Talk-Polywell.org

And to be clear: we are not talking about funding, we are talking about the probable viability of hypotheses being studied in relation to being able to demonstrate Q=>1.

Here is a potential example of you lifting your thoughts from someone else"

skipjack wrote:Some of that research like the ITER Like Wall (yes that is the scientific term) was implemented into JET and they are aiming to beat ITER to break even.

JET has been upgraded with the ITER-Like Wall (yes, that’s its scientific name) — basically a wall of solid beryllium that can withstand being bombarded by ultra-high-energy neutrons

JET director Steve Cowley said, “We hope in the next runs of Jet that we’ll approach a [fusion energy gain] of one.” (Q = 1).

JET Article

And, the thing you don't understand, is that the Be-W and W components placed in JET are done so to support materials testing for ITER and DEMO, not to support JET Q=1.
Hoping to approach Q=1, is wishful hyperbole taken out of context. The real research goals are to support plasma management and materials testing for ITER & DEMO. Reaching breakeven is not a given, and not probable. Will they improve Q? Probably. Will that help them better test plasma management and materials? Absolutely, and, go figure, it is even in the research plan.

ladajo wrote: And, the thing you don't understand, is that the Be-W and W components placed in JET are done so to support materials testing for ITER and DEMO, not to support JET Q=1.
Hoping to approach Q=1, is wishful hyperbole taken out of context. The real research goals are to support plasma management and materials testing for ITER & DEMO. Reaching breakeven is not a given, and not probable. Will they improve Q? Probably. Will that help them better test plasma management and materials? Absolutely, and, go figure, it is even in the research plan.

That fact that you never read my full posts explains a lot of the problems in our communication. Your personal bias towards my person is clearly showing in almost every post you make.
That is fine, I will just ignore you in the future.
Just one last thing:
I guess that is why the headline of the very article that you just posted reads:

The UK will be the first to break even with fusion power

And that is the end of the discussion for me. It is pointless to have a discussion with someone who only wants to argue and is completely resistant to real arguments. Your personal bias towards my person is clouding your judgement. That is particularly interesting, since you know nothing about me, nor my background. I laugh every time you make speculative posts about me because you are so far off, it is funny. I just hope that you are not among those calling the shots in the US military. With people like you in charge, we would be totally doomed.

Skipjack wrote:

ladajo wrote: And, the thing you don't understand, is that the Be-W and W components placed in JET are done so to support materials testing for ITER and DEMO, not to support JET Q=1.
Hoping to approach Q=1, is wishful hyperbole taken out of context. The real research goals are to support plasma management and materials testing for ITER & DEMO. Reaching breakeven is not a given, and not probable. Will they improve Q? Probably. Will that help them better test plasma management and materials? Absolutely, and, go figure, it is even in the research plan.

That fact that you never read my full posts explains a lot of the problems in our communication. Your personal bias towards my person is clearly showing in almost every post you make.
That is fine, I will just ignore you in the future.
Just one last thing:
I guess that is why the headline of the very article that you just posted reads:

The UK will be the first to break even with fusion power

And that is the end of the discussion for me. It is pointless to have a discussion with someone who only wants to argue and is completely resistant to real arguments. Your personal bias towards my person is clouding your judgement. That is particularly interesting, since you know nothing about me, nor my background. I laugh every time you make speculative posts about me because you are so far off, it is funny. I just hope that you are not among those calling the shots in the US military. With people like you in charge, we would be totally doomed.

ladajo is an Eagles fan.

Tokamak Energy is featured in a short 3 min 34 s news clip by Channel 4 from UK. You get to see their current lab and tokamak. General Fusion is also briefly mentioned. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQjlsftLp5Q

crowberry wrote:Tokamak Energy is featured in a short 3 min 34 s news clip by Channel 4 from UK. You get to see their current lab and tokamak. General Fusion is also briefly mentioned. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQjlsftLp5Q

Cool video. I love how fast they are moving.

I guess that is why the headline of the very article that you just posted reads:

The UK will be the first to break even with fusion power

Thank you for helping me make my point: Hyperbole.

Chris Lo has done a nice interview with Dr David Kingham from Tokamak Energy called Tokamak Energy: big ideas in a small vessel. It is an illumninating article on what Tokamak Energy is doing.

CL: Do you have a timeframe in mind to hit certain milestones?

DK: Yes, the key milestones are five years to get to an energy gain in one of these compact devices, by around 2020. Ten years to get to first electricity production, even if it's only on a relatively modest and possibly short timescale, and then 15 years to get to electricity in the grid. It will require very substantial investment, but if we make progress along that path, then we'll be in a position to raise that investment. We can only hope to do that if we collaborate around the world with people who have got complementary expertise to the expertise that we have.

However, there haven't been many very exciting results for the last 15 years. I mean, JET achieved its huge goal of 16MW of power back in 1997, and nothing really spectacular has happened since then. So we know as a business that to keep investors, the public and perhaps politicians interested, we have to produce results every year or two and they've got to be exciting.

http://www.power-technology.com/feature ... el-4708451

JET had already reached 64% of break-even back in 1997, before it had a robust enough physical structure to take a break-even load. Now that it's been completely refitted, it's only a matter of time before it achieves break-even.

Says here that (as of last year) the plan was to run DT again in 2017.

Here they say that the plan is to produce 15 MW of fusion power in essentially steady state (5 s duration), which is better performance than the previous DT campaign where they achieved 16 MW transiently, but only 4 MW in steady-state. However, because they are using ~ 45 MW heating power (combined neutral beams, RF, and induction), this will only correspond to Q ~ 0.3.

I may be exposing my ignorance (hopefully not stupidity), but I seem to recall that the revived JET had a goal of reaching break even near the end of the current research run, ~ 2019. As such, could the quoted numbers above reflect an intermediate goal?

Also, there is some interesting numbers. If they are needing to increase heating power nearly 100% just to maintain the same output for 5 seconds instead of less than 1 second, it would seem to not be encouraging from a predictive standpoint. There would be no intervening improvement in confinement, and actually a significant decrease in effective confinement with longer term steady state goals (of 5 seconds vs less than a second).

Though, I guess a near 2 fold increase in input power yielding a ~ 3 fold increase in fusion power steady state is scaling in an eventual break even direction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_European_Torus

[quote/]"In the history of fusion research the year 1991 is particularly significant: on the 9th November a Preliminary Tritium Experiment achieved the world’s first controlled release of fusion power. Six years later, in 1997, another world record was achieved at JET: 16 mega watts of fusion power were produced from a total input power of 24 mega watts – a 65% ratio. This is equivalent to a release of 22 mega joules of energy. a total of 16 MW was measured for less than a second and 5 MW for 5 seconds."[/quote]

Dan Tibbets

D Tibbets wrote:I may be exposing my ignorance (hopefully not stupidity), but I seem to recall that the revived JET had a goal of reaching break even near the end of the current research run, ~ 2019. As such, could the quoted numbers above reflect an intermediate goal?

Yup:
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1812 ... ite-energy

http://www.globalfuturist.org/2016/08/t ... e-horizon/

Title is click-baitish, but I found this interesting:

But Tokamak Energy’s third prototype, currently under construction, aims to reach 15mC in the next 12 months and 100mC by the end of 2017.

Also:

Copper magnets and regular superconductors, which operate at near absolute zero, require too much energy. So Tokamak Energy is using high-temperature superconductors, though these still operate at -200C.

And:

Plasmas are well understood, meaning that containing the ultra-hot gas is the major obstacle. “It is essentially an engineering and technical challenge now,” said Kingham.

Good news about the ELM.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 111858.htm