The End of Coal Fired Powerplants

For the last several years I've been predicting that nuclear fusion, long established as being the means of providing all of the world's electrical power needs, would be commericially viable within about 20 years. Apparently I was wrong as Lockheed-Martin made a stunning announcement.

http://news.yahoo.com/lockheed-says-makes-breakthrough-fusion-energy-project-123840986--finance.html

From both an energy and environmental perspective this is outstanding news. This is the "magic buller" that can end the atmospheric pollution, environmental, and ecological problems with burning coal for power production not just in the US but around the world.

This also makes all arguments by Republicans against the EPA's decision to require US coal fired powerplants to reduce atmospheric emissions by roughly 30% in the next 15 years (which they could do in five years based upon current technology) completely moot. We have a far superior form of producing electricity without any atmospheric pollution becoming available on the relatively near horizon that will render all of the coal fired powerplants obsolete.

Effectively we should be looking at planning the shutdown of the coal fired powerplants and the ending of coal mining operations because we won't be needing the energy from coal in the future. In as few as 10 years the burning of coal for electrical production effectively becomes unnecessary.

 

Since it's still in the planning stage, now's the perfect time to crush it. Just watch.

 

Well as long as the technology is safe and affordable I see no problem with using it. Questions what do we do with the 7 million workers worldwide that rely on coal jobs? almost 200k are in the USA and that does not include any industries that rely on coal jobs as well. Not against this as I said but we should be prepared for the consequences as well.

 

This came as a shock to me. The last time I researched fusion extensively, which was a couple of years ago, they were still talking about building giant billion dollar reactors and hoping to get a sustainable power source demonstrated in Europe. Then I see this trending on my Facebook page and immediately post it on our Conservation Clubs page.

If true and its not being hyped this changes everything. We won't have to rely on coal as mentioned nor will we have to bother with the almost as equally obnoxious wind and solar power generation. They said it could fit on the back of a truck (I am assuming they mean a semi-rig flatbed and not a F150) which means you could have a decentralized power grid with each community having their own power grid so no longer will we have need of those giant long distance transmission towers as well.

I kind of feel like I wasted all this time pushing Thorium, but I will gladly deal with that if this is true.

 

The market will determine that. At this point though if I am a coal worker in their 20s or 30s, I would seriously consider going back to school for another trade or a degree. It won't happen for sometime anyways as it will take upwards of a decade even after they are made to get enough to them scattered around the country. That leaves 20 years yet AND we will still be selling coal overseas and most countries won't be able to afford these right away.

 

As the article notes they're initially working on a "100-megawatt reactor measuring seven feet by 10 feet" so it would either fit on a small box truck chassis or easily on a trailer that an F-150 could pull.

A 100 MW powerplant is not a "large" generator but will power over 40,000 and up to perhaps 100,000 homes in the US (depending on region) and we use a lot of electricity compared to most other nations. As noted these can basically be "community" or "small-town" size power plants so that long transmission lines become unnecessary. Of course local power grids would exist to provide back-up during down-times for any specific power plant.

 

If 100 MW can be generated from a 7'x11' powerplant the cost isn't going to be prohibitive. How much money can it really cost to build something that small in size? It certainly won't be nearly as expensive as building a coal fired power plant. We can also note that the 100 MW capacity is excellent for less developed countries that use far less energy per household than the US. I would also assume that targeted loans from the IMF would help encourage poor third world countries to purchase these powerplants to reduce CO2 levels.

With a prototype in a year, viable commercial design in five years, and full production in ten years this is not very far down the road from being a reality not just for the US but for the world.

 

Wonderful news....but, of note:

"Lockheed said it had shown it could complete a design, build and test it in as little as a year, which should produce an operational reactor in 10 years."

 

While new jobs will be created they won't match the number of jobs lost in the coal industry nor will coal workers be qualified for the new jobs. We can't, of course, base our economy on "make-work" programs as technology changes the employment landscape. We can assume robotics will play a big roll in building these nuclear fusion power plants as they are relatively small and fabrication and assembly will use the latest technology.

This addresses a much greater problem though as AI (artificial intelligence) and technology are making human labor obsolete. Some have, based upon the exponential expansion of AI, predicted that most human labor will be replaced by computers and robots within the next 50 years leaving almost everyone without a job.

 

It would be a great news for the world and a possible boost for all the economies. But frankly speaking I wouldn't rely on Lockheed Martin's release. The work on thermonuclear synthesis is done by international scientists for years and decades. And so far there is no technology among scientists. It is quite doubtful that a private company would have more success with the same project.

 

This program is being conducted by the Skunk Works that always meets and exceeds expectations. I used to work at the Skunk Works and I know the abilities of that division of Lockeed-Martin. Not only will they meet the 10-year projection they'll have it done well well ahead of schedule. The historical accomplishments of the Skunk Works are legendary.

 

I truly hope you are correct...the implications for virtually every sector of our economy and quality of life are incredible. Not to mention worldwide impacts for everyone eventually...within 50 yrs. poverty and hunger could be decimated.

