Thread by @FLF_Nick

It's out, NIF has shown gain, Q > 1. If confirmed on Tues this is a profound and very important result. It shows that inertial fusion can work in a device suitable for a power plant 🧵#fusion #ClimateEmergency
ft.com/content/4b6f0f…

We have long known that the physics of inertial fusion works. Both the US and UK tested inertial fusion capsules underground. These were high-gain targets, the kind needed for a power plant

The NIF result, if confirmed, shows that this process can work in a controlled lab or power plant environment. The actual fusion energy release is not enough for power production, but we know high-gain targets work (@ian_bott_artist, your work is the best)

This result is about mastering the ignition process, showing exactly where the threshold lies. It is now extremely clear what you need to do to get inertial fusion to work

And there is a clear path to a power plant here. The NIF laser is far too expensive. Other approaches still need cost reductions but are closer. The Dipole Concept from @CLF_STFC is one example
clf.stfc.ac.uk/Pages/DiPOLE-C…

There have been at least 6 major conceptual design studies on inertial fusion power plants, going back as far as 1985. Much of the engineering needed has been progressed, and I never use the word "just" for engineering challenges, but the path is clear

HYLIFE, 1985 - osti.gov/servlets/purl/…
HYLIFE-II, 1994 - researchgate.net/publication/27…
Osiris / Sombrero, 1994 - sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
Z-IFE, 2005 - tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.131…
LIFE, 2011 - tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.131…

It is also very clear what is needed for cost-competitive power production. For the laser approach, the driver and target cost needs to fall, and the survivability of the target chamber needs to be improved
royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rs…

For @FLFusion, this is a huge derisking. The core physics of our approach is exactly the same. They are doing spherical implosions, we are doing spherical implosions. Our amplifiers focus a planar input to produce a spherical implosion, and boost the power at the same time.

The amplifiers allow us to use a much simpler and lower-cost driver, a high-velocity projectile launched by a large but pretty simple capacitor bank. This approach is already at the cost level

The projectile approach also allows the use of a liquid first wall, neatly side-stepping the major engineering challenges of neutron damage, high heat fluxes, and producing tritium. It also allows higher energy per shot so targets don't need to be as cheap

This result doesn't mean we get to skip a step, it is incumbent on us to prove we can do it our way. But our gain demonstrator is based on a design that is MORE robust journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/1…

We are on the vanguard of a new industry. If confirmed, this is a holy grail moment. I'm buzzing. The team @FLFusion are buzzing.

P.s. and I care about energy, human development, the climate, only academics care about being first. I care about getting there

P.s. a reference to get into literature on target cost reduction. This paper talks about $0.25 per target, this depends on frequency and other details. Our targets need to be below ~$20. Minimising material used and reselling scrap does it. fusion.gat.com/pubs-ext/MISCO…