ChatGPT contemplates fusion energy
We asked ChatGPT on its thoughts about fusion and got interesting answers
If you want to know ChatGPT’s predictions (yes, it actually doesn’t like to make predictions) on which year fusion finally produces net energy and whether itself would like to be powered by fusion, read on!
General
What do you think about fusion energy?
Fusion energy is a potential source of clean, safe, and abundant energy that could potentially replace traditional fossil fuels. It involves the fusion of two atomic nuclei to release energy. This process is similar to the process that powers the sun.
Fusion energy has several potential advantages over traditional forms of energy, including no greenhouse gas emissions, no long-lived radioactive waste, and the potential for a nearly unlimited supply of fuel.
However, developing practical fusion energy has proven to be a significant challenge. Scientists have made progress in developing fusion reactors, but they have not yet been able to achieve self-sustaining fusion reactions that produce more energy than they consume. In addition, the technology for confining and controlling the extremely hot and volatile plasma necessary for fusion reactions is still under development.
Overall, while fusion energy shows promise as a potential source of clean and abundant energy, there are still significant technological and engineering challenges that need to be overcome before it can become a viable option.
All true. It’s promising but hard.
What’s the best way to solve the challenges of fusion energy?
Developing practical fusion energy is a complex and challenging task that requires a multidisciplinary approach and collaboration between scientists, engineers, and policymakers. Here are some of the ways that the challenges of fusion energy could be addressed:
1. Continued research and development: Scientists and engineers need to continue working on developing the technology needed for practical fusion energy. This includes developing more efficient methods for confining and controlling the plasma that is necessary for fusion reactions, as well as developing materials that can withstand the extreme conditions inside a fusion reactor.
2. International collaboration: Fusion energy research is a global endeavor, and international collaboration can help to share knowledge, expertise, and resources. Projects like ITER involve collaboration between 35 different countries and can help to accelerate the development of practical fusion energy.
3. Public and private investment: Developing practical fusion energy requires significant resources and funding. Governments and private investors can help to provide the necessary funding to support research and development efforts.
4. Policy support: Policymakers can help to support the development of fusion energy by providing incentives for private investment, funding research and development, and creating regulatory frameworks that encourage the use of clean energy sources.
5. Education and outreach: Educating the public about fusion energy and its potential benefits can help to build support for continued research and development. Outreach efforts can also help to attract the next generation of scientists and engineers who will be needed to continue working on this important technology.
Overall, developing practical fusion energy will require a sustained and collaborative effort across multiple disciplines and sectors. By continuing to invest in research and development, collaborating internationally, and supporting policies that encourage the use of clean energy sources, we can work towards realizing the potential of fusion energy as a safe, clean, and abundant source of energy.
Here ChatGPT gives a general answer but it’s well put.
Should fusion energy be regulated by the same regulations as fission and by the same regulators (e.g. by the NRC)?
The regulation of fusion energy is a complex issue that depends on many factors, including the specific technology being used and the potential risks and benefits associated with it. Here are some things to consider when discussing the regulation of fusion energy:
- Different technologies: Fusion energy and nuclear fission are different technologies with different risks and benefits. While both involve nuclear reactions, fusion reactions do not produce the same types of radioactive waste as fission reactions. Additionally, fusion reactions do not have the same potential for runaway reactions or meltdowns as fission reactions.
- Different regulators: In the United States, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is responsible for regulating nuclear fission reactors, while the Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for regulating fusion energy research. The DOE also works with other federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to ensure that fusion energy research is conducted safely and in accordance with applicable regulations.
- Risk assessment: The regulation of fusion energy will depend on a careful assessment of the potential risks and benefits associated with the technology. Regulators will need to evaluate the safety and environmental impacts of different fusion reactor designs, as well as the potential risks associated with the handling and disposal of any radioactive materials that may be produced.
- Public input: As with any new technology, the regulation of fusion energy should be transparent and open to public input. Regulators should engage with stakeholders, including scientists, engineers, policymakers, and members of the public, to ensure that their concerns and perspectives are taken into account.
-Overall, the regulation of fusion energy will depend on a careful evaluation of the technology and its potential risks and benefits. While fusion energy and nuclear fission are different technologies, they both involve nuclear reactions and require careful consideration to ensure that they are used safely and responsibly. The specific regulatory framework that is appropriate for fusion energy will depend on many factors, including the specific technology being used and the risks associated with it.
No clear answer here.
When will fusion happen?
In which year do you think the first reactor will be providing electricity to the power grid?
… While the development of practical fusion energy is an ongoing process, it is difficult to predict when the first commercial fusion power plant will be operational and providing electricity to the power grid. It is likely to be several decades before commercial fusion power plants become a reality, and there are still many technical and engineering challenges that need to be addressed before fusion energy can be fully commercialized.