 

As I mentioned the Skunk Works is a unique environment using a very small group of the finest engineers and technicians in the world. Unlike the international efforts that have focused on a large fusion reactor the Skunk Works focused on a very small nuclear fusion reactor which is much easier to produce. Of course the Skunk Works also had the advantage of knowing every development in nuclear fusion over the past decades.

As I mentioned I've worked at the Skunk Works and it accomplishs things that no other high tech manufacturing enterprise can accomplish. It really is that good and I'd bet money on it without any hesitation because I know that what they can accomplish literally boggles the mind.

 

Great news to be sure but it still could be 20 years before it is actually commercially viable. Predictions of construction completion have a knack of being over estimated, especially when it is a technology idea that has not been built yet.

 

Sounds interesting but they're still predicting 10 years out in the best case scenario, I wouldn't get too excited yet.

 

Adopting new technologies always leaves casualties; where are all the typewriter mechanics and VHS engineers? However this isn't going to happen overnight and natural wastage-retirement etc., will account for many of the jobs lost. The rest will have to find alternative employment or retrain.

 

I live in the Coal Capital of the U.S. and let me state for the record....just the damage it does to people and the environment is enough to cry a sigh of relief when it goes away.

 

No more pneumoconiosis has to be a good thing.

 

Not when it comes to the Skunk Works that has traditionally turned scientific theories into reality very expeditiously. It's exactly what the Skunk Works has been doing since it was created as a division of Lockheed over 1/2 century ago. It's what they do and they have the best engineers as well as the finest technicians that money can hire. The Skunk Works is generally 10-20 years ahead of everyone else when it comes to techological achievements. The only real limitation they have is on the number of projects they can take on because there are very few engineers and technicians that even qualify to work at the Skunk Works.

 

I agree someplace like the skunk works can turn out something because they are not encumbered by traditional methods and regulation but when it comes to commercial viability, the hurdles are not yet known and construction of commercially available product is more what I am talking about. Also, don't underestimate the ability of the government to throw a wrench into this process.

 

If the Skunk Works is projecting having a working model in a year then the techological issues are resolved and all that's left is the physical construction of the reactor. With over 1 million times the electrical production capability compared to a coal fired powerplant of the same size it is already commercially viable even before building the first commericial models. Deuterium-tritium does not create any harmful radiation for humans as the few atoms that become radioactive have an extremely short half-life often measured in naoseconds and they are all contained. A fusion reactor cannot "melt-down" like a fission reactor and they are absolutely safe to operate.

There is no logical foundation for our government to ever oppose nuclear fusion reactors using deuterium-tritium as a fuel source and our government has actually been providing limited funding to the ITAR (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) project in France. Of course ITAR is building a megalithic reactor that won't even be complete for another 7 or 8 years under a general government philosophy of "bigger is better" which isn't a logical argument. Unemcumbered by illogical government agendas the Skunk Works cut to the chase in addressing a small and economical solution to the problem of nuclear fusion.

 

I don't think they are going to be able to just churn these things out like iPhones at least not for awhile. There are 20,000 municipalities just in the US. As with any highly specialized piece of equipment there will only be a handful of companies able to build it. Lockheed's patents will also be an issue as I don't see them selling their technology to just anyone especially the Chinese who are infamous for copying other people's work and then making (*)(*)(*)(*)ty knock offs.

And finally there is the wonderful red tape of bureaucracy. There is no way that something new like this isn't going to have to be tested and approved by the NRC or whomever would be responsible for this. A few prototypes will be buried out in the desert somewhere for a few years to make sure that they don't leak or malfunction in someway. While I am sure Lockheed will test their stuff at various stages the government likes to put their big boy pants on and check boxes on reports.

 

Really the difference between a public announcement (with no technical details) about having fusion in 10 years is the kind of thing we've heard a million times. I'm in my early 30's and have probably heard this exact claim at least 15 times from major companies and corporations...

 

There will certainly be regulator issues but remember that these nuclear fusion generators don't produce any harmful radiation. A "leak" doesn't produce a threat to anyone and any malfunction results in the automatic ending of the nuclear reaction. Also remember that we're only talking about a gram or so of fuel for one of these generators to work for a very long time.. Nuclear fusion is very safe and there are no environmental or potential worker safety issues to overcome.

I can also assure you from personal experience that the Skunk Works is very good at dealing with the US government. It's been doing it for decades.

I highly anticipate that most of the assembly work will be done by robotics with little human labor involved in producing these generators. They will be produced on an assembly line like automobiles and the rate of production could easily be very high.

Yes, the Chinese can be problematic because they do steal technology but hopefully the State Dept can deal with the Chinese. While technically Lockheed could lose revenue because of technology theft by China it's going to have more orders than it could probably produce at least for several years anyway.

 

This is very exciting to me. What do you think the prospects for single-home sized units (or even RV or car sized ones) are? Will it scale down? How far? A fusion flashlight?