New Superconductor World Record Surpasses 250K 271
myrrdyn writes to tell us that a new superconductivity record high of 254 Kelvin (-19C, -2F) has been recorded. According to the article this is the first time a superconductive state has been observed at a temperature comparable to a household freezer. "This achievement was accomplished by combining two previously successful structure types: the upper part of a 9212/2212C and the lower part of a 1223. The chemical elements remain the same as those used in the 242K material announced in May 2009. The host compound has the formula (Tl4Ba)Ba2Ca2Cu7Oy and is believed to attain 254K superconductivity when a 9223 structure forms"
substitute a mineral or two here and there (Score:1, Insightful)
we're talking room temperature
a few more simple crystallization process tweaks
we're talking desert weather
change the fabrication and assembly process like this and that, add layers of this material and that material:
ductile materials rather than ceramics
seriously, it will take a lot of hard (nobel prize winning) effort, but there isn't a shred of doubt in my mind that by my old age at least, materials scientists will give us cheap, high temperature superconducting wires
which changes everything, and has implications everywhere, in avenues of possibilities none of us have fully thought out, but plenty of us are excited to try
Re:LHC? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow. I'll bet the guys at Cern are feeling pretty foolish right about now.
No, "high temperature" superconductors cannot be used in magnets. That's why they're using liquid helium (or was it liquid hydrogen?) instead of the much cheaper liquid nitrogen -- all the superconductors that work at the warmer liquid nitrogen temperatures will stop working in a moderately strong magnetic field.
Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
You want me to believe a wildly high superconductor Tc claim using a link to a shady website that looks like it was designed in 1996, without any link to a paper or an author, without any reference to where the discovery was made, without any notes about secondary confirmation, without any other reference in the media except one lamo blog and without any real formal publication at all? Here's what every physicist reading this article right now is thinking: STFU. If you get a near room temp Tc superconductor working, you better be on the front page of a rushed to print edition of Nature that someone just ran down the hall to shove in my hand, or I'm not even going to give you the time of day.
Re:Simply generate electricity locally. (Score:2, Insightful)
Missing tag (Score:5, Insightful)
You're being taken for a ride (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A couple visions for the future (Score:4, Insightful)
Solar panels are stupid right now. They require rare materials, are not very reliable, but very expensive. :) :)
The solution for right now are arrays of cheap, easily replacable mirrors that heat a tube of water so that it can drive turbines. Simple, reliable, and very cheap. And yo only need to fill i tiny tiny amount of some very dead desert with them.
I can't imagine anything beating that. You could build it right now even in the poorest regions of the world. Nearly out of trash.
I agree with the rest of the first vision though.
The second one... well... tidal is bad, because it messes with nature for no reason (compared to above solution). :)
The rest is good.
But I don't think we need any technological advancement at all, to make this come true. Everything except for being able to buy those high-temperature superconductive power lines, and for the acceptable solar cells, already exists and is used right now.
But we can simply use big traditional DC lines until then.
And as I said, we don't need solar cells.
The only question remaining is: Why isn't it being done already? If I were a poor African state, (preferably with a desert) I'd put a big plant into that desert, and tell the oil and other industries, that they can go fuck themselves, because now I'm free! ^^
Then I'd start exporting energy and technology.
Done right this would mean a boom for the whole country.
Then add ubiquitous Internet access, and before you know it, you're surpassing India and are the no 1 country in Africa.
Re:Bad summary (Score:5, Insightful)
You seem to know what you're talking about, care to clue the rest of us in as to whether the link is at all plausible? Given the nature of the source, I have difficulty believing so.
Re:Simply generate electricity locally. (Score:5, Insightful)
depends on the power generation source. If we can make a stable fusion system that fails safe then yes. Pebble bed fission isn't bad. in fact on or two per 1 million people would stabilize the power grid.
The big problem with the power grid is that it is a really simple target. The 2003 blackout of the north east USA, was testament to the fact that one little screw up and the whole thing shuts down in beautiful cascading failures. a targeted set of attacks at key points at the right time of the year could kill millions with only a handful of targets. and I am not talking about destroying any nuclear plant, just the right transmission towers in the right sequence and suddenly the north east of the USA, some 40 million people are without heat and electricity for a month. Target for a second attack for the north west, shortly afterwards, and then rolling blackouts in the south and no one will be able to fix it for a year. 20 maybe 30 bombs around the country and the USA is worthless for the next couple of years.
partial local generation is the only viable long term solution to our future power needs. Big plants will be needed, but small plants will save lives. Even partial solar and wind generation in each region would be enough to help.
Re:Bad summary (Score:3, Insightful)
Alas, there's a big gap between knowing enough to snipe at an AC and knowing enough to evaluate the claim itself. Sorry...
Re:Simply generate electricity locally. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Simply generate electricity locally. (Score:4, Insightful)
Studies here in Denmark have shown that birds adjust their route ~200 m from the mill. It has also shown that the high voltage cables connecting the windmill to the grid kill many more birds than windmills, even windows kill more birds than windmills. There are examples of Falcons nesting and breeding on windmills here.
The only known wind mill farm with a lot of bird killings is in the altamont pass where a huge number of small windmills have been placed in the middle of a raptor hunting ground. Ensuring that the birds are preoccupied with their prey and don't have time to look for moving obstacles.