Dec. 11, 2017 – By Steven B. Krivit

Return to ITER Power Facts Main Page

Recently, some organizations involved in the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) program have corrected false and misleading information published on their Web sites, after reading articles published by New Energy Times.

This report summarizes the way that some ITER proponents have misled non-experts about the potential power output of the ITER experimental nuclear fusion reactor, once it becomes operational. The misrepresentation is not exclusive to ITER; it has been a systemic problem in the fusion community for decades. ITER is simply the largest and most recent fusion project.

Specifically, the proponents conflated the power gain ratio of the plasma (technically known as the fusion Q) with the power gain ratio of the device (technically known as the engineering Q). They took the value for Q-fusion and convinced non-experts that it was the value for Q-engineering. They did this not only by switching the Q-values but also by hiding the actual input power required for the reactor. This report also identifies people and organizations who have published false statements about the ITER design and function based on the information they were given by the ITER organization.

A decade ago, Neil Calder, a former ITER spokesman, taught attendees at his international communicators’ workshop how to promote ITER to the world:

False and misleading 2008 statement by Neil Calder, former head of ITER public communications (Source)

Continue reading »

Ian Chapman, CEO UKAEA

Nov. 16, 2017 — By Steven B. Krivit

Yesterday, Ian Chapman, the chief executive officer of the U.K. Atomic Energy Authority, acknowledged the inaccuracy of his statements about the performance of the U.K.’s biggest fusion reactor. Chapman’s inaccurate quote was published in the U.K. Sunday Times on Nov. 12, 2017.

Chapman is one of several fusion scientists who have consistently provided false and misleading statements about fusion reactor performance to the news media and public. Chapman told the Sunday Times that the U.K. Joint European Torus (JET) fusion reactor produced 16 megawatts (MW) of electrical power with a 25 MW input. If true, this would represent an efficiency of 64 percent.

In fact, the 16 MW output was in the form of heat, not electric power. More significant, instead of requiring 25 MW of electrical input power, the reactor required 700 MW of electrical input power. This means that the most powerful controlled nuclear fusion experiment in the world produced power equivalent to only 1 percent of the power it consumed. In other words, the result was a net loss of about 684 MW of electricity. Continue reading »

Nov. 7, 2017 – By Steven B. Krivit 

Return to ITER Power Facts Main Page

In response to the Oct. 6, 2017, New Energy Times report “The ITER Power Amplification Myth,” managers of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), now under construction in southern France, have corrected some of the false and misleading statements on the organization’s Web site. (List of Corrections)

Representatives of the ITER Council at the June 2017 Meeting (List of Names)The ITER organization had told the public for years that, when complete, the nuclear fusion reactor will produce 500 megawatts (MW) of net power.

Here is an example of the false and misleading claim that, until recently, was published on an ITER Web site page specifically for members of the news media:

“ITER has been designed to produce 500 MW of output power for 50 MW of input power—or ten times the amount of energy put in.” (Archive copy)

That statement, as well as other false and misleading statements on the ITER Web site, has since been corrected.

The ITER organization, however, is still not transparent about its 500 MW claim. In contrast, here is an example of a factual and transparent statement about the ITER design capacity, as published on the Japanese ITER team’s Web site:

“Will ITER make more energy than it consumes? … ITER is about equivalent to a zero (net) power reactor, when the plasma is burning.” (Archive copy) Continue reading »