I have been occasionally emailing various bloggers and others with some version of the following draft (without necessarily suggesting or appealing for any particular response or reply):

There are a firm and associated non-profit society in NJ, called, respectively, Lawrenceville Plasma Physics and Focus Fusion Society. They are dedicated to advancing and putting into play a revolutionary and incredibly cost-efficient energy source.

I have been following this for years, and now funding and progress have accelerated. I’ll walk you through my own understanding and projections of outcomes a bit first, and then you can get the data from their sites, directly.

Scientific/technical:
The process is a form of what’s called Dense Plasma Focus fusion. It involves inducing fusion of a combination of elements or isotopes to self-ignite by (usually) magnetic contraction. There are two main varieties: steady-state (as exemplified by the Bussard approach), and pulsed. This is the latter, and is vastly easier to sustain once established. Rather than fusing Deuterium with (highly radioactive) Tritium (both very expensive and requiring elaborate handling), it masters the much tougher but ‘aneutronic’ p-B (proton-boron) process, using ordinary neutral stable elements (hydrogen and boron).

The device itself consists of a ring of 8 cathode pins surrounding a tubular anode, all in about the size of your palm with fingers pointed upwards. It sits in a chamber full of hot hydrogen ions and decaborane (B10H14), which supplies boron and additional hydrogen. A 45KV pulse is sent up the cathodes from a capacitor bank, and produces a rolling ‘donut’ of charged gas which is drawn into the anode tube.

There, it coils into a twisted cord which is drawn down, kinking more and more until it knots into a sub-microscopic “plasmoid”, which implodes under the pressure of its own magnetic fields. A brief fusion event occurs, in which single protons (ionized hydrogen) fuse with B11 ions, producing C12 , which immediately fissions into 3 He4 ions. A powerful electron beam exits the plasmoid in one direction, and helium ions in an opposing beam in the other. The electrons are absorbed in the chamber gas, reheating it, and the helium ions pass out through a standard “solonoid” (wound copper wire tube), which experiences a huge pulse of induced current as it slows the ion beam. That current is fed back into the power control system, and fully recharges the capacitors.

About 40% additional energy is produced as hard X-rays. (This very low and manageable % is achieved by a new (patented) quantum process for limiting the “X-ray cooling” which normally squelches plasma fusion events.) These escape the core chamber and encounter a new (patented) shell of thousands of layers of foil(s), drained by a wiring grid. I.e., the X-ray photons interact with the foils, gradually giving up all their energy as current. This current is drained off as the “profit” from the generator.

The whole affair is “pulsed”, with higher output from faster pulsing. The most manageable “sweet spot” seems to be around 330cps (Hertz), which produces a steady 5MW power supply. [With adequate fast electrode cooling technology, up to 25MW seems quite possible.] One of these generators can run a year on about a kilo or so of boron — a trivial amount. Fuel costs are negligible.

There is no radiation outside the housing, and it can be entered after about 9 hrs “cooling off” in complete safety. There are no waste products, other than a small amount of garden-variety helium. Some excess heat is produced, which can either be readily vented or used for local purposes (building heating, industrial processes, etc.)

It is critical to note here that this is NOT a “thermal cycle” heat engine like ALL other nuclear/fusion/fission processes. That is, it does not depend on generating heat to boil water (or other volatile fluid) to spin a turbine to generate electricity (at about 30% efficiency, typically). Net energy efficiency/recovery in FF is estimated at 50+%, which accounts for much of its startling cost advantages.
_____
Now, the economics.
A complete prefab generator and maintenance housing, about the size of a home garage, is expected to cost around $250,000 in mass production. This is about 1/20 the cost of best current plant construction costs for generating installations. They can be trucked and set up virtually anywhere, the only constraint being that there must be provision for real-time monitoring and control, and access a half-dozen days or so a year for refueling and component replacement/maintenance by engineers/technicians. Generators can either plug directly into existing grids, or be used as local power sources — e.g., by factories or buildings. Or ships. Or spacecraft.

Power pricing (with all amortization, fuel, maintenance etc. rolled in) for its output is estimated at ¼¢/KWH at source. That’s $0.0025. Again, about 1/20 of best current numbers.

It is estimated that 10X current planetary power requirements could be sustained using local (on-planet) boron resources until approximately when the sun goes red giant in a gigayear or few.

This is “disruptive technology” with bells on.

Imagine yourself as a government or investor with $XXX,000,000 to put down on new power generation capacity OR operation/upgrade of existing plant. Which are you going to put your money into: (1) Technology which has suddenly been rendered obsolete by a 20+:1 cost disadvantage? Or (2) Scrapping the old and replacing it with the new ultra-economical alternative? Hint: if you choose (1), those who choose (2) will eat your lunch. And breakfast and dinner, too.

______
(cont)