Feb. 10, 2019 – By Steven B. Krivit –

Complete Series

Wikipedia, although not the most authoritative encyclopedia reference, is almost always a reliable benchmark for public consensus and understanding. It therefore serves as an excellent indicator of how broadly the public was misled about the projected net power output of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER). As a result of the impermanent nature of text on any Wikipedia page, in conjunction with the preservation and record of every edit that is made, the online encyclopedia can also serve as a time-correlated reflection of public consensus.

The false and misleading statements on Wikipedia were similar to those found in most news stories about ITER. They were similar to the false and misleading statements that were and still are on many documents and Web sites published by the European Commission, the European Parliament, the International Atomic Energy Association, and many other organizations.

The English, French, and Chinese Wikipedia ITER pages contained false claims that grossly exaggerated the projected net power output of ITER. The other Wikipedia ITER pages had less-significant errors. The most accurate Wikipedia ITER page was the German-language page. After I published “The ITER Power Amplification Myth,” in October 2017, I began making corrections, as shown below, to some of the Wikipedia ITER pages. Continue reading »

Complete Series

Jan. 30, 2019 – By Steven B. Krivit –

FuseNet, the European fusion education association, which influences and engages students of all ages, has corrected its false and misleading power claim about ITER, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor. The publicly funded reactor is under construction in southern France. The countries contributing to the $22 billion ITER project represent more than half the world’s population.

The misleading statement had been on the FuseNet Web site for at least eight years. The organization made the correction this week after a seven-month exchange of a dozen letters among New Energy Times, the FuseNet Board of Governors, and the FuseNet Board of Advisors.

May 31, 2018: “The fusion reactor itself has been designed to produce 500 MW of output power for 50 MW of input power, or ten times the amount of power put in.”

Jan. 29, 2019: “The fusion reactor itself has been designed to produce a plasma with 500 MW of thermal output power for 50 MW of net injected power, a plasma power amplification factor of ten (Q=10).”

The original claim falsely attributes the power values to the overall reactor. The revised claim correctly attributes the power values exclusively to the plasma. This is important because these numbers do not reflect the 300 MW of electrical power required to operate the ITER reactor. When power conversion efficiencies are considered, the ITER design will result in a reactor with about zero net power output.

This, of course, will not demonstrate the feasibility of practical fusion power. However, it will still be a significant scientific achievement because the Joint European Torus (JET), which is ITER’s predecessor, resulted in a reactor with a net loss of almost 700 MW of electricity.

These facts also contradict another published claim by FuseNet. In 2014, Roger Jaspers, the chairman of the FuseNet Board of Governors, wrote a report claiming that the ITER reactor would be “the first fusion test reactor that will produce about the same amount of power as a gas power station (500 MW).” That would be true for ITER only if the power required to operate ITER is not subtracted.

The report is available from a European Commission Web site at this URL. (Archive Copy)

—————————————–

N.B.: New Energy Times wishes to thank the Internet Archive for providing historical archives of Internet Web pages.

Oct. 25, 2018 – By Steven B. Krivit –

Complete Series

In response to a letter from New Energy Times to Richard Lyall, the Atkins nuclear major projects director, the Atkins company has removed a false and misleading claim about the most powerful fusion experiment, performed at the JET reactor in the U.K. in 1997. It has also removed a similar claim about the expected results of the $22 billion ITER reactor, now under construction in southern France.

Atkins is a U.K.-based engineering and design consultancy that is responsible for building the infrastructure at the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor site. In April 2010, Atkins was awarded a €150 million contract from the European ITER domestic agency known as Fusion for Energy.

On Oct. 2, 2014, Atkins displayed a slide presentation to financial analysts and investors and claimed that the ITER reactor is designed to produce 500 MW of output power for 50MW of input power and that the best fusion result so far, from the JET reactor, produced 16 MW of thermal power.

ITER will, in fact, consume at least 300 MW of electricity to produce that 500 MW of thermal power. If all goes well, the equivalent net power of the ITER reactor will result in a loss of 86 MW, which is not enough for an engineering breakeven. It will, however, be a significant improvement over JET, which had a net loss of 684 MW.

Atkins had published the false claims on its Web site at this url and in this downloadable PDF (revised PDF) until receiving this letter from New Energy Times. New Energy Times sent the letter to Lyall, Julianne Antrobus, the Atkins Nuclear director, and Martin Grant, the Atkins chief executive officer for energy. In response to the letter, Atkins did not dispute, argue or discuss the discrepancy with New Energy Times. The Atkins company simply and silently deleted the false claims.

New Energy Times has tracked how fusion scientists have, for decades, failed to disclose the full amount of input power required by JET and failed to disclose the full power that will be required for ITER. As shown by this document, fusion scientists deceived the Atkins directors into thinking that, “if successful, the [ITER] facility will deliver nuclear fusion on a commercial scale offering safe, limitless and environmentally responsible energy.”

Fusion scientists used a double meaning of the phrase “fusion power” without informing people outside the fusion research community about the double meaning. Misled by fusion scientists, Atkins, in turn, misled financial analysts and investors about the expected power from ITER.

Slide #20 from Oct. 2, 2014, Atkins presentation to financial analysts and investors depicting false projections for ITER and false results from JET