ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



Fusion catches fire

Posted: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 6:46 PM by Alan Boyle


LLNL
Technicians check a positioner inside the target chamber at the National Ignition
Facility in California. A tiny capsule containing fusion fuel would be placed at the
very end of the pencil-shaped positioner, then blasted by 192 laser beams.

All of a sudden, nuclear fusion is becoming an energy buzzword instead of an energy joke: One route to fusion is being hailed as having the potential to become a "holy cow game-changer," another mainstream method is getting a multimillion-dollar boost, and a dark-horse candidate is stealthily moving forward as well. Heck, even cold fusion is back in the game.

So what's behind the seemingly sudden interest?

Part of the buzz is dictated by the calendar. After 12 years of construction, the world's most powerful laser is finally finished at the National Ignition Facility in California, and VIPs are getting a look at some of the best that Big Science has to offer in fusion energy research.

But part of it is dictated by the hard times we're living in, said Richard Nebel, who heads a team looking at an unconventional kind of fusion technology. "These can be the times when innovation can really take hold," he told me today.

The way Nebel sees it, tough times can spur people to look for unconventional solutions to society's challenges - for example, how to develop cleaner, cheaper, more abundant sources of energy. Biofuels (including algae), wind, wave, geothermal and solar power are all part of the mix, along with better batteries and greater fuel efficiency.

There's a place for safer nuclear power as well, involving fission as well as future fusion - or maybe even fission-fusion hybrids. Here's a quick rundown of the latest developments:

Laser fusion
The $3.5 billion National Ignition Facility has been 12 years in the making, but today the Energy Department announced that the super-laser-blaster is fully operational and ready for business. The department has emphasized the facility's function as an H-bomb simulator, probably because that's its most down-to-earth application. However, a lot of researchers and onlookers are hoping that the NIF can provide a realistic route to commercial fusion power.


LLNL
  Click for video:
  The National Ignition
  Facility explains "the
  power of light."

The NIF's array of 192 pulsed lasers are designed to blast pellets of deuterium-tritium fuel so intensely that they ignite in a fusion reaction. Earlier this month, NIF's operators reported that they delivered more than a megajoule of laser energy to the target chamber's focus point - which should be enough to get nuclear fusion started.

The prospect of creating a controlled fusion reaction is what led New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman to write that the research planned for NIF might be a "holy cow game-changer" in the energy quest. If the technique actually works, a $10 billion pilot power plant could be built to prove that "any local power utility could have its own miniature sun - on a commercial basis," Friedman said.

And if not? "At the pace we're going with the technologies we have, without some game-changers, climate change is going to have its way with us," he wrote.

Tokamak fusion
The other Big Science path to fusion leads through France, where the $13 billion ITER fusion research plant is under construction. ITER, due for startup in 2016, is an international effort that is based on magnetic-confinement technology. The fusion reaction would be contained within a highly shielded, doughnut-shaped chamber known as a tokamak.

A year ago, U.S. participation in ITER was essentially put on hold due to the budgetary battles between Congress and the Bush administration. There was a risk that U.S. firms would be locked out from participation in the project - but that scenario was averted when the Energy Department restored ITER's funding just in the nick of time.

The omnibus spending bill for the remainder of this fiscal year, which was signed into law three weeks ago, includes $124 million for the U.S. involvement in ITER. Thom Mason, the director of Tennessee's Oak Ridge National Laboratory, told the Knoxville News Sentinel's Frank Munger that the U.S. ITER effort had been "running on fumes" for the past few months.

"So, this will really help the morale and get people moving," he said.

The big priority now is to arrange for the purchase of U.S.-built hardware that the federal government has promised to contribute to the ITER reactor. That should have a "good economic impact in terms of employment," Mason said.

Fission-fusion hybrids
Some researchers say the fusion process could be paired up with the fission process to reduce the amount of waste left behind by conventional nuclear reactors.

The classic hybrid concept - known as Laser Inertial Fusion-Fission Energy, or LIFE - was developed by NIF researchers: They suggested that a laser-sparked fusion reaction could supply extra neutrons inside a fission reactor. That power boost would burn up radioactive leftovers that otherwise would have to be stored or reprocessed.

More recently, physicists at the University of Texas at Austin proposed a similar hybrid technique that would employ a fusion tokamak rather than a laser-blaster. The technique was touted by Forbes magazine's Jonathan Fahey as a "Texas Smoosh 'Em." (Fahey also looked at the LIFE concept.)

The idea's boosters say going with hybrid reactors would reduce the need for long-term waste repositories such as the one that had been planned for Yucca Mountain in Nevada. It looks as if the Obama administration is pulling the plug on the plans for Yucca Mountain, so
any strategy that cuts down on the nuclear waste problem would be warmly welcomed.

However, it's not yet clear whether the fusion-fission hybrid concept is workable. Over at the Atomic Insights blog, Rod Adams is skeptical about NIF in general and hybrid nuclear power in particular. "Fission works; fusion is a complex hallucination," Adams writes.

Polywell fusion
If fusion is a hallucination, the wildest part of the vision would have to be the project that Nebel and his colleagues are working on at EMC2 Fusion Development Corp. in New Mexico. They're following up on preliminary indications that a relatively low-budget, high-voltage gizmo known as a Polywell fusion device could produce more energy than it consumes - that is, if the gizmo is scaled up to the appropriate size.

Late last year, Nebel's team sent a report about their experiments to their funders at the U.S. Navy. The results were encouraging enough that the Navy is providing the money for follow-up work through the end of this year.

Nebel told me the interim funding was meant to "keep us alive until they figure out what they want to do." Although he was reluctant to go into the details, progress reports posted on the Talk-Polywell discussion forum and the Dean's World blog indicate that the device's design  is being tweaked to improve its performance.

