Lockheed Martin’s latest claim is a working reactor in five years.

Ah ouais, quand même,…

Initial work demonstrated the feasibility of building a 100-megawatt reactor measuring seven feet by 10 feet, which could fit on the back of a large truck, and is about 10 times smaller than current reactors, McGuire told reporters.

#Skunk_Works et aussi,… #serpent_de_mer !

Oui, désolé de m’être fait le relai de la pub de Lockheed Martin, ça sent les mecs qui cherchent des sous.

In the slick promotional video, McGuire describes fusion as “a high risk, high payoff endeavour”. Lockheed have come up with an idea and they want someone to give them some money so they can develop it.

Investment in fusion is exciting and potentially world-changing. But real breakthroughs occur when experiments actually take place.

▻http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/16/has-lockheed-martin-really-made-a-breakthrough-on-nuclear-fusion

D’autant que

the U.S. program was struggling to maintain a viable research program amid stagnant budgets and the growing financial commitment to ITER, which is consuming an increasingly large share of U.S. fusion funding

▻http://news.sciencemag.org/physics/2014/10/u-s-fusion-plan-draws-blistering-critique

Non, non, t’excuse pas : ça donne une bonne occasion de rigoler sur des sujets qui ne s’y prêtent pas toujours. L’article du Guardian vaut son pesant de cacahuètes !

Professor Steven Cowley, director of the Culham Centre for Fusion Energy in Oxfordshire, says he is “nonplussed”. According to Cowley, Lockheed had said “all the usual things about how it’s going to save the world and how nice it would be if [the reactor] was small” but failed to produce any details upon which their success can be judged.

#humour_anglais

Vous rigolerez moins quand ils remplaceront la production gaz de schiste par un seul camion à fusion ! LM, c’est pas les gens qui tentent de faire voler l’avion en bois du dernier sommet de l’OTAN ?

▻http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/nuclear_power/2013/01/fusion_energy_from_edward_teller_to_today_why_fusion_won_t_be_a_source_of.htm

Excellent, #merci, tout l’article est un régal…

But a quick look at the defense contractor’s ambitious plan—a working reactor in five years—already shows the dream fraying around the edges. A year and a half ago, the company promised that fusion was four years away, meaning that the schedule is already slipping. Negative one years of progress in 20 months is, sadly, business as usual for fusion.

Au début, on s’y perd un peu sur la datation de l’article (janvier 2013, rendant compte de l’annonce d’octobre 2014), mais ça fait aussi partie du jeu : on peut le garder sous le coude…