopes.svg
Nuclear Fusion is very safe.. and is in fact our safest form of energy based on mortality rates per watts generated. Yes, even safer than solar and wind. And that is counting in Chernobyl death counts. Fukushima had just a single death from radiation. ref: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents And both of these accidents where from Gen2 reactors. Gen3s and newer are considerably safer. In fact the failure point in the Fukushima accident was not with the nuclear reactor itself. As that survived both the earthquake and tsunami. The problem that happened was that after the earthquake they decided to shut down the reactors as a safety precaution. But nuclear reactors can't be instantly flipped off. And will still be very hot and needing constant cooling. So for that they used a diesel generator to pump water to cool the reactor. Problem was.. they didn't have any other redundancy than that diesel generator.. And when they tsunami hit.. the generator got flooded.. and stopped pumping water.. which eventually led to the accident.. If they had simply had more redundancy, which was a known safety issue they never addressed, then the Fukushima accident would have never happened. But interesting to note.. that there was just a single death from radiation with Fukushima. Considerably more died from the Tsunami and during evacuation of the plant. And there hasn't been a noticeable increase in cancer counts either.. So much of the disaster with Fukushima has been massively over-exaggerated by the media. Of-course the economic cost of cleaning up the Fukishima mess is a considerably expensive economic loss. But then again.. we shouldn't be using Gen2 reactors anyways. They are stupidly outdated.. And Gen3s are much safer and MUCH more efficient.
I wish you talked more about the technology and engineering behind the tokamak and really explain why fusion is taking so long or why it's always "20 years away".
It's taking so long because of the immense temperatures required for fusion. At 150 million degrees C every material we know will melt well before even reaching the temperature. In order to contain the reaction and temperature the reactor requires a very powerful elctro-magnetic field which in turn requires al of of energy. We managed to obtain fusion decades ago, but because of the immense energy consumption, we always had a negative energy coefficient. until we manage to make that coefficient positive (more energy comes out than goes in) we cannot use this technology. ITER developed in France by many nations and the one developed in China in 2021 aim to finally have that coefficient positive, thus proving that fusion can be truly useful. The good news is that since the discovery of fusion, we are getting closer and closer to the goal and the trend is accelerating.
@@primusroI did a research project on this I know what's going on. What you just told me is known to most people who has some knowledge about fusion. I was talking about the actual physics or engineering problem scientists are trying to overcome. For example if we had high temperature superconducting magnets some of the engineering problems would be solved and when we will discover a method of creating them is not known to anyone.
No important information here. Yes, the advantages of fusion WILL BE familiar, IF AND WHEN it is developed to a useful state. The one word I didn't hear in this whole video is: BREAKEVEN. The first commercial power plant is expected in…2050?? That, right there, tells you there is HUGE UNCERTAINTY about this whole activity.
We still have to see why the catastrophe in Fukushima happened: An Earthquake. Japan is just located ON the ring of fire. An entirely inadequate place to even build fission reactors. Why it happened in Tchernobyl formerly: uncontrolled operations, tampering, misoperation, false instructions, undertaking risky tests without sufficient knowledge about the consequences and how the reactor would react in such a situation. None of the western reactors ever had a fatal accident and always were inside their expected parameters. Because of existing strict and controlled and maintained safety standards And: reactors should only be built in areas where NO earthquakes are expected at all or at least very unlikely. Which is not the case in japan. wrong place,, wrong location, false planning, seemingly being not told the whole truth about their geological lability.
@@samuelgomola9097 It is similarly difficult to get H3 as the He3 - one needs a fission reactor excess neutrons and Li6 to produce H3, He3 is then direct daughter product of the H3 decay - and so the D-T fusion is similar way utopia as the He3 fusion.
You can use fusion reactor to make plutonium because it releases neutrons. So it can be used to make nuclear bombs if the tokamak is cloaked in uranium. So there is misinformation here.
@@erichaynes7502 ITER is just another ISS wasting the money. There are too many countries to take part in this project and pretty hard to balance every party interest. This project is already delayed several times and still constructing.
Surely we need these plants to run full speed full time not just a few seconds what stops that now? What makes it likely to be achieved in the next few years?
At 0:26 "Moreover, one of the side-products of burning fossil fuels -- carbon dioxide -- is also the chief culprit that's accelerating global warming, making our weather more unpredictable, and causing extreme weather conditions such as tornados and hurricanes." Hmmm? Tell you what...let's apply Hitchen's Razor to that claim, to wit, "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." Or, in Latin, "quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur."
call it fusion reactor, not Artificial Sun the reactor need to be hotter 10 times than the sun core, and the sun run on quantum fusion relies on massive size more than temperature, they are not the same
Well, the core of the sun is not the peak temperature of it by far, and a fusion reactors does not have a core. So both are quite confusing factoids to bring into a comparison anyway.