Decades. Ouch.
Private fusion companies have much accelerated time lines. Can they do it faster than public projects?
Private fusion companies have indeed emerged in recent years with the goal of accelerating the development of practical fusion energy. These companies often focus on developing smaller and more agile reactors, using innovative technologies and approaches that are not typically pursued in publicly funded research.
… Overall, private fusion companies may be able to develop practical fusion energy faster than public projects, but it is still likely to be many years before a commercial fusion power plant becomes a reality. It will likely require a combination of public and private investment, research, and collaboration to achieve this goal.
Many years. That doesn’t sound too bad. But of course if we want to make an impact to climate change we need fusion as soon as early 2030s.
Compared to renewables
Do you think we should focus on solar, wind and hydro instead of putting resources into fusion?
Solar, wind, and hydro power are all proven sources of renewable energy that are currently being used to generate electricity around the world. These technologies have significant advantages over traditional fossil fuels, including reduced greenhouse gas emissions and improved environmental sustainability.
However, fusion energy also has the potential to be a significant source of clean and abundant energy. Unlike solar and wind power, fusion energy is not dependent on weather conditions, and it can provide a constant and reliable source of energy. Additionally, fusion energy has the potential to provide significantly more energy than other renewable sources, making it a promising option for meeting growing energy demands.
… Ultimately, the choice between investing in fusion energy or other renewable energy sources depends on a variety of factors, including the availability of resources, the specific energy needs of a given region or country, and the environmental and economic considerations of each technology. Many experts believe that a mix of different energy sources will be necessary to meet future energy needs while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions and improving sustainability.
OK we are undecided here. Let’s keep going.
For which population is it much better than renewables?
1. Populations with high energy demand: Fusion energy has the potential to generate much higher amounts of energy than renewables, making it more suitable for meeting the high energy demands of large-scale industrial applications, urban areas with high population densities, or energy-intensive processes like desalination or hydrogen production.
2. Populations in areas with limited space or resources: Fusion energy can potentially provide much higher energy density than renewables, meaning that it can generate a large amount of energy from a smaller footprint. This makes it more suitable for areas with limited space or resources, where renewables like solar and wind may not be able to provide sufficient energy generation.
3. Populations in areas with high energy security concerns: Fusion energy can potentially provide a more secure and reliable source of energy than renewables, which can be affected by weather conditions or other factors. This makes it more suitable for populations in areas with high energy security concerns, such as those with limited access to energy imports or vulnerable to energy supply disruptions.
That makes sense. Build it where you have high population density but I might suggest to not build it directly in the city. It’s using radioactive tritium after all.
What is your best estimate of LCOE for fusion energy in 2050?
Some experts in the field of fusion energy have made projections about the potential cost of fusion energy in the coming decades. For example, the International Energy Agency’s 2020 report on fusion energy estimated that the cost of fusion energy could potentially reach commercial viability by the 2040s, with LCOE estimates ranging from $50/MWh to $200/MWh, depending on the specific fusion technology and deployment scenario.
Other projections have suggested that the cost of fusion energy could potentially be competitive with other forms of low-carbon energy, such as nuclear and renewables, by the mid-21st century.
Overall, while there is still significant uncertainty around the future cost of fusion energy, many experts believe that it has the potential to become a viable and cost-effective source of energy in the coming decades, and significant research and development efforts are underway to accelerate its commercialization.
Still some way to go for fusion. ChatGPT recalls that for solar it will be much cheaper (“IRENA also projects that the LCOE for solar PV will continue to decline in the coming years, with estimates ranging from USD 0.013/kWh to USD 0.05/kWh by 2050”).
Future
Could a future version of ChatGPT make use of a lot of green energy?
As an AI language model, ChatGPT does not have physical form and does not require energy to operate in the traditional sense. Instead, ChatGPT operates on computer servers powered by electricity.
Training of large AI language models like ChatGPT can consume significant amounts of energy. This is because the training process involves running complex calculations on powerful computer hardware, which can consume large amounts of electricity.
… In the future, it is possible that ChatGPT and other AI models will operate on even more efficient and sustainable computer hardware. For example, researchers are exploring the use of quantum computing, which has the potential to be much more energy-efficient than traditional computing.
Overall, while ChatGPT and other AI models do not directly consume energy, their operation does require electricity, and efforts to increase the use of green energy sources to power this electricity can help to reduce the environmental impact of these technologies.
OK I think it doesn’t need it. But let’s see. Personally, I think we will see plenty more power-hungry applications. As a wise professor once said, “We are making a mistake giving society more electricity because humans will just use more and more electricity”. A viscous circle.
