[Galoredk]

This is an invention that could change civilization as we know it: A compact fusion reactor developed by Skunk Works, the stealth experimental technology division of Lockheed Martin. It's the size of a jet engine and it can power airplanes, spaceships, and cities. Skunk Works claims it will be operative in 10 years.

Aviation Week had exclusive access to their secret laboratories and talked to Dr. Thomas McGuire, the leader of Skunk Work's Revolutionary Technology division. And revolutionary it is, indeed: Instead of using the same design that everyone else is using—the Soviet-derived tokamak, a torus in which magnetic fields confine the fusion reaction with a huge energy cost and thus little energy production capabilities—Skunk Works' Compact Fusion Reactor has a radically different approach to anything people have tried before. Here are the two of them for comparison:...

Read the whole story here:

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/lockheed-martins-new-fusion-reactor-design-can-change-h-1646578094


Maybe it's time to buy some Lockheed Martin shares?

[mikema63]

Interesting.

[Rei Murasame]

Fantastic. Imagine being able to just generate sorties with electric planes and not having to worry about how and when to mid-air refuel them?

[mikema63]

The implications of scalelable fusion reactors as described by the aeronautics article are in general quite fantastic.

We'll see how it develops.

[JohnRawls]

Fusion reactors have great promise IF they build them. Would be a revolutionary change like the combustion engine, because they are relatively more safe than anything else (Even gas and Hydro) and produce almost 0 damage to the environment (Unless you consider the fuel burned that transforms into particles as damage). By the ammount it can generate though, we should have plenty of fuel or if efficiency is really high, then unlimited ammount of fuel.

If its build its efficiency coefficient will be really important. I doubt it will be as high as it can be theoretically, that is usually the case with any energy generating devices.

[mikema63]

then unlimited ammount of fuel

That's actually not true and one of the bigger problems we would face in future, tritium and deuterium fuel is simply not that common and (obviously) is permanently consumed to for helium. We could replace them with He-3 but we would have to operate lunar mining operations.

[JohnRawls]

As i said, it really deppends on efficiency.

[Typhoon]

I am quite sceptical but hope to be proven wrong.

Sounds great, right? Compact fusion reactors of this type would solve the world's energy needs at a stroke, slash carbon emissions, and ensure reliable, clean power anywhere in the world with some easy-to-obtain fuel: hydrogen. But experts are skeptical, not just about the technology but about the manner in which it is being promoted.

"I think it's very overplayed; they are being very cagey about divulging details," Professor Edward Morse from UC Berkeley's School of Nuclear Engineering in California told The Register. "An isolated group working in skunkworks is great at developing stealth aircraft, but it doesn't fit for this kind of research."

Prof Morse said that, judging from what limited information is out there, the reactor looks very like the small devices he makes for plasma physics experiments. While the new reactor design may emit neutrons, it may not generate the kinds of temperatures Lockheed is claiming could be possible.

These kinds of claims have been made before he pointed out. Back in the 1950s the US spent a lot of time and money at Los Alamos National Laboratory building the Perhapsatron to test out the Z-pinch theory of fusion generation, which eventually proved fruitless.

"The search for fusion has been long and painful and a lot of people embarrassed about it," Prof Morse said.

The professor also pointed out a curious part of the Lockheed announcement: the frequent mention of the search for outside investors. If the technology is such a game changer, why isn't moneybags Lockheed prepared to put its own money behind it?

"Lockheed Martin had revenues of $45bn last year, and profits of $2.9bn, so why are they seeking external funding, he asked. "That's like Barack Obama asking me for a loan."

A spokesman for General Atomics, a defense contractor that has focused on fusion and fission research for decades, said Lockheed's idea was raising eyebrows because this was the first the contractor had heard of it – and GA has been working with the US Department of Energy for years on fusion research.

General Atomics' fusion experts were unreachable as they are in Russia at the moment attending the 25th Fusion Energy Conference (FEC 2014) in St Petersburg, which would have been a logical place for Lockheed to present their idea.

It's very rare in the scientific field for a revolutionary leap forward of the nature Lockheed is claiming. It's not impossible, but the scientific community will need to see a lot more evidence before the compact fusion reactor is taken seriously.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/10/16 ... ed_fusion/

[quetzalcoatl]

We have been disappointed so many times by the ever-receding mirage of fusion power, that no gives such stories much credence. Perhaps we may end up fueling the Singularity with pedal-powered generators in our dens.

[Rilzik]

It would be great and all and it's something we need but, how many people in the energy industry would lose jobs worldwide? 100 million? 50 million? I don't know, but over a decade or two it would be pretty massive shake up of the world economy. It would destroy entire countries.

[Drlee]

Oh goody. I can use as much free energy as I want when I am 80!

[Beal]

About time. I want my Mr. Fusion.



...not to mention flying cars and hoverboards.

[Galoredk]

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/142464853/hendo-hoverboards-worlds-first-real-hoverboard

Here you go!

[Capitalist]

If you read the article closer Lockheed Martin expect the prototype to be built within 5 years, followed by a fully operational model 5 years after that. So if neither the prototype or fully operational model are built within their 5 years timeframes then it will be a bit longer before we see this being used to generate power.

It would be great and all and it's something we need but, how many people in the energy industry would lose jobs worldwide? 100 million? 50 million? I don't know, but over a decade or two it would be pretty massive shake up of the world economy. It would destroy entire countries.

How many jobs would be created in developing and less developed countries that would now have a cheap, clean and abundant energy source at their disposal? How many jobs would be created by the new technologies that would be created by the existence of this device? I work in the energy industry in the state of Queensland in Australia, which is dependent on coal and gas exports. Both I and my home state will simply have to adapt when such changes come into place.

[Galoredk]

http://m.aviationweek.com/technology/skunk-works-reveals-compact-fusion-reactor-details

Much detailed technical explanation

[Pants-of-dog]

15 years ago, it was 15 years away, and in fifteen years time, it will be fifteen years away.

Windmills work right now.
Hydro-electric dams work right now.
Even old school nuclear works right now.

[mikema63]

I don't think anyone is saying that we should pin all our hopes on this panning out, but it's important to keep tabs on this type of thing.

Of course that's outside of my purely scientific interest in the project, which makes me want to keep up with it outside of it's practical applications.

[Rugoz]

15 years ago, it was 15 years away, and in fifteen years time, it will be fifteen years away.

Pretty much.

There's no reason to believe this will work any better than any of the countless fusion "revolutions" that were announced in the past 50 years. Just because its not a tokamak doesn't mean the concept is new.

[DrSteveBrule]

Fantastic. Imagine being able to just generate sorties with electric planes and not having to worry about how and when to mid-air refuel them?

Its funny that you mentioned that, because I remember reading an article some time ago that described a 50's USAF prototype meant to do exactly that. It was cancelled due to political factors and cost effectiveness, but the plan was supposedly feasible, even with mid 20th century tech. A breakthrough with lighter, more powerful fusion reactors might just give the world the impetus needed to resurrect the nuclear powered plane.

[Nattering Nabob]

Heh...Lockheed finally got around to putting it on their webpage...

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/produc ... usion.html