It's orders of magnitude harder. The Sun doesn't fuse hydrogen directly either, it's a complicated multi-step process. And more importantly, extremely slow. That's why stars burn for billions of years, instead of exploding a millisecond after ignition.
@@giovannip8600 i would like to help explaining, but I don't know how to phrase it. So in short, andras had a very good shortcut : if it was trivial, the sun would react in a few seconds. Fact it lasts million years is the proof it's very complicated. Other stellar events may take seconds. Like merging two black holes. Merging two neutron stars. The core event of a supernova ... The death of a super massive star. Hydrogen fusion is slow. And thus ... Much harder when you have gravity against you. The whole aim of a tokamak is to produce a magnetic donut to fight gravity. Without gravity, we would build a much larger room and we would have much less issues. A larger room would make it easier to handle the heat.
Doesnt fusion reaction create a huge magnetic field? I'm gonna propose that if they start this fusion reaction it could disrupt earth's natural magnetic field changing the weather, moving the pole positions, and possibly killing us all. With that being said I think they should try something else..anyways just a thought considering we revolve around the sun..
Yeah, I agree with your comment. This video really does feel as though the Chinese Government was involved. Not mentioning any other scientific advancements, and trying to make China look as though it is the sole inventor of the universe. Trying to butter themselves up to look good. *Cough* *Cough* ThEy ArE StEaLiNg oThEr IdEa'S.
Good question. Given the steps he's taken in other fields already, it would seem only natural for him to set up research around this too. The fusion code has not been completely cracked yet, though.
This is what the head of a country should plan to do (infrastructure) and not like the clown who brags about their military capablities which is only good for war and not good for the people of a country
While energy is certainly one of the biggest problems facing virtually everyone, everywhere, it is not THE problem. Indeed all of humanity's problems combined- including energy- are rendered irrelevant by the problem of overpopulation. Having BILLIONS of human beings is utter insanity. We need to globally agree and switch to one child per couple for a few centuries. Alas, even though this problem is literally staring us all in the face the vast majority of people don't see it. If ever the proverbial "Can't see the forest for the trees" saying held true, it is here. Of course many profit from it too. Especially those in power.
Go back to Tesla. The earth is a toroidal field. Free energy can be found by going back to Tesla. No ruination of our world just piggy backing on what is already there.??????
Just the minor problem of getting more energy output than you have to put into it, as you said. What is the science that would make that real? Fusion is always 30 years out has been a constant for more than 50 years now.
The science is solid, fusion bombs demonstrate it very nicely. In theory it would be possible to use bombs to generate power, we just have to contain the explosions in large underground cavities. The main issue is of course the huge proliferation risk. For more traditional fusion reactors the hey is to hold the plasma long enough and hot enough. The hotter plasma makes way much more power and therefore can be self-sustaining, and obviously the longer it burns the more energy it generates. The biggest energy cost is starting the reactor up, once it's running it doesn't take much to keep it running.
@@andrasbiro3007 I agree the theory is sound. But it will take a lot of dedication to get there. Like landing men on the moon and bring them back 50 years ago. Not because it is easy...
How is it possible that you made a video about Tokamak fusion without mentioning ITER? The biggest experiment in fusion the world has ever seen?
HL-2M is only a feeder program into that larger international project, of which China is a member.
I know, not mentioning ITER is a huge flaw in this video.
Exactly
Ikr I was waiting for it until the last seconds...
Maybe he could do a add-on video like CGP grey does.
coz the title
Nuclear fusion research is worldwide. Every country which join ITER project exchange their studies and papers each other. So the opinion that ONLY China has advance technology in nuclear fusion is not true, I think.
2829かろっさ Yes, you are right about that. But the IETR project is so slow and underfunded, so America, China, Europe, India etc. has their own project.
2829かろっさ
But you didn't provide any fact that which country is advancing than China, etc Japanese fusion reactor's achievement.
Fukushima is still leaking deadly radiation onto the ocean poisoning billions of fishes
@@User-nu6km The people who eat the fish as well then the flowers on their graves then the animals who eat the flowers then the people who eat the animals, but don't worry, GE made a killing on these outdated reactors for their stockholders.
How "Leading the world" can be interpreted as "ONLY in the world" ?
I'm sorry Lei, this video does not meet your normal high quality videos. How does ITER get ignored?
just read the title
China war shut out from ITER. So China fusion tech is 100% Chinese .
Deuterium and Tritium are labeled backward in the image. Hope that doesn't throw folks too much! :)
you've saved me billions of Yuan, thank you
Whole Nuts And Donuts Saw that too, hope they got the rest of facts correct LOL's.
sooo a whole 8 minute video talking about Fusion and didn't even mention ITER?
