← Back to context

Comment by epistasis

4 days ago

That's astounding, I've never heard anybody claim that the reactors would be simpler before! Do you have any estimates of anybody working on the problem that thinks that?

Every schemer I have ever seen is quite a bit more complex than a fission reactor. Often, designs will depend on materials that do not yet exist.

That said there is a tremendous variety of techniques that fit under the umbrella term of "fusion," so I'm hoping to learn something more.

Not simpler in terms of technology, but simpler in terms of deployment, regulation, and security. Those are the majority of costs in fission power plants.

  • The majority of the cost in fission is in the massive construction build, change orders, logistics, massive concrete pours, welding, etc.

    I've looked a lot into this in terms of how to get a project like Georgia's Vogtle to have cost less, or Olkioluoto in Finland, or Flamanville 3 in France. Big complex construction projects are expensive, and it's not clear at all to me that fusion would be simpler or smaller, or escape the rest of Baumol's cost disease that has been plaguing fission in highly developed economies.

    • The more plausible looking modern fusion companies tend to be designing very small reactors compared to those projects. Vogtle is 5000 MWs. Olkioluoto is 1600. Helion is promising reactors that are 50 and can be shipped via trains by 2028 (or 2030 depending on how you read some statements/interpret what I just said). They still need some neutron shielding to actually operate them safely (boronated concrete, probably not shipped by train), but nothing on the scale of what you need for a fission plant.

      (and other than that I echo elcritch's comments)

      5 replies →

    • That’d be interesting to learn more about. What I’ve seen always leans toward regulation driving costs.

      Though I guess some of that infrastructure could be overbuilt due to excessive regulation.

      Also much of the concrete and steel is needed for the containment domes. Fusion power likely wouldn’t require nearly as much protection. Perhaps just a fairly standard industrial building.

      1 reply →

    • I would guess the preventative maintenance over the lifetime of a fission reactor exceeds the initial build costs.