Helion fusion to talk at Plasma Physics APS conference | Hacker News Reader

Helion fusion to talk at Plasma Physics APS conference

meetings.aps.org

21 pointsjoak13 comments

They seem to be willing to lift the veil a bit...

The abstract is a bit of a spoiler..

Author: David Kirtley Helion’s Trenta prototype compressed Field Reversed Configuration (FRC) plasmas to thermonuclear fusion conditions, reaching 9 keV plasma temperatures [1]. FRC plasmas are fundamentally high-beta and if heated through pulsed, adiabatic compression, they operate in a unique collisionality regime that supports both thermonuclear fusion conditions as well as maintains an ion to electron temperature ratio. In the presented work, a theoretical analysis of FRC compression to generator-relevant fusion conditions is derived from fundamental scaling laws. This work includes independent ion and electron heating [2], radiation losses [3], empirical particle transport scaling [4], fusion reaction rates, ion temperature distribution evolution, and D, T, and He-3 fuels. As will be shown, for all operating conditions above 20 keV, a high-beta D-He-3 FRC outperforms a low-Beta D-T plasma in terms of electrical and fusion power output.

Not to be too crude, but somewhere in the business plan there must be a USD$/W figure for a power plant ...

(e.g. https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-cost-of-a-100-megawatt-sol... )

This is a scaling claim, and I don't know, but it feels super weak.

Of course a high beta plasma beats a low beta plasma. The problem with high beta is is instabilities, and you know, actually getting high beta.

Since it's pulsed the instabilities do not have time to arise and matter.

As I understand they are going to explain how they get to high beta.

That doesn’t sound like much time spent fusing.

Why is it "Sam Altman's" Helion Energy? He has nothing to do with it other than later stage funding. And the company name is Helion Energy and not "Helion fusion".

Edit: Title has been partially edited after, not necessarily because of, my comment.

Later stage, early stage, a good of chunk all his wealth invested in it and posts in hn to advertize it.

Still not his. From what I can tell, he only invested in 2021, several years after the founding of the company and several other investors, including the U.S. government. And again from what I can tell, the 2021 investment far exceeds his estimated net worth, so is it even his money or an investment pool?

And he has nothing to do with this conference or the tech. I'm just not a fan of cult of personality, something venture capitalism is rife with. It's always interesting how people, such as recruiters, try to sell the investors as if that has anything intrinsic to do with the company and its people.

Also, the company name is still wrong in the title.

My mistake: I mentioned Sam Altman so people could remember the company: «oh yes the one Sam Altman invested in». «Sam Altman backed» would have been better than «Sam Altman's» but it didn't fit in the allotted number of characters.

I'll be glad to change in the title «Helion fusion» to «Helion Energy fusion company» but title cannot be changed anymore.

Ah, I didn't even realize you were the submitter. I just used the title as a prompt for commentary on what I discussed. I'll admit that it seems nitpicky, but it's a subtle thing that I think ends up getting repeated everywhere in society. I have even experienced it in companies, where an internal organization would be referred to as "<so and so's> org", and so I would never know what organization they were talking about since it wasn't named, who <so and so> even was because only first name's would be used, and I was left confused as to why an organization made up of hundreds of people was named in the possessive of a single person.

Anyway, as an on-topic discussion, Daniel Jassby, formerly of the Princeton plasma physics group, seems pretty unconvinced by Helion's approach in his article Voodoo Fusion Energy.

https://engage.aps.org/fps/resources/newsletters/newsletter-...

From what I can tell, any non-tokamak design is basically a research project, whether it is a startup or not.

Commonwealth Fusion Systems probably has the most chance in getting to commercial fusion, as it's based on the relatively well-known tokamak design, but it's still a long road ahead.

Daniel Jassby is kind of a joke in the fusion community. The self appointed expert that says that (almost) all startups in the field are BS. Journalists often cite him to "balance" their article with an alternative view.

Tokamaks are a very expensive way of boiling water, and many think it will be hard or impossible to produce electricity at market costs.

That's why non-tokamak approaches are followed with interest and hope.

Small tokamaks are what I think are potentially viable, a la Commonwealth Fusion Systems.

Here's a good talk that I think addresses the physics vs engineering approaches to fusion.

https://youtu.be/L0KuAx1COEk

I do think tomakaks are possible. CFS and Tokamak Energy are getting there fast.

But the 50MW shipping container size generator planned by Helion would be really transformative. No need to build near a river to cool. Order from the factory, get delivered, install.

https://www.reddit.com/r/fusion/comments/ukeisj/if_polaris_h...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com