The French reactor cost too much and still unfinished.
@@marczhu7473 china is part of it. And ITER is an experiment, never intended to be money effective. ITER will never really produce electricity. Just like China, the French company will need to build two more tokamaks before being able to produce sellable electricity.
iter... too slow. china has no time to wait. and we should remember the GLONASS navigation system, china was one of those founders, but china has been refused to share technologies, western countries just want money from china.
...only 8minutes get over it China leads hear
alx I thought Glonass is Russian.
Why call it an artificial sun instead of a fusion reactor? Isn’t there also talk of a Chinese satellite with a giant mirror to reflect sunlight down to light up the night? The title confuses the two.
the mirror is just a stunt by chengdu gov, it just on paper. Such scale of operation just to replace 1 city's lighting and is not a national level project is a dead giveaway for a pr stunt. Also that project is called artificial moon.
Tokamaks are always called artificial sun, because they engineer the same process (H+H=He ). There are many other kinds of fusion reactors (mentioned in other comments ). Artificial sun is much less ambiguous about the kind of fusion.
I’m pleased to see such elegant typography in the video!
This is something that I was missing on other educational channels on UA-cam. Subscribed!
❤
In this video: After more than half a century of our most intelligent scientists working on fusion, we still put more energy in than we get out of it. Nobody has proven that they can do otherwise. Conclusion: Fusion will solve all our energy needs in the future... (?!)
Amazing. Nuclear fusion will allow us to *reach 10% of light speed in interstellar travel!*
U mean the explosion?
Uh mazin'
our body can't handle that speed...
@@sonnyy4303 we dont need to have to be on the craft we could use the craft to collect data from planets bwfore not reacable to man do
@@sonnyy4303 If its gradual we can
If Helium is the only byproduct from nuclear fusion, then that means we've solved the helium shortage problem
Use falcon 9 to ship it away from the planet ^^
I'm skeptical that there'd be enough helium made from many fusion reactors to supply demand. Nuclear doesn't use a lot of material, that's it's big selling point.
exactly
@@Benoit-Pierre why would you ship the helium away from the planet
@@BigCroca nuclear fission is mot an issue in itself. All research topic produce a good amount of toxic wastes. Nuclear fission is an issue when 500+ plants over the world produce massive amounts of wastes we don't know what to do with.
Fusion is pretty much similar. As long as it remains a research thing, for fur an curiosity, wastes it produces are negligible. When 10+ plants will be in commercial use, and In industrial size production, they will produce massive amount of helium, to the point the helium percentage in breathable air will significantly rise, reducing the O2 ratio. It's not an urgent topic, but it's a critical issue we must solve before going industrial scale production.
10 years ago, we were looking for ways to store helium any way we could, but the gas is inert by essence, and refuses to merge with any heavy other material, or react In any way. The low cost of falcon 9 is a serious solution to ship he away from earth. Maybe toward the side of the planet that is away from the sun, so that solar wind can push them away from earth when they are released. ( israelit probe have reached the moon (technically crashed, but that's not the point ), launched by falcon 9, so with appropriate gravity assistance, F9 is sufficient to exit attractions of earth ).
Just go thorium and be happy, fusion is still 10 years away as it has been for the last 70 years.
Also thorium with a mouton salt reactor is not going to melt down.
Fusion is for space travel.
go wind geo and solar more reliable and cna be decentralized to remote locations
It is impossible for an RBMK reactor to explode! They are super safe.
come on, fusion is different! They are heating plasma to several million degrees, what could possibly go wrong?
@@thulyblu5486 first go watch chernobyl
Debaditya Saha what a tv show does not make you an expert lol
@@debadityasaha1684 the point of the show was to illustrate that the Soviet's weren't honest and open about the failings and short falls of the things they did, that these lies made Chernobyl happen. I can't help feel you've missed that point.
It wasn't a TV show...but more like an educational documentary... And theoretically fusion cannot go rogue without feeding as like fission...I think
2:23 nice, wrong atoms xD
Deuterium and tritium lol.
We met the scientists that were involved with the international Fusion project near Monique in northern Provence. They said they hoped to have a Fusion Power station up and running by 2025 at the latest.
They told us that the heat generated would destroy nuclear waste.
For a country the size of France, they figured they could produce all the power the country needs for everything, with 4 or maybe 5.
This is the first time I have seen anything produced about this form of energy in the media.
I wonder what the price per MW/h is for the power station construction, and its yearly maintenance cost. since I expect this will limit the scalability of the tech once its available.
For now, in ITER, the cost of maintenance is around several hundred thousand euros every 3 days of work to renew all the Carbon plates on the walls. Atm it's the most unsolved issue.
good point the sun is the most reliable through decentralized solar panels
I have to join the other commenters on calling you out on this video.
