NBC news article from Alan Boyle

[Tom Ligon]

I found this link over on the Fusion Energy Social Media site on LinkedIn. It is more about the Dynomak, but mentions the EMC2 Polywell. However, the costs look dated, not reflecting Dr. Park's Microsoft talk. Has anyone pinged Alan about the Microsoft talk yet?

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science- ... ap-n223266

[MSimon]

I found this link over on the Fusion Energy Social Media site on LinkedIn. It is more about the Dynomak, but mentions the EMC2 Polywell. However, the costs look dated, not reflecting Dr. Park's Microsoft talk. Has anyone pinged Alan about the Microsoft talk yet?

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science- ... ap-n223266

Thanks for the heads up. I just contacted him.

[D Tibbets]

This is apparently a variation on the spheromak. As such it may allow for high Beta and thus high fusion power density/ small reactor size. Once all of the research and development costs are completed. The cost of constructing reactors may appx. follow the radius cubed scaling. Foe each doubling is machine radius the costs increase 8 fold. A two meter machine might cost $100 million. A 10 meter radius machine would thus cost ~ $ 12.5 billion, for the same fusion output. A smaller machine, even at mildly increased technology costs has a big advantage. Dr Park hinted at this and Dr Bussard emphasized this on several occasions. Any reactor that does not allow for direct conversion will depend on a conventional steam plant for generating the electrical power and will look pretty much like a coal fired, or a nuclear fission plant . Lots of steam plumbing, cooling, etc with a hopefully small reactor somewhat similar in size to a Nuclear fission reactor. A tokamak is different in that the reactor itself may be as big as the steam plant.

Bussard proposed cutting a Polywell reactor into the existing coal fired steam plant. The only real change would be idling the incinerator. If the reactor is small and relatively inexpensive, such modifications could greatly ease the adoption of the fusion reactor. It is somewhat similar to early optimism with fission nuclear reactors. That proved to be a boondoggle as the dangers and attempts to control them bloated the costs tremendously. Still, it has been made almost competitive with coal.

With a relatively small and Safe reactor (fission or fusion) the cost may be small enough that all other considerations drives the total plant costs. Improvements in the steam plant may be as important. Things like super critical CO2 'steam' plants, modification of waste heat management - such as with much improved thermocouples, etc . may play as significant a role in advanced economical and environmentally friendly power plants.

The only real game changer is direct conversion. If a compact fusion generator can be coupled to a compact high efficiency direct conversion scheme things change considerably. There would still be cooling and waste heat issues but they would be much reduced. This is a tremendous potential advantage for any scheme that might produce aneutronic fusion - D-He3, or especially P-B11 fusion in a non ignition machine. Systems like the Polywell, DPF and some FRC (?) systems thus have development risks, but a much higher potential payout result.

Dan Tibbets

[Ivy Matt]

This article is from last fall, shortly before the Lockheed-Martin media blitz.

[MSimon]

This article is from last fall, shortly before the Lockheed-Martin media blitz.

10 Oct 2014 to be exact.

[TDPerk]

...such as with much improved thermocouples, etc...
Dan Tibbets

Thermocouples or thermopiles, one being for measurement the other being for low temperature gradient electricity production.

[D Tibbets]

...such as with much improved thermocouples, etc...
Dan Tibbets

Thermocouples or thermopiles, one being for measurement the other being for low temperature gradient electricity production.

Your distintion stimulated me to look for some context, definitions. Basically thermocouple and thermopile are synominous, Each is described as an elictrical generator ans a sensor. Thermopiles are apparently serial and/ or parellel arrangements of multiple.thermocouples. Apparently such arrangements can be more sensitive as a heat sensor such for medical ear thermometers, etc. The only real distintion for power generation I saw from my brief search was thermoelectric generator as applied to satalite radio isotope power sources.

No consistant seperation in term/ application, so choose your preference but reconize both seem to be used as discriptors for sensors and generators.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermopile

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermocouple

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoelectric_generator
http://science.howstuffworks.com/enviro ... ion136.htm

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/thermopile

Dan Tibbets