Contenders…
(1) Comments
Discuss In Forums...for “energy of the future”
The goal of the “Contender” section is to enable us to compare different energy candidates. We are most interested in the contenders for a “fusion prize.” However, we will compare a range of energy approaches for a broad perspective on humanity’s energy options.
Construction Plan:
The “Contenders” section will be set up as two “weblogs” with shared categories. Why use “weblogs” for content management?
Contender ID weblog
One weblog will be the Contender’s ID spreadsheet.
One ID per contender.
For example, Focus Fusion would be one entry in this weblog. Tri-Alpha would be another. NIF, Polywell, etc., each would have a single entry.
The Contender ID weblog will have custom fields. Discuss contender custom fields.
Categories will be set up, one “category” per Contender, so that news on each contender can be linked to that contender. In other words, “Focus Fusion” is both a weblog entry, and a category. This makes sense when we get to the second weblog:
Contender news weblog
Once the contenders have been identified and the basic information is in place, site users can comment on them, and they can also add news articles on each contender as they are found.
This requires us to set up a second weblog called “contender news” and allow registered members to upload articles on that contender. Your article will appear on the contender’s page in their “news” column, once you check off the appropriate “category”, which will link your news to the contender. If an article relates to several contenders, you simply check off several categories and the news shows up on each contender’s news list.
To summarize, we will have one “Contender ID” weblog, limited to one post per contender. It will enable contenders to be compared in tabular fashion. And then we will have a second “contender news” weblog for multiple, unlimited news posts on each contender. As news is generated for each contender, their section expands.
What needs to be done
Construction tasks: Some of these things everyone can do, some of them the webmaster has to take care of.
- Step 1 is to develop logical comparison criteria. You can help!
- Step 2, fill in the blanks - find the facts - for each contender. You can help!
- Step 3, set up the website so we can choose various contenders and compare them side by side. Job for webmaster, although coding suggestions and examples are welcome.
- Step 4: start second weblog for news articles, to be submitted by registered users. Webmaster sets it up.
- Step 5: start posting articles & comments on the contenders.You can help! This is for you to do!
Contenders by Type
Contenders for fusion can be broken down into Aneutronic Fusion Contenders and Conventional Contenders. We might also add “weird science” contenders like cold fusion, although some ffs members suggest that we don’t even mention such disreputable approaches so as not to be associated with them.
Of course, there are those who say that fusion is a non-starter, that it’s impossible. As such, we would be remiss not to keep an eye out for other energy contenders that may well end up being the energy of the future. The renewable energy, fossil fuels, and fission sectors are well funded, and many noteworthy innovations are taking place here. This section will allow us to keep track of those as well, to some extent.
Aneutronic Fusion:
The candidates below were copied and pasted from Wikipedia. As noted in the “construction” discussion, we need to set up an entry for each of these, and other categories, and then let this section automatically populate with new entries. For now, here is the list to start on:
* Dense plasma focus, (that’s us!) has been funded by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, the Air Force Research Laboratory and private funding, among others.
* Polywell fusion was pioneered by Robert W. Bussard and funded by the US Navy, uses inertial electrostatic confinement.[18][19]
* The Z-machine at Sandia National Laboratory, a z-pinch device, can produce ion energies of interest to hydrogen-boron reactions, up to 300 keV. Non-equilibrium plasmas usually have an electron temperature higher than their ion temperature, but the plasma in the Z machine has a special, reverted non-equilibrium state, where ion temperature is 100 times higher than electron temperature. This data represents a new research field, and would indicate that Bremsstrahlung losses could be in fact lower than expected in such a design.
* Colliding beam fusion is also studied, for example by Norman Rostoker at Tri Alpha Energy, who previously collaborated on the Migma approach. The Tri Alpha Energy device combines a Migma ion beam collider with a Field-Reversed Configuration in order to increase ion density.[21]
* The Electron spiral toroid is another colliding fusion approach, from Electron Power Systems, Inc. who claims to make self-confined toroidal plasmoids, with no need for an external magnetic field for their confinement.[22]
* The PLASMAK, a redesigned compact spheromak with a high conducting plasma shell confining a plasmoid resembling a ball lighting, studied by Paul Miroslav Koloc at Prometheus II, Ltd., had also been proposed as a candidated for p-B11 fusion.[23]
None of these efforts has yet tested its device with hydrogen-boron fuel, so the anticipated performance is based on extrapolating from theory, experimental results with other fuels and from simulations.
Conventional Fusion
The nefarious NIF, ambitious ITER and others will go here.
Fission
It’s radioactive. Are there innovations that keep bringing the dangers down? In any case, no greenhouse gases. That’s a plus. Too bad about the plutonium enrichment, and rogue nations, though.
Weird Science
This is perjorative, but we need a category for the disreputable candidates. And also one for totally different candidates, I suppose.
Renewables
Can be further subdivided into solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, and many new flavors. Note that we are also attempting to get “Aneutronic fusion” to be defined as “renewable”.
Fossil Fuels
Is peak oil really a problem? Isn’t global warming overstated? There are quite a few who think that. We’ll need a space for fossil fuels to make the case for being available into the future.
How Hard Is It?
Fun with Fusion
Comments
All the above contenders seem to be dancing around the elephant in the room. They seem to be divided into two general groups, either high pressure plasmas or strange participating elements such as tritium or boron.
Neither are useful for the ultimate purpose and aim of this research - continuous feasible and economical fusion generation of electricity.
High pressure plasma cannot be contained for more than a fraction of a second.(Bye bye Tokamaks!)
In practice how can you use solid tritium or boron continuously? Feed it into to the reactor the form of rods or something? No, in the end, the idea is basically silly.
Like all other fusion experiments, they are a form of long term employment for the researchers. Nothing more.
The exception to the above list is “colliding beam” fusion. But why beam? Why not a colliding plasma? A lot more dense. Much more likely to be useful and successful, especially if the colliding jets of plasma are continuous.
Daa. I never though to that!
Or is it nobody has thought of a method of accelerating dense plasmas (of hydrogen or deuterium) to the required joint velocity? Yeah, NOBODY has tried it.
In energy terms this outcome is identical to trying to achieve a very dense plasma, as in a Tokamak. And it is far simpler to achieve.
The required velocity is too high? Nonsense. All the no-hopers in the physics profession mumble about nuclear cross-sections (probability of nuclear collision). I have looked at nuclear cross-section theory. It is defective in two respects at least. 1. The development of the theory is fundamentally based assuming a crystal lattice. Since when is a plasma a crystal lattice? 2. The probabilities are based on the Gaussian normal curve. The normal curve is old hat. A more correct curve has higher tails, such as a fractal curve. That increases the probability of collision.
Nuclear cross-section theory is cook-book physics. And it produces a bad cake!
Also, quantum tunneling effects are very likely, which will massively reduce the velocities required.
So, a solution is staring at you in the eyes! Simple, basic. Just fire dense PLASMAS of hydrogen or deuterium head on at each other. It WILL work. Fusion, continuous useful fusion, will be achieved.
I can even suggest a simple low cost experiment, using two Pyrex glass tubes connected to a large glass sphere. Just fire plasmas straight down the tubes straight at each other into the sphere. Surround the sphere with neutron and gamma detectors. Voila. Somebody gets a Nobel Prize. (And many thousands of chancers at Livermore, ITER etc. become unemployed!).
I can even suggest a simple method of accelerating the plasmas to a high speed, if anyone is interested.
Post a Comment