The biggest thing in the short time will probably be MSRs and thorium based nuclear fission, while fusion is still at embrional stage at best.
Also i feel like talking about China's experiment and not ITER as a whole is quite partial.
True EAST and other Chinese experiments are part of ITER. Chinese getting lots of Know How from ITER.
a few called him ou to be fair - I suggest that China is more advanced in this area as well as solar electric panels solar- electric cars and batteries environmental priorities to the deregulating polluting American capitalistic system of money over people in the Trump demonstration - American is going by the wayside to the illusion of ever a MAGA
I think the atoms of deuterium and tritium are mislabeled at 2:21....
Yeah they are!
Ummmmm... a few flaws in this one, for sure.
the basics are true
Lei: China is leading the race
ITER: am i a joke to you?
Hexa sorry, it is a joke , it’s never going to produce electricity
I also say that thorium reactors are a much safer form of nuclear fission power.
You sound young. I'm not, I've heard this kind of talk about fusion literally for decades. It's always "just around the corner" or new group from whatever country have "a new technique" or my personal favorite "In five years" Fusión is a pipe dream, in time you'll see.
Same.
How did China manage to beat Germany researching about nuclear fusion? Last time I checked Germany was doing well with a twisted toroid called Stellarator similar to the Tokamak.
protest in germany
@@xihangyang They were protesting about traditional fision nuclear reactors, nothing to do with this one which really is eco friendly and cleaner.
Fission with thorium is supposed to be safe.
Fission at all is now safest source of energy, solar and wind are much more dangerous than current fission plant in daths per PWh of energy produced. Also we know three nuclera power disasters and only one killed people Chernobyl because qute stupid and paranoid Soviet goverment. In video is bit missinformation about considering fission as not safe energy source.
@@samuelgomola9097 but fission with thorium isnt unsafe like with uranium. ua-cam.com/video/U1lIfFcxVuY/v-deo.html
Robots don't care
This video makes me intoxicated
Could you please look at the secret renewable energy problem ( batteries ) and what we are doing to get rid of this issue ( pumped storage etc )
Pumped storage is only in areas where you have a hydoelectric dam. They use excess energy at night to pump water back up into the lake.
No he can't. No one can do that. Pumped storage is shit
Batteries are not the problem, they are the solution to the biggest flaw of renewable energy. If you mean the shortage, don't worry, Tesla is working on it. Tesla just acquired Maxwell Technologies, which will soon allow it to get rid of Panasonic and make it's batteries fully in-house. That will likely speed up the growth of production volume. Also Elon recently said they might get into the mining business too, to ensure adequate supply of raw materials. With the Boring Company that's a very logical and expected step.
András Bíró batteries are not the solution. The issue is storage. To build billions of batteries is unreadable etc ok tech is getting better, but it still won’t fill this gap. Pumped storage is prob the best, but there is also a tech called pressure tech, where air is compressed and forced through a turbine etc. We get it batteries are great but they are not the short term or long term solution. They are part of it, not the whole solution.
well we heard about graphene energy storage isnt it ?
nice video, I have something to add though.
- Nuclear fission is safe enough. After Fukushima safety requirements shot up insanely. I do trust existing nuclear power plants. New generation of fission reactors is on the way too, see Terapower and Thorium molten salt reactors.
- as others said, ITER is the biggest nuclear fusion test in construction. Please, make a video about it, it is beyond awesome.
- At the end you showed many pics of many different fusion approaches. Do not mix them up please, show the differences, they are interesting.
- Fusion does not bring electricity to poor countries, unfortunately. Fusion power plants will probably need to be large scale in the beginning and will be extremely expensive for quite some time. Huge power plant can not reach faraway locations because of power losses in transmission.
My vision is fusion for large cities and agglomerations, 4th gen of nuclear reactors + pumped hydro storage for smaller, but stil dense enough areas and solar + wind + batteries for rural, developing and remote areas. (Hydro and geothermal when applicable). Of course, it will always be energy mix, I only stated the dominant energy source.
insanity -we have the sun infinitely cleanly decentralized to solar panels and costing much less - clue THE SUN
Nuclear fission is expensive, dangerous and dirty (radioactive). Fusion is safe, clean and abundant, thing is we still haven't achieved a working and practical fusion energy.
@@rap3208 I agree with nuclear fission being expensive. It is radioactive of course, but not dangerous in comparison to other energy sources by any metric. We have developed systems to deal with security and radioactivity decades ago and new designs are even better. Nuclear power plants are so secure you can literally slam an airplane right into the reactor and no radioactive material will be released.
Fusion is superior, but:
- as you said, we dont have it working commercially yet
- depending on the type of fusion there will still be some radioactivity (only aneutronic fusion is completely non-radioactive)
- general rule is that bigger machine is more efficient than small one. With fusion we are chasing all the efficiency we can get, therefore first power plants will likely be very expensive, complex and really big. That is why I said what I said in the original comment.
