A 100 GW D-T Plant

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

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Sun Aug 22, 2010 12:21 am

MSimon wrote: I believe China is INSTALLING a 1 MV DC transmission line. Close enough until you have to get the details down.
Wikipedia wrote:The HVDC Gezhouba–Shanghai is a high voltage direct current electric power transmission system between Gezhouba and Nanqiao near Shanghai, China put in service in 1989. The bipolar 1,046-kilometre (650 mi) line is rated at 500 kV and a maximum power of 1,200 MW.[1][2]

BenTC
Posts: 410
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 4:54 am

Postby BenTC » Sun Aug 22, 2010 12:40 am

Axil wrote:But for a BIG country that makes steel and aluminum

As an aluminium producer, I would rather have my very own fusion reactor over which I had complete operational control, than relying on a grid that might trip once every five or ten years. Cheaper too.
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Sun Aug 22, 2010 12:43 am

Kiteman,

You referenced an installed line.

I said "is installing. "

http://www.siemens.com/innovation/en/pu ... echina.htm

To be completed in 2010. +/-800KVDC

Some tech stuff:

http://www02.abb.com/global/seitp/seitp ... nology.pdf

Failure modes:

http://teshmont.com/pdf/papers/800%20kV%20Paper.pdf
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Postby GIThruster » Sun Aug 22, 2010 1:13 am

D Tibbets wrote:
GIThruster wrote:"* The exception of course would be a truly humongous reactor that could directly transmit its energy to the entire planet. Any guesses on what it is called?"

the greatest achievement of the Krell civilization. . .


The Krel used the energy of the planets core (I think?). This reactor would dwarf even that. It is so powerful, and has such macro instabilities in its magnetic fields (it even puts Tokamaks to shame) that it would have to be placed a great distance from the Earth to be safe.

Dan Tibbets


Sounds like the Sun.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

Enginerd
Posts: 178
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 5:29 am

Postby Enginerd » Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:32 am

D Tibbets wrote:This reactor would dwarf even that. It is so powerful, and has such macro instabilities in its magnetic fields (it even puts Tokamaks to shame) that it would have to be placed a great distance from the Earth to be safe.


Best to put it at approximately 1 AU to be safe....

BenTC
Posts: 410
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 4:54 am

Postby BenTC » Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:11 pm

Thanks. This was interesting...
> http://www02.abb.com/global/seitp/seitp ... nology.pdf
Every year China installs new power-generating capacity equivalent to the entire installed capacity of Sweden.

China is currently planning to build one 800kV DC line per year over the next ten years...

India is currently planning to build one 800kV DC line every two years over the next decade...

So it can be said that 800kV DC will account for a significant part of world growth in power transmission capacity over the next ten years.
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:32 pm

The magic of Polywell is the reduced cost and the distributed system. It makes for a robust and dependable cheap infrastructure. Iwonder how big a ball we could make if we rolled up all the regional and national grid lines?

So sorry, it’s a matter of personal preference. I like big powerful things. You can get “BIG POWER” out of fission. Boron fusion seems so impotent. Three 2.3 MeV alphas per reaction hardly seems worth the effort. What a joke. It just doesn’t seem up to the job that must be done.


I have to comment: So it is like the 2.43 neutrons per fission...but instead we get 3 <screaming> alphas for fusion...

Hidden joke for those in the know :D

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

Postby Axil » Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:45 pm

deleted
Last edited by Axil on Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby Axil » Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:46 pm

How would a large reactor(s) fit into the renewable paradigm; here is a proposal.


Maybe, nuclear R&D for very large nuclear reactors can be sold as an adjunct to renewable power generation as follows:

Prudent investment in research and development of complimentary technologies such as the super grid, superconductive power lines supporting CO2 free nuclear and renewable power generation can underpin a renaissance in electrical production in the USA and a transition away from fossil fuel energy sources.

The Tres Amigas Project provides a framework and an unprecedented opportunity to build a large centralized underground nuclear generation project using direct conversion of nuclear energy to feed direct current (DC) into the super conducting transcontinental super grid.

Image

The key technology is direct nuclear power conversion into DC electric power, the same direct energy conversion approach can turn fusion and/or fission power directly into DC power.

But additionally, this nuclear power source can both load-level and backup an intercontinental wind generation capacity strategically positioned in the mid-west and solar generation in the southwest.

Clovis, New Mexico is the projected heart of this electrical power development zone. With a sparse population of about 30,000, this dry, isolated, high planes ranch land is an ideal location for a national energy generation park.

More specifically, the Cannon air force base is ideally suited to house an energy generation campus. It was until recently the home of the 27th Fighter Wing before it was decommissioned in 2005.

New green concepts in nuclear power production utilizing direct power conversion of nuclear radiation to DC electric current provides direct energy conversion at high efficiency.

This reactor type must be air cooled and need no water making its deployment in dry conditions possible. At near perfect energy conversion, this futuristic power source produces little waste heat to dissipate into the environment.

The nuclear power source need not bear the total national power production load. Far form it.

This new paradigm in power production compliments wind and solar power in that it can mitigate the peaks and valleys in large scale renewable power sources based on rapid self regulation of the nuclear reaction.

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

Postby Axil » Sun Aug 22, 2010 7:08 pm

Iwonder how big a ball we could make if we rolled up all the regional and national grid lines?


This is a valuable observation.


When a concept is taken to extreme, it is important to look at resource limitations.

To replace fissile fuels, a large deployment of electric conductive material will be required. Think of how muck copper will be needed to produce all those wind mills, electric cars, and polywells together with their support equipment and interconnecting grid components.

For example, is there enough copper in the world to manufacture all the equipment required?

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Postby GIThruster » Sun Aug 22, 2010 7:15 pm

Emmmm. . . sorry but I'm not believing anything like air cooled nukes in the desert and direct nuke power conversion at high efficiency. Did you have something to share other than a pipe dream?
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

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

Postby Axil » Sun Aug 22, 2010 7:34 pm

Hydrogen- Boron11 fusion would not be as much, but I suspect it would still be in the ball park compared to Uranium fission.


If I were an advocate of boron fusion, I would be concerned with the cost of isotopically purifying the boron both in terms of cost and power, since large amounts of boron would be needed to compensate for the low energy production levels per reaction.

One interesting question that might come up, does it take more energy to purify a mole of boron, than can be obtained from fusion of that mole.

How many tons of boron are needed to produce a gigawatt year of power. Has anyone ever done the calculation?

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

Postby Axil » Sun Aug 22, 2010 7:47 pm

Did you have something to share other than a pipe dream?



I though that polywell if properly scaled to large size was one of the direct power conversion approaches that could meet the requirements of this (power hub) deployment mode. If it cannot scale to very large size, then the polywell concept is limited (BTW: like light water reactors and PBMR).

The eventual costumer of polywell will be electric utilities. These companies require “economies of scale”. They have never considered using small reactors because of this perceived weakness.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Sun Aug 22, 2010 11:05 pm

If I were an advocate of boron fusion, I would be concerned with the cost of isotopically purifying the boron both in terms of cost and power, since large amounts of boron would be needed to compensate for the low energy production levels per reaction.


Yeah. I would be concerned too if we didn't have the costs available from the semiconductor industry. And that for five or six nines pure. Where three or four nines will do for a fusion reactor.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Sun Aug 22, 2010 11:08 pm

They have never considered using small reactors because of this perceived weakness.


It is not economies of scale that hurts. It is expensive operating personnel.

A BFR could - once fully developed operate unattended.

Utilities like 50 to 200 MWe plants.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests