Reply To: turn heat into electricity

[Brian H]

[Cont]
Hi, Kenneth;

I am not an official spokesperson for the project, but here is a “layman’s” summary I have sent out here and there:

There is a firm and associated non-profit society in NJ, called, respectively, Lawrenceville Plasma Physics, and The 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 control.

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 rarified 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 twists into a kinked cord which is drawn down, knotting more and more until it forms a sub-microscopic pumpkin-shaped “plasmoid”, which implodes under the pressure of its magnetic fields. A brief fusion event occurs, in which single protons (ionized hydrogen) merge with B(11) ions, producing C(12), which immediately fissions into 3 He(4) 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 “solenoid” (wound copper wire tube) which experiences a huge pulse of induced current as it slows the charged beam. That current is fed back into the power control system, and mainly 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 and encounter a new (patented) shell of thousands of layers of foil(s), drained by a wiring grid. 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 pulses. The most manageable “sweet spot” seems to be around 330cps (Hertz), which produces a steady 5MW power supply. One of these generators can run a year on about 5 kilos 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 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. They 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.

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.

______
Extrapolations.
It can plausibly be argued that the prices of all human goods and services reflect roughly the amount of energy put into bringing them from source to purchaser, whether that is gold or internet-delivered bits and bytes or arugula or beer or cars or … Fuel, heat, movement, and so on are major components of those energy inputs. Reducing those costs by 95-98% will have a dramatic impact on human wealth, across the board. It will suddenly be readily possible to provide resources and life basics to billions who cannot now afford them. And the wealthier world will experience an explosion of benefits and choices which were impossible just yesterday.

[Cont]