@@martintirpak1033 Please read more and acquire more knowledge and wisdom. What you said is embarrassing. "Bigger machine is more efficient than small machine"? Do you know that "Raspberry Pi Zero" is thousands, million times more powerful than the mainframes of yesteryears? I don't want to talk to you.
Not saying we shouldn't try to achieve cleaner energy. But Fossil fuels aren't depleting fast. Huge discoveries being made every day, and we have a huge surplus. Just wanted to throw that out there
In 2:25 you inverted deuterium and tritium
2103: You can now get AAA fusion batteries. They last you five generations but we cap usability to fifteen minutes.
You need to do a video on ITER and the planned American version of this which was planned like ten years ago.
Nobody cares about race obsessed America.
Fusion and Quantum computing will change the course of human civilization.
Spending money in technology better than we produce weapons
This video is not up to your usually high standards.
1. ITER is by far the most advanced nuclear fusion project today (China is a part of that).
2. Calling fusion plants "artificial suns", while being somewhat accurate, is very simplistic and childish.
3. Nuclear plants are the SAFEST means of power generation we have today.
1.yes 2. nope 3. hell no
@@masaitube While "artificial sun" works well to explain in very simple terms how fusion reactors work, no one calls them that on a regular basis. They're called fusion reactors.
Here are some stats on the safety of most power production methods. Remember that a large majority of deaths caused by nuclear is because of Chernobyl, which is entirely to blame on the lunacy of the Soviet Union and doesn't have much to do with the safety of nuclear.
Energy Source Mortality Rates; Deaths/yr/TWh
Coal - world average, 161
Coal - China, 278
Coal - USA, 15
Oil - 36
Natural Gas - 4
Biofuel/Biomass - 12
Peat - 12
Hydro - world, 1.4
Solar/rooftop - 0.44-0.83
Wind - 0.15
Nuclear - 0.04
Source: www.energycentral.com/c/ec/deaths-nuclear-energy-compared-other-causes
@Takhe opi Yes. Nuclear fusion. That doesn't make fusion reactors actual artificial suns. They just use the same process. "Artificial sun" is a shallow and poor description for fusion reactors, though it is semi-accurate and OK for very basic explanations.
@Takhe opi it's about as stupid as calling a car engine a fireplace because both have fire.
@ 2:45, What material do they use to contain the 100,000,000 Celsius temperature? How doesn't it melt everything in the premises?
It uses a tokamak. It's also called a magnetic bottle. Strong toroidal magnetic field is used confine the hot plasma is a very narrow region at centre of the cavity which is in. vacuum, so the hot plasma can't radiate any heat to surrounding material
Nothing. Emptyness. The room has no air. And the elements of reaction are held by/in a magnetic donut. And the intense heat produces high level of radiations and infrared that do kill the surface of walls. At the moment it is precisely the issue. All surfaces of walls need to be changed every 3 days what requires to switch experiment down. The expiremnt itself is stable. But they have to turn it off after 48h to change wall plates before ... Radiations and infra red go killing concrete.
Also, if a critical failure ever let the magnetic donut die, the matter would fall and melt the floor. It's the only case that can make a tokamak completely dead beyond repair.
was there a chain reaction at Fukushima??? I give this video 3.6 roentgen, not great, not terrible
Glad I'm not the only one who spotted this.
a 2nd artificial sun?
Not required, I power my home and car from a fusion source with zero building and running costs, it is called the Sun!
Except when it is not shining.
EXACTLY - what is all this misdirection to something obvious and certain like the big Pharma creating drugs to make huge profits
No comment on how fission and fusion shouldn't be pronounced the same, if only for the sake of clarity?
if you’re dumb enough to not know the difference, you shouldn’t be here.
Interesting stuff.
Well, whoever achieves a functioning large scale fusion power plant effectively saves mankind and the planet in one go. Within a few decades we can normalise greenhouse gases and stop using coal, uranium and other polluting or risky sources. So bravo and respect to China and any scientists and engineers ANYWHERE that can crack this problem in the next 20 years....because thats about as much time as we have left to do it.
As the saying goes, I have seen this movie. It did not end well for the humans. As for perfectly safe, isn’t that what they told us before 3 mile Island???
ITER estimated completion date is 2015. It will operate at 150 million °C. While the Chinese HL-2M is set to open in late 2019. operating at 200 million °C. following this, another test reactor is to be built in China by 2021
2015? But that was 4 years ago.
@@arshawitoelar7675That's why the Chinese is leading now.
i love the optimism about fusion, but i'm from the eighties and well erm.. fusion was 50 years away then.. and it still is now, i'd bet on LFTR's
Love you're channel, but this was definitely you're best vid
why not bet on both, first we need to get LFTR's running but keep researching fusion and we can switch when everything is ready for nuclear fusion.