"We've been trying to clean up some of the things we know we can do better," Nebel said.

Nebel has long hoped that the technology could be ramped up to create commercially viable fusion reactors - which would cost way less than $10 billion each, by the way. He is still hopeful. "We think that we should be able to go forward with this," he said.

However, Nebel is also reluctant to overpromise. That might not be a bad thing, considering that so many people involved in the fusion quest have been promising so much for so long. The most Nebel will say is that the studies - and the discussions with potential funders - are continuing.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

MSNBC should report more on the REAL progress in fusion: Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (Cold Fusion). The announcement on March. 23, 2009 by American Chemical Society is maybe the single most important science news for the decade. For the first time, there is no more doubt raised about the experimental result: high energy neutrons have indeed been detected, so it's prooof positively there is a NUCLEAR process going on.

Cold Fusion technology not only has a huge implication on our energy future, but also has a huge NATIONAL SECURITY implication if it falls into the wrong hands. You must read this to understand the danger:

http://tinyurl.com/ddfdvy

Read it and pass it to your elected politicians. Urge them to support LENR research. BTW buy some palladium metal for a great investment.
[...] The hydrogen used in a fusion reaction of this kind is either heavy hydrogen (deuterium, which has one neutron as opposed to hydrogen's zero), or tritium which has two neutrons.  NEITHER of which can be combined with oxygen to form water.
Mr. Jones you said:
"All the fusion reactors under development will at best just barely manage to induce fusion, and have ZERO chance of an uncontained reaction- fusion is incredibly difficult.  There is absolutely no cause for worry on that score."
By fusion reactors under development, is NIF considered here? Is this a fusion reactor prototype?
Fusion will happen. There is no question about that. It's just a matter of time.  Look at Henry Ford.  He said he could mass produce automobiles, and he did.  Now it's history.  Look at Hyman George Rickover.  He didn't really know that much about Nuclear Powered Submarines, but he went ahead and built one.  Now that's history as well.  I envy people alive today who were born in the 19th century.  Look at the history they've seen come and go.  So much of it people take for granted today.  If you don't think you take things for granted?  How do you feel when your power goes out?  Fusion will happen and when it does, it's going to put a lot of people back to work.  
In answer to the question from "C":  Earth-bound fusion is like the sun only in the sense that it creates the same nuclear reaction.  The sun uses gravity to compress its hydrogen enough to fuse it into into a heavier element (helium), thereby releasing energy.  On earth, we use an array of lasers all aimed inward at a single point, or carefully-configured magnetic fields, to compress the hydrogen and initiate fusion.  Fusion reactors on earth are not really "mini-suns" but they do have enough similarity that people often describe them that way.
The original people who promised Fusion power are now dead and long gone away. These fusion reactor proponents will also die away.

Fission Reactors, and a breeder program have been producing power in France for 30 years.

Politically incorrect, technically competent. It will be ignored by the popcorn science crowd now in the white house, as usual.
I would like someone here to show me how we are going to (or currently) able to circumvent the basic law of conservation of energy in which we cannot gain more energy than what was put into it.

You can't create energy. You can only transform it from one state to another. Period.

I have seen so many attempts over the years of people claiming to have developed a new method or device that outputs more energy than was was put into it but when they come up for an actual scientific review, they never pan out. It's heart-breaking for sure, but it's simple fact.

The universe and all the stars in it follow the same laws so I'm not sure why man thinks he'll do any better though I don't knock anybody for trying.

Honestly, if there were such devices possible and actually produced more energy than what is invested, don't you all realize companies would already be doing exactly that? The financial power companies could have on technology that actually does it would be staggering.

A simple way to start learning why what some of the things described here aren't possible (only in terms of gaining more engery than was was put in), take a good long look at perpetual motion machines (and how they don't actually work). Not to mention reading up on the conservation of energy.

That being said, I do love to see new studies performed and society as a whole gain new understanding but as of this writing, what some claim to be able to do are blowing smoke in others faces.

Don't let some of these companies fool you that they are gaining more than what they put into it. In the physical realm, you simply can't.

I'm all for science and for the actual legit studies described here in the article don't get me wrong. It will continue to advance man-kind as a whole but I do really dislike people and companies that make false unverified claims against the masses for their own financial gain.

In short, take it all with a grain of salt and study carefully what claims are being made by companies.
Another unconventional fusion related project is the Mosier-Boss project at USN SPAWAR San Diego. She has reported high speed neutrons (poss fusion generated) from a Deuterium-Palladium Cell. This was reported at a recent American Chemical Society meeting.
Nice, well-written article. However, "cold fusion" is more than just "in the game" and by the way, it is NOT strong interaction fusion: it is based on weak interactions. And yes, it is potentially better than 'hot fusion' if successfully commercialized because there are no energetic neutrons and no gammas. See: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/scienergy.php    
"Yes lets turn all the hydrogen into helium so that we have no water to drink, that's a good idea. It's not an endless fuel supply. When hydrogen fuses it forms helium which cannot be made into water. Why do we think this is a good idea."

The potential energy from just the deuterium isotope of hydrogen (not *all* the hydrogen) in one gallon of water is equal to 300 gallons of gasoline. The E=mc^2 equation (Energy equals mass multiplied by the square of the speed of light) says in essence that a small amount of matter can be converted into a large amount of energy. (as shown in the forms of nuclear energy we already use) Yes it's finite, but the available energy in the barest fraction of the available fusion fuels on Earth will suffice for many thousands of years.

Unless you expect to consume energy at the rate of a star, you will NOT see any visible depletion in the amount of hydrogen on Earth if this can be made to