Visit to Helion Energy Lab

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

TallDave
Posts: 3113
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Postby TallDave » Fri Nov 13, 2009 3:51 pm

I disagree with your physics version of efficient market hypothesis: that everything worth inventing has been invented and that anything that hasn't been funded isn't worth funding.


Plus, lots of worthless ideas get funded too, even in relatively well-understood fields. Every year millions go to companies claiming mathematically impossible compression tech.

Munchausen wrote:
TallDave wrote:I don't have any questions, but if at the end of the tour you could scream "POLYWELL!!" over and over until security drags you out that would be appreciated.


Certainly appreciated, but hardly beneficial.


I just enjoy the mental image of fanatical fusion cultists screaming about their respective technologies at each others' facilities. Peer review would be much more entertaining as a contact sport.

Munchausen
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:36 pm
Location: Nikaloukta

Postby Munchausen » Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:24 pm

I disagree with your physics version of efficient market hypothesis: that everything worth inventing has been invented and that anything that hasn't been funded isn't worth funding.


Didn't say that. But there seems to be no shortage of ideas on how to make fusion energy happen. You can't fund them all.

Science at the level of individual plasma devices is a very specialized area, often even fellow plasma physicists don't really understand how rival fusion concepts outside their area of expertise they work in. If you apply for funding for FRC research and there isn't an FRC man on the funding panel but instead just a few tokamak physicists they won't completely understand what your talking about and probably won't give you funding.


As I understand it, the scientific community chose long ago to concentrate efforts on one approach. Do you think they did this prematurely?

Anyway, if I was in a position to decide on which one to fund, one of the statements below would certainly appear to me as more insightful, trustworthy and honest than the other.

I probed John as best I could, but I could find no obvious roadblocks. You at this forum know that spotting potential problems is my strong suit, and my expertise in FRCs should have helped me to do so in this case. Of course, it might just not work for any number of reasons, and John has no illusions about that.


if we build it, then it will work and then it will start replacing other forms of energy

Munchausen
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:36 pm
Location: Nikaloukta

Postby Munchausen » Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:52 pm

I just enjoy the mental image of fanatical fusion cultists screaming about their respective technologies at each others' facilities. Peer review would be much more entertaining as a contact sport.


To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven

However: Why amuse yourself at the expensive of others?Collect the other true believers, get your shotguns and hayforks and go for a crusade.

Munchausen
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:36 pm
Location: Nikaloukta

Postby Munchausen » Sun Nov 15, 2009 2:06 pm

I still think Art Carlson (or that other guy Slough) should do popular lecture on the FRC on Google video. If he thinks it's worth having.

If done in a sensible and appropriate manor, there is no scientific honour or credibility to loose on popularizing one's results.

Quite to the contrary, it may result in funding and faster progress.

Besides, I do hugely enjoy listening to a witty, knowledgeable and well performed lecture.

If asked politely, Torulf will certainly contribute with illustrations to the best of his abilities.

I can assure you, that more than a few swedish nuclear engineers will be informed of this lecture as soon as it is available.

MSimon
Posts: 14310
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:47 am

As I understand it, the scientific community chose long ago to concentrate efforts on one approach. Do you think they did this prematurely?


Yes.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
http://protonboron.com/
THE OPEN POLYWELL FUSION CONSORTIUM

Munchausen
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:36 pm
Location: Nikaloukta

The helion presentation updated again

Postby Munchausen » Sat Nov 28, 2009 11:03 am


MSimon
Posts: 14310
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Re: The helion presentation updated again

Postby MSimon » Sat Nov 28, 2009 1:40 pm


They have a tritium problem. i.e. No plans for breeding. And that was by page 3.

And then they have a steam plant. If the cost of the fusion plant was brought to zero it wouldn't change the economics much assuming costs in line with nuclear or coal plants.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
http://protonboron.com/
THE OPEN POLYWELL FUSION CONSORTIUM

Skipjack
Posts: 5824
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Postby Skipjack » Sat Nov 28, 2009 8:25 pm

They have a tritium problem. i.e. No plans for breeding. And that was by page 3.


On page 5 it says Fuel: Litium and Deuterium. So I would assume that they do breed their own Tritium somehow.

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Postby Axil » Sun Nov 29, 2009 8:17 am

The fusion/fission hybrid power calculations are far higher than for just fusion.

The FRC may work in fusion/fission hybrid mode with a fusion “Q” factor of less than 1.

Fission is a huge energy multiplier.

Using thorium and beryllium, for every fusion neutron produced, you get out 144,000 MeV thermal energy; give or take. If the FRC can get to a neutron production rate of 10e17 neutrons per second, it is in business.

Maybe by increasing the reputation rate you can get good energy output out of the FRC at its current level of development.

For example the following estimate includes overhead for tritium production.

At 10e17 n/s and a repetition rate of 10 to 15 times a second the thermal energy of 60 megawatts are produced.

At 10e17 n/s and a repetition rate of 100 to 150 times a second the thermal energy of 600 megawatts are produced.

At 10e17 n/s and a repetition rate of 1000 to 1500 times a second the thermal energy of 6 gigawatts are produced.

------------------------------------

Fusion and fission make a good couple; they fill gaps; like from the movie “Rocky”


You really like her?
- Sure I like her.



I don't see it. What's the attraction?



I don't know. It fills gaps, I guess.



- What's "gaps"?
- I don't know. She's got gaps, I got gaps.



Together we fill gaps. I don't know...

Munchausen
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:36 pm
Location: Nikaloukta

Postby Munchausen » Sat Mar 27, 2010 9:37 am

p. 11 and 12 in the presentation
"Full scale source undergoing testing"
in combination with a picture of a stainless steel contraption looking like a disguised moonshine still.

Does this mean the Helion did get their money and is now building the phase II break even device?

Then we should know in 21-33 months?

kurt9
Posts: 542
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:14 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA

Postby kurt9 » Wed Mar 31, 2010 8:45 pm

Tritium breeding seems to be an issue with D-T fusion. Is this easily done in a pulsed FRC reactor?

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Postby Axil » Wed Mar 31, 2010 9:15 pm

kurt9 wrote:Tritium breeding seems to be an issue with D-T fusion. Is this easily done in a pulsed FRC reactor?


The Helion reactor is a fusion/fission hybrid. A hybrid is a fuel factory that feeds a large number of dependent fission reactors.

If you feel like reading see:

http://www.marcobresci.it/docs/fusione_ibrida.pdf

All fission reactors produce tritium as a nuclear waste product. This tritium can be sent to a helion reactor for use as a feed stock. This is one advantage of the hybrid concept.

A D-T fusion reactor must breed its own tritium.

JLawson
Posts: 418
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: Georgia
Contact:

Postby JLawson » Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:28 am

TallDave wrote:I just enjoy the mental image of fanatical fusion cultists screaming about their respective technologies at each others' facilities. Peer review would be much more entertaining as a contact sport.

Coming soon to an arena near you - Full Contact PADLESS Peer Review Deathmatches!
When opinion and reality conflict - guess which one is going to win in the long run.


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 2 guests