Lawrence Livermore claims a milestone in laser fusion

Re:Lawrence Livermore claims a milestone in laser fusion by code4money on Tuesday August 17, 2021 @01:51PM (#28212742)

Releasing more energy is good, but is it enough of a difference that the delta can be captured (assuming imperfect capture process) + is it able to offset the cost of the expensive laser setup (maintenance)?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lawrence Livermore claims a milestone in laser fusion by m-watson on Tuesday August 17, 2021 @01:54PM (#28212797)

Baby steps, there are any number of issues to address if the goal was to create something that is energy producing for consumption. However, taking out even any aspect of commercialization or scaling this is an important milestone in terms of science and engineering. That's not to say don't ask those questions, it is just allow the excitement of progress while asking future questions.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lawrence Livermore claims a milestone in laser fusion by modeless on Tuesday August 17, 2021 @02:16PM (#28213073)

The article states that the reaction produced more energy than the fuel absorbed, not more energy than it took to run the lasers. I expect the efficiency of power transfer to the fuel is pretty low.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lawrence Livermore claims a milestone in laser fusion by lambdatronics on Thursday August 19, 2021 @10:34PM (#28241823)

You're right, they had 1.8 MJ of photons hitting the target, but something like 400MJ of energy going into the laser, which is inefficient (<1%).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lawrence Livermore claims a milestone in laser fusion by modeless on Monday August 23, 2021 @01:07AM (#28272502)

Wow, I didn't guess that low. I guess it makes sense though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lawrence Livermore claims a milestone in laser fusion by jatone on Tuesday August 17, 2021 @05:17PM (#28214968)

also mentioned chain reactions which would be one way to generate more energy than input even if your input was high.

[ Parent | on HN ]