Reply To: Energy Output – MW & GW

[zapkitty]

jamesr wrote: The other aspect to D-T fusion fission hybrid designs is that you can take a fusion reactor (whether ICF or MCF) that would not be able to achieve nett gain on its own, to a system that with the extra heat of the actinide fission (plus decay heat of fission products) makes a whole system that can generate nett power. However unlike a standard fission reactor it is sub-critical without the fusion neutrons so there is no chance of runaway chain-reaction.

So it has all the benefits of the accelerator driven sub-critical reactor ( http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf35.html ), but swapping the problems of designing a stable, efficient, high current particle accelerator with the problems of laser or magnet design.

(… pokes head back in…)

Hmmm…

Increasing stability in accelerators (uptime) is a point… we’re going to be at this for decades at a bare minimum… but with cheap power just how efficient would the accelerators need to be?

So would the following comparisons be accurate? Have I skipped something? I tend to favor FF 🙂 but this seems like it would turn out very lopsided to me…

The costs of FF units, the as-yet undesigned accelerators and handling the (very) hazardous waste on its trips through the accelerators… but it would all happen on-site and external to the power supply.

versus

The costs of neutronic fusion, steam handling, turbines and the additional problems and expenses of requiring the integration of the (very) hazardous waste as a part of the power supply… and the question of if using one of the neutronic fusion solutions would mandate prepping the waste for transport, transporting it cross-country and then handling it again for integration into the power supply?

What have I overlooked? 🙂