Talk-Polywell.org

given the apparent track record of the Recovery projects I wouldnt assume anything administratively accept they threw money at everything that moved, or stood still. To think anything useful could be gleaned from the Recovery Act administration seems naive. It may prove beneficial that all that mone...

Quote MSIMON : We can help you through the difficult points and you may even come up with stuff that hasn't been properly addressed. But it is easier if you show a little humility (I know - it is hard - I don't do it well either). With respect, I dont think my humility is an issue, my ignorance MAY...

I would be interested in comments on possibility of both thermal conversion AND electron capture in a BORON BFR. I understand the issues of cost for thermal turbines etc, but that suits our 1400MW Nuclear Base comparison. I also understand that Boron plasma will require a much higher heat reaction t...

Normal plants convert one energy source to another. Fussion Reactors can be self breeding and convert a realtively cheap feed stock (Boron) to energy. You do not have the continuing cost of energy input in this scenario so it would seem that operational costs would be competitive. Well yes you do. ...

So here is where I am currently at: to equate to the 1400MW 2.4 Billion Nuclear project which is a real one being built. 1.5 meter 100mw scales 1:7 for 1400MW output we need a 1) 4 - 5 meter reactor (depending on capture efficiency) 2) built for $2.4 billion. 3) Boron Fuel costs per year would be $4...

How much Boron would it take to produce 100MW for one year? Anyone have a clue? ... yielding a fuel mass estimate of about 60 kg per year. WIKIPEDIA: The average cost of crystalline boron is $5/g I compute that at $300,000 a year. One of the reoccuring themes here is transportation and remotness to...

But that is efficiency of capture of gross generated electron energy, not % of inputed energy Yes, of course. Sorry, it has drifted off your original topic by half-a-lane; Chrismb, not meant as a critisism, only an observation, I greatly appreciate yourself and the few who have tried to seriously d...

Total efficiency by this calc = 45%. ... , but that doesn't matter much as the numbers show that it's no better than thermal energy capture, even if everything and all else is possible. But that is efficiency of capture of gross generated electron energy, not % of inputed energy, without understand...

whoops! that quote was from blaisepascal

Quote: KitemanSA I agree with that statement... I'd rephrase it: If the value of net output power (raw power less conversion and feedback losses) is greater than the costs of fuel, maintenance, operation, and construction debt service and repayment, then why couldn't we build it? ENDQUOTE Thanks fo...

Damon, During all that time your capital is tied up you are paying people and no income. So add that to your capital budget. WoW is that the way an engineer ties up his money 100% up friont? It's called PLANNING and personell dont stand around and money isnt drwan down till needed. I'ts called LETT...

It seems curious when a statement such as: If you can produce 200mw from a $200 million investment you have a viable plant. Is refuted by engineers. I don't know what part of their training makes this a bad model. This is well within the PRE GLOBAL WARMING enconomy. Normal plants convert one energy ...

While I am throroughly convinced that my view is legit, this is will be my last attempt to illustrate it. This is a purely economical presentation based on intial and startup costs versus value of output to grid. Portlan OR Gas Plants presented as a baseline economically viable investment. The plant...

MSIMON With all due respect, and admiration for all of your wealth. I don't think you read my post correctly, the $10,000 was a break even point covering the cost of the fossil fuel startup, and has nothing to due with overall output. After startup costs are reccovered , all net output is a net gain...

[/quote]And that pitance of energy output may be enough to justify running it. Better than nothing. You'd be glad for 1MW net power if you were stuck on a moon base or something![/quote] If I had a startup energy cost of 100mgw for 1 hour, then produced 1mw for 20 years I have 175200 (-100) hours of...