Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 5:10 am
Out of interest I was running through some of the reaction channels for transition metal elements fusing with a proton (the current hypothesis), using the naturally occurring isotope ratios. (Piantelli has stated previously that the reaction is possible for the transition metals). On a hunch, I chose to only consider transition metals that have spin 0+ nuclei stable elements, so these are the even numbers.
Of these, the ones that have reaction channels that produce long half-life radioactive products are at least Titanium, Chromium, Zirconium, Molybdenum, Ruthenium ... maybe others. (These maybe cleaned up by refining to remove initial isotopes that lead to long-lived radioactive products).
Also interesting are Platinum and Mercury but these are rare elements so widespread use is probably not feasible. However, with appropriate refining it looks like Platinum could produce Mercury, Iridium and Gold as products so other economic reasons maybe worth looking at. Also naturally occurring isotopes of Mercury have short-half life products including a tiny percentage of Gold.
The most likely candidates that have short half life products are Iron, Nickel and Zinc. Which is quite a coincidence as these are commonly occurring metals used for centuries by man.
Points of note:
Zinc - proton fusion has an interesting product in Gallium (rare metal used in semiconductor industry). Worse case reaction path seems to be a beta decay with 243 day 1/2 life of Zn-65 to Cu-65 (originating from a Zn-65 to Ga-65 to Zn-65)
Nickel - proton fusion paths is already well covered with Rossi and other analyses. Although seems like for the largest percentage naturally occurring isotope [Ni-58] there is possibility of a product with beta-decay with radioactive half life of 10^4 years (Ni-58 to Cu-59 to Ni-59 to Co-59) which could be a legacy ...
The most appealing to me, using this simple analyses is Iron.
Iron - proton fusion:
Fe-56 (91 % naturally occurring isotope) + proton goes to Cobalt-57 and produces 5.516 MeV energy. Co-57 decays by electron capture (emitting X-rays) to stable Fe-57 in 272 days and is an isotope already used and desired by medical industry.
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=ma ... +Cobalt-57
Fe-54 (5.8%) + proton goes to Co-55 decaying to Fe-55 in 17 hours by way of beta decay. Fe-55 decays by way of electron capture with 1/2 life 2.7 years to stable Manganese-55. This final step is already an X-ray source used widely in scientific applications with 60% 5.19keV X-rays and 20% 5.9 keV rays. Primary fusion reaction produces 4.6 MeV.
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=ma ... +Cobalt-55
Fe-58 (0.3%) + proton goes to stable Co-59. This reaction outputs 6.85 MeV.
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=ma ... +Cobalt-59
Other questions regarding economics of the materials preparation of Iron nano-particle powders to get the right surface structure obviously need to be considered. But on this analysis, assuming only proton to naturally occurring isotope fusion requires no enrichment and produces no long-lived radioactive isotopes except those that already desired by industry for low energy properties. Iron powders are also less toxic, safer and easier to work with than Nickel powders.
Just something to think about. I was always told you couldn't get energy out of fusing Iron .... ??
Of these, the ones that have reaction channels that produce long half-life radioactive products are at least Titanium, Chromium, Zirconium, Molybdenum, Ruthenium ... maybe others. (These maybe cleaned up by refining to remove initial isotopes that lead to long-lived radioactive products).
Also interesting are Platinum and Mercury but these are rare elements so widespread use is probably not feasible. However, with appropriate refining it looks like Platinum could produce Mercury, Iridium and Gold as products so other economic reasons maybe worth looking at. Also naturally occurring isotopes of Mercury have short-half life products including a tiny percentage of Gold.
The most likely candidates that have short half life products are Iron, Nickel and Zinc. Which is quite a coincidence as these are commonly occurring metals used for centuries by man.
Points of note:
Zinc - proton fusion has an interesting product in Gallium (rare metal used in semiconductor industry). Worse case reaction path seems to be a beta decay with 243 day 1/2 life of Zn-65 to Cu-65 (originating from a Zn-65 to Ga-65 to Zn-65)
Nickel - proton fusion paths is already well covered with Rossi and other analyses. Although seems like for the largest percentage naturally occurring isotope [Ni-58] there is possibility of a product with beta-decay with radioactive half life of 10^4 years (Ni-58 to Cu-59 to Ni-59 to Co-59) which could be a legacy ...
The most appealing to me, using this simple analyses is Iron.
Iron - proton fusion:
Fe-56 (91 % naturally occurring isotope) + proton goes to Cobalt-57 and produces 5.516 MeV energy. Co-57 decays by electron capture (emitting X-rays) to stable Fe-57 in 272 days and is an isotope already used and desired by medical industry.
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=ma ... +Cobalt-57
Fe-54 (5.8%) + proton goes to Co-55 decaying to Fe-55 in 17 hours by way of beta decay. Fe-55 decays by way of electron capture with 1/2 life 2.7 years to stable Manganese-55. This final step is already an X-ray source used widely in scientific applications with 60% 5.19keV X-rays and 20% 5.9 keV rays. Primary fusion reaction produces 4.6 MeV.
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=ma ... +Cobalt-55
Fe-58 (0.3%) + proton goes to stable Co-59. This reaction outputs 6.85 MeV.
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=ma ... +Cobalt-59
Other questions regarding economics of the materials preparation of Iron nano-particle powders to get the right surface structure obviously need to be considered. But on this analysis, assuming only proton to naturally occurring isotope fusion requires no enrichment and produces no long-lived radioactive isotopes except those that already desired by industry for low energy properties. Iron powders are also less toxic, safer and easier to work with than Nickel powders.
Just something to think about. I was always told you couldn't get energy out of fusing Iron .... ??