@@comradeakimov6183 I don't object to that at all, but fusion seems to be very very hard, nevertheless always do research.. keep pushing boundaries.
200 000 000c why iron do not melt ? what is element do not melt?
One of the channels producing quality contents 👍
Some of the commercial startups are predicting 2030 for first fusion energy supplied to the grid. Speed is related to budget though and China has huge resources so if it spends enough it may overtake them.
You propagate the illusion that fission isn’t safe. I Don’t like that.
I have to agree with you, it's like saying cars aren't safe because 1 type of car is dangerous. There are LFTR reactors, that use thorium, those are pretty safe, you can build these today. Fission is an awesome technology but it is always 30 years away!
It was all the fault of my comrade Dyatlav who ruined nuclear fission for the entire world.
G Dols Yes. Fission is an awsome technology that is here. And actually the current generation of it (Gen3) is way safer than cole and oil and even solar and wind. Generation 4 with thorium is a couple of years away, but not decades as fusion still is.
Comrade Akimov Tell more. What happened?
@@sluggo3slug he made us push the reactor to the limit and i pushed the az5 button.
Nuclear Fusion is 30 years away , they said 30 years ago...
they also said we'd have flying cars and hoverboards. most ETA's should be doubled and taken with a grain of salt.
As with others, I think the next "revolution" is more likely to be next gen fission, something that could be on line within the next 5 to 10 years rather than 30 to 50 years down the road. All of our fission plants are loosely based on submarine plants and use water for cooling, molten salt doesn't explode like the current plants do. One could take all of the benefits you list for fusion and equally apply them to next gen fission... which is almost here now. BTW, China is also working on MSR.
I am also waiting for fusion power though, fission is great, but in the long run, fusion has the potential to be greater.
The Chinese is also working on 4th gen nuclear reactor.
What I don't get..
Is why are they not using fissile materials as excellarents.
Just trace amounts. Just enough to boost activity and enhance the possibility of surplus fusion.
Its more about magnetic confinement and materials that can withstand the temps and transfer the heat.
@@billboyd4051
You also have to invest energy into getting them to plasma and beyond.
If some of that energy doesn't have to come from the instruments themselves. Then our end of energy investment can be a bit lower.
It doesn't even have to be in the plasmas itself.
The shell will be radioactive eventually anyway.. give it a radioactive inner layer.
Heck, the plasma itself can be contained in an inner lacework donut that is both magnetic and radioactive.
A layer of separation.
curious. I'm not sure I've learned anything about China's efforts with nuclear fusion. m
2:00 Mass can only be lost if you want to produce energy.
I'm guessing if it releases energy not necessarily only if you want to
@@giovannip8600 You can only lose mass by nuclear fusion if the element is under iron and by fission if the element is over iron.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_binding_energy#/media/File:Binding_energy_curve_-_common_isotopes.svg
Great video as always!! I'm watching it now! :D
so nuclear fusion powers Dashlane, got it.
Meanwhile, switch to solar and solar charged electric vehicles! #NoBrainer
EXACTLY this is a ways off to sure and clear solar wind and geo
You know iter do you
All parts made in China…
I can't wait!
Nuclear Fusion is very safe.. and is in fact our safest form of energy based on mortality rates per watts generated. Yes, even safer than solar and wind. And that is counting in Chernobyl death counts. Fukushima had just a single death from radiation. ref: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents
And both of these accidents where from Gen2 reactors. Gen3s and newer are considerably safer.
In fact the failure point in the Fukushima accident was not with the nuclear reactor itself. As that survived both the earthquake and tsunami. The problem that happened was that after the earthquake they decided to shut down the reactors as a safety precaution. But nuclear reactors can't be instantly flipped off. And will still be very hot and needing constant cooling.
So for that they used a diesel generator to pump water to cool the reactor. Problem was.. they didn't have any other redundancy than that diesel generator.. And when they tsunami hit.. the generator got flooded.. and stopped pumping water.. which eventually led to the accident.. If they had simply had more redundancy, which was a known safety issue they never addressed, then the Fukushima accident would have never happened.
But interesting to note.. that there was just a single death from radiation with Fukushima. Considerably more died from the Tsunami and during evacuation of the plant. And there hasn't been a noticeable increase in cancer counts either.. So much of the disaster with Fukushima has been massively over-exaggerated by the media.
Of-course the economic cost of cleaning up the Fukishima mess is a considerably expensive economic loss. But then again.. we shouldn't be using Gen2 reactors anyways. They are stupidly outdated.. And Gen3s are much safer and MUCH more efficient.
