m**e
发帖数: 857 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 Military 讨论区 】
发信人: muce (muce), 信区: Military
标 题: 国家点火装置面临失败
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Mon Oct 8 17:54:56 2012, 美东)
So Far Unfruitful, Fusion Project Faces a Frugal Congress
NY Times
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
Published: September 29, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/science/fusion-project-faces-
For more than 50 years, physicists have been eager to achieve controlled
fusion, an elusive goal that could potentially offer a boundless and
inexpensive source of energy.
The laser uses blasts of concentrated light to compress, heat and ignite
tiny capsules of hydrogen fuel, above. The goal of the project is to one day
achieve controlled fusion.
To do so, American scientists have built a giant laser, now the size of a
football stadium, that takes target practice on specks of fuel smaller than
peppercorns. The device has so far cost taxpayers more than $5 billion,
making it one of the most expensive federally financed science projects ever
. But so far, it has not worked.
Unfortunately, the due date is Sunday, the last day of the fiscal year. And
Congress, which would need to allocate more money to keep the project alive,
is going to want some explanations.
“We didn’t achieve the goal,” said Donald L. Cook, an official at the
National Nuclear Security Administration who oversees the laser project.
Rather than predicting when it might succeed, he added in an interview, “we
’re going to settle into a serious investigation” of what caused the
unforeseen snags.
The failure could have broad repercussions not only for the big laser, which
is based at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, but
also for federally financed science projects in general.
On one hand, the laser’s defenders point out, hard science is by definition
risky, and no serious progress is possible without occasional failures. On
the other, federal science initiatives seldom disappoint on such a
gargantuan scale, and the setback comes in an era of tough fiscal choices
and skepticism about science among some lawmakers. The laser team will have
to produce a report for Congress about what might have gone wrong and how to
fix it if given more time.
“The question is whether you continue to pour money into it or start over,
” said Stephen Bodner, a former director of a rival laser effort at the
Naval Research Laboratory in Washington. “I think they’re in real trouble
and that continuing the funding at the current level makes no sense.”
China is studying the program’s mistakes, Dr. Bodner added, perhaps with a
goal of building an improved machine.
“It’s kind of an amazing device,” said William Happer, a physicist at
Princeton University who directed federal energy research for the first
President George Bush. “Still, it’s not science if you don’t fail now and
then. But you do have to have some wins.”
Many science analysts predict that the big laser will survive, because its
powerful beams can still squeeze materials to extraordinarily high pressures
, temperatures and densities that are useful in safeguarding the nation’s
nuclear arms — a goal that attracts bipartisan support. For instance, the
laser might help engineers see if a particular metal part that had to be
substituted in a class of aging nuclear arms would still work as needed.
Even so, skeptics outside the government have long assailed the laser
project, known as the National Ignition Facility, or NIF, as a colossal
waste of money. Just operating it, officials concede, costs roughly $290
million a year. Some doubters have ridiculed it as the National Almost
Ignition Facility, or NAIF.
Big science projects more costly than the laser include NASA’s newest space
telescope, whose price tag now runs to more than $8 billion, and the 17-
mile circular accelerator in Europe that recently helped pin down the
elusive subatomic particle known as the Higgs boson. It cost about $10
billion.
In interviews, the laser’s architects and supporters at the Livermore lab
defended the device as working beautifully and pointed to the challenge of
planned breakthroughs as the fundamental problem.
“It’s like having a cure for cancer by a certain date,” said Penrose C.
Albright, the laboratory’s director. “I understand why people want to have
milestones. But when you’re dealing with science and Mother Nature, all
you really can do is agree on whether you’re on the right path.”
The sprawling laser complex, the officials insisted, would one day achieve
its advertised goal: fusing the hydrogen atoms in a speck of fuel into
helium, and thus creating what physicists liken to a tiny star.
“Contrary to what some people say, this has been a spectacular success,”
said Edward Moses, the laser’s director. Even so, he added, “science on
schedule is a hard thing to do.” | w*******g
发帖数: 9932 | 2 imagine the unemployment line when fusion power becomes the main stream
【在 m**e 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 Military 讨论区 】
: 发信人: muce (muce), 信区: Military
: 标 题: 国家点火装置面临失败
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Mon Oct 8 17:54:56 2012, 美东)
: So Far Unfruitful, Fusion Project Faces a Frugal Congress
: NY Times
: By WILLIAM J. BROAD
: Published: September 29, 2012
: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/science/fusion-project-faces-
: For more than 50 years, physicists have been eager to achieve controlled
| b*******y
发帖数: 4304 | 3 the umemployment line did not show up when the regular nuclear power plant
was invented.
Compared with regular nuke power plants, a fusion plant only saves on the
fuel side. But a regular plant will not consume more than several tons of
fuel rod in a year.
Counting that, plus whatever is saved on mining/extraction, there are not
many job cuts.
Still, you have to distribute the power, you have to maintain the power grid
. The whole infrastructure is still been worn everyday, all needs labor to
keep it up and running
【在 w*******g 的大作中提到】
: imagine the unemployment line when fusion power becomes the main stream
| w*******g
发帖数: 9932 | 4 fission nuclear power plants have so much pollution problem, they can
never displace coal fire plants.
so you cannot use them for comparison purpose.
fusion power is relatively clean and reduce fossil fuel consumption by
a lot.
mining, transportation, mining equipment makers will suffer a lot.
grid
【在 b*******y 的大作中提到】
: the umemployment line did not show up when the regular nuclear power plant
: was invented.
: Compared with regular nuke power plants, a fusion plant only saves on the
: fuel side. But a regular plant will not consume more than several tons of
: fuel rod in a year.
: Counting that, plus whatever is saved on mining/extraction, there are not
: many job cuts.
: Still, you have to distribute the power, you have to maintain the power grid
: . The whole infrastructure is still been worn everyday, all needs labor to
: keep it up and running
| a***n
发帖数: 3633 | 5 这个没关系，用核聚变的利润养闲人就行了。
【在 w*******g 的大作中提到】
: imagine the unemployment line when fusion power becomes the main stream
| x****u
发帖数: 12955 | 6
can
by
挖煤又不是全部的采矿业
【在 w*******g 的大作中提到】
: fission nuclear power plants have so much pollution problem, they can
: never displace coal fire plants.
: so you cannot use them for comparison purpose.
: fusion power is relatively clean and reduce fossil fuel consumption by
: a lot.
: mining, transportation, mining equipment makers will suffer a lot.
:
: grid
| b*******y
发帖数: 4304 | 7 挖掘提炼铀矿的那几个毛毛人， 就别起哄了。 石油， 磷肥，煤炭， 铁矿， 铜这些
才是采矿业的大头。 随便拿个开采金银的行业， 都比铀矿多得多
can
by
【在 w*******g 的大作中提到】
: fission nuclear power plants have so much pollution problem, they can
: never displace coal fire plants.
: so you cannot use them for comparison purpose.
: fusion power is relatively clean and reduce fossil fuel consumption by
: a lot.
: mining, transportation, mining equipment makers will suffer a lot.
:
: grid
|
|
