• Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      96
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      They boiled 10 kettles of water with this energy.

      Ultimately, if everything is optimized, its probably only limited by the number of kettles available.

      • 0110010001100010@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Could we somehow capture the steam from all the kettles to turn a turbine? I see zero problems with this plan.

          • ThePancake@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I know this is probably tongue in cheek, but I genuinely thought the same until recently. There’s a company called Helion which is developing a really cool fusion process that doesn’t use steam as an energy transfer mechanism. Obviously it has its own set of drawbacks and roadblocks, but still really cool tech in the making.

            Here’s the video I saw going into detail on it if anyone’s interested:

            https://youtu.be/_bDXXWQxK38?si=iBpHfDxhRgHHRtN2

            • 4am@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              9 months ago

              I hope this actually pans out, but I am suspicious that it won’t. Mostly just because of they way they have this air of tech bro hype around them; hopefully I just learned about it through poor sources because it would be freakin cool if it worked

            • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              Oh yeah I’ve seen that one.

              Honestly I don’t have high hopes, they believe their next model will solve the shortcomings they face with it’s size, but that could reveal a whole other set of issues.

    • krellor@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      9 months ago

      Since everyone else gave a joke answer I’ll take a stab in the dark and say the upper limits would be the availability of hydrogen and physical limitations in transforming heat output into electricity. The hydrogen is the most common element but 96% of it is currently produced from fossil fuels. After that, it would be how well you can scale up turbines to efficiently convert heat to electricity.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        The hydrogen is the most common element but 96% of it is currently produced from fossil fuels.

        I’m not expert either, but I don’t think most of that 96% of hydrogen is a candidate for the fusion we’re doing today. NIF (like the OP article) uses Deuterium (Hydrogen with 1 neutron) and Tritium (Hydrogen with 2 neutrons) is what is squashed together to produce energy. The more neutrons make the fusion “easier” to produce energy.

        Naturally occurring Deuterium isn’t crazy hard to find. Its in sea water, but you have to go through A LOT of sea water to pull out the rare atoms of Deuterium. Naturally occurring Tritium is much more rare with having to find very small amounts in ground water.

        Humanity is also able to make Deuterium and Tritium as byproducts of nuclear fission.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          For reference and because I was curious enough to look for it, Deuterium is 0.0156% of the hydrogen in ocean water.

      • Zeth0s@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        If you have fusion energy, creating H2 from water via electrolysis is a joke. You can do it at home. It only requires a lot of energy. But with energy from fusion it will become super easy, barely an inconvenient

          • Zeth0s@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            It is muuuuuuuuuuch lower. The actual energy is incomparable, like an ant vs superman level of energy.

            The energy in practice it’ll be extracted from H2 has to be much higher for the process to have a practical use

        • Sphks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          In the news, 5.000 years later : “Scientists warned that our mass extraction of hydrogen may produce global salinization, but no one wants to reduce its energy consumption.”

      • MonkderZweite@feddit.ch
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Electrolysis has up to 70% efficiency and needs sulfuric acid. The superheated thing has about 90% efficiency.

    • Zarxrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s nearly limitless because they used nearly 200 lasers. If they built a new one with the full 200 lasers, who knows what could happen.

    • meco03211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      You have to sign up for a two year initial contract. After that there’s tons of limits.