I wish you talked more about the technology and engineering behind the tokamak and really explain why fusion is taking so long or why it's always "20 years away".
It's taking so long because of the immense temperatures required for fusion. At 150 million degrees C every material we know will melt well before even reaching the temperature. In order to contain the reaction and temperature the reactor requires a very powerful elctro-magnetic field which in turn requires al of of energy. We managed to obtain fusion decades ago, but because of the immense energy consumption, we always had a negative energy coefficient. until we manage to make that coefficient positive (more energy comes out than goes in) we cannot use this technology. ITER developed in France by many nations and the one developed in China in 2021 aim to finally have that coefficient positive, thus proving that fusion can be truly useful. The good news is that since the discovery of fusion, we are getting closer and closer to the goal and the trend is accelerating.
@@primusroI did a research project on this I know what's going on. What you just told me is known to most people who has some knowledge about fusion. I was talking about the actual physics or engineering problem scientists are trying to overcome. For example if we had high temperature superconducting magnets some of the engineering problems would be solved and when we will discover a method of creating them is not known to anyone.
No important information here. Yes, the advantages of fusion WILL BE familiar, IF AND WHEN it is developed to a useful state. The one word I didn't hear in this whole video is: BREAKEVEN.
The first commercial power plant is expected in…2050?? That, right there, tells you there is HUGE UNCERTAINTY about this whole activity.
We still have to see why the catastrophe in Fukushima happened: An Earthquake. Japan is just located ON the ring of fire. An entirely inadequate place to even build fission reactors. Why it happened in Tchernobyl formerly: uncontrolled operations, tampering, misoperation, false instructions, undertaking risky tests without sufficient knowledge about the consequences and how the reactor would react in such a situation. None of the western reactors ever had a fatal accident and always were inside their expected parameters. Because of existing strict and controlled and maintained safety standards And: reactors should only be built in areas where NO earthquakes are expected at all or at least very unlikely. Which is not the case in japan. wrong place,, wrong location, false planning, seemingly being not told the whole truth about their geological lability.
Now all that's needed is a huge donut focusing shield high powered field to manipulate the inner power and outbursts.
I agree that fusion energy would be great, and that`s an understatement, but I think it will remain 20 years away forever.
What's that assumption based off of?
How about the He3 reaction....it gives off electrons
It's much harder to achive and also very difficult to get He3. It should be good source energy for huge lunar bases not here on earth.
@@samuelgomola9097 It is similarly difficult to get H3 as the He3 - one needs a fission reactor excess neutrons and Li6 to produce H3, He3 is then direct daughter product of the H3 decay - and so the D-T fusion is similar way utopia as the He3 fusion.
You can use fusion reactor to make plutonium because it releases neutrons. So it can be used to make nuclear bombs if the tokamak is cloaked in uranium. So there is misinformation here.
Chinese are leading the world 🗺
What about ITER?
@@erichaynes7502 he is a madarsachap he doesn't know about ITER
@@erichaynes7502 ITER is just another ISS wasting the money. There are too many countries to take part in this project and pretty hard to balance every party interest. This project is already delayed several times and still constructing.
This technology belongs to the whole world.
Surely we need these plants to run full speed full time not just a few seconds what stops that now? What makes it likely to be achieved in the next few years?
scientists and engineers are asking that very same question
At 0:26 "Moreover, one of the side-products of burning fossil fuels -- carbon dioxide -- is also the chief culprit that's accelerating global warming, making our weather more unpredictable, and causing extreme weather conditions such as tornados and hurricanes." Hmmm? Tell you what...let's apply Hitchen's Razor to that claim, to wit, "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." Or, in Latin, "quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur."
Finally, Dr. Oc's Dream will Come True.
Great.
Thorium looks promising...
>
call it fusion reactor, not Artificial Sun
the reactor need to be hotter 10 times than the sun core, and the sun run on quantum fusion relies on massive size more than temperature, they are not the same
Well, the core of the sun is not the peak temperature of it by far, and a fusion reactors does not have a core. So both are quite confusing factoids to bring into a comparison anyway.
Several countries are in this effort China is just a small step ahead of all
Why not just plain hydrogen? The sun uses normal hydrogen for fusion.
Why would it not work on earth?
It's orders of magnitude harder. The Sun doesn't fuse hydrogen directly either, it's a complicated multi-step process. And more importantly, extremely slow. That's why stars burn for billions of years, instead of exploding a millisecond after ignition.
@@andrasbiro3007 thank you for answering. It makes sense I guess
@@giovannip8600 i would like to help explaining, but I don't know how to phrase it. So in short, andras had a very good shortcut : if it was trivial, the sun would react in a few seconds. Fact it lasts million years is the proof it's very complicated.
Other stellar events may take seconds. Like merging two black holes. Merging two neutron stars. The core event of a supernova ... The death of a super massive star.
Hydrogen fusion is slow.
And thus ... Much harder when you have gravity against you. The whole aim of a tokamak is to produce a magnetic donut to fight gravity. Without gravity, we would build a much larger room and we would have much less issues. A larger room would make it easier to handle the heat.
@@Benoit-Pierre thank you for the short explanation :)
Doesnt fusion reaction create a huge magnetic field? I'm gonna propose that if they start this fusion reaction it could disrupt earth's natural magnetic field changing the weather, moving the pole positions, and possibly killing us all. With that being said I think they should try something else..anyways just a thought considering we revolve around the sun..
Also fuck nuclear power
not great not terrible
**Sponsored by the Chinese Government**
So what are you going to do about it … heh … lol
@@prioris55555 I'm gonna collect me some of that internet money. They haz enough. I want some too.
Yeah, I agree with your comment. This video really does feel as though the Chinese Government was involved. Not mentioning any other scientific advancements, and trying to make China look as though it is the sole inventor of the universe. Trying to butter themselves up to look good. *Cough* *Cough* ThEy ArE StEaLiNg oThEr IdEa'S.
Why does he not mention anything other than China's attempt? He is missing a lot of major research.
Settle down champ. You're gonna spill your juice box.
Tommy, read the title. Why would he mention USA is not doing anything?
Is there any way we could get Elon Musk to start building a fusion reactor?
Musk probably already has one.
dude Elon musk have limitation as well .
Good question. Given the steps he's taken in other fields already, it would seem only natural for him to set up research around this too. The fusion code has not been completely cracked yet, though.
It does look like Elon is fully invested in harnessing solar power tho. Let him concentrate on that just in case this doesn't pan out.
Unless it's a fusion reactor that can increase a teslas's autonomy then no...
Unfortunately it all seem to good to be ture .. Making something hotter than sun wont end well.
ITER
hopefully I'll live to 2050 to wittiness this.
What kind of temperature sensor that can record 1000000 degree Celsius
No direct sensor, but remote measurement through radiation intensity calculation.
What happened to dense plasma focus fusion? Did it go the same way as cold fusion?
This is what the head of a country should plan to do (infrastructure) and not like the clown who brags about their military capablities which is only good for war and not good for the people of a country
What's the other 4
WE UTILIZE FILTHY TECH WITH DIRE AND DOLEFUL CONSEQUENCES
Isn't it Goku's space ship gravity training room?
So this Sun will replace the oil and they might burn the world and melt the Antartica
after fukushima nuclear fission wasnt (idk the exact wording) deemed save... uhh yea Chernobyl... definitely made it very popular
not even mentioning things like hanford, which is the reason why I argue rushing fission is a bad idea lol.
Can u make video on thorium reactor .🇮🇳🇮🇳
The best immediate protection of the environment would be to burn all bomb materials instead of fossil fuels.
If you mean nuke the USA, I am all for it.
While energy is certainly one of the biggest problems facing virtually everyone, everywhere, it is not THE problem. Indeed all of humanity's problems combined- including energy- are rendered irrelevant by the problem of overpopulation. Having BILLIONS of human beings is utter insanity. We need to globally agree and switch to one child per couple for a few centuries. Alas, even though this problem is literally staring us all in the face the vast majority of people don't see it. If ever the proverbial "Can't see the forest for the trees" saying held true, it is here. Of course many profit from it too. Especially those in power.
right on time, although the time line is a bit out, think it will be shorter, a lot shorter
No weapons can be created from fusion? We had a fusion bomb a few years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki was bombed
China has now the reactor on run for hours and about 150000000 °C = unlimited Energy
At the rate that things are evolving, China risks being cut off from Western technology. Hence, the need to achieve technological independence.
Go back to Tesla. The earth is a toroidal field. Free energy can be found by going back to Tesla. No ruination of our world just piggy backing on what is already there.??????
"30 years in future" - just like 70 years ago
How can founded this artificial sun
Just the minor problem of getting more energy output than you have to put into it, as you said. What is the science that would make that real? Fusion is always 30 years out has been a constant for more than 50 years now.
The science is solid, fusion bombs demonstrate it very nicely. In theory it would be possible to use bombs to generate power, we just have to contain the explosions in large underground cavities. The main issue is of course the huge proliferation risk.
For more traditional fusion reactors the hey is to hold the plasma long enough and hot enough. The hotter plasma makes way much more power and therefore can be self-sustaining, and obviously the longer it burns the more energy it generates. The biggest energy cost is starting the reactor up, once it's running it doesn't take much to keep it running.
@@andrasbiro3007 I agree the theory is sound. But it will take a lot of dedication to get there. Like landing men on the moon and bring them back 50 years ago. Not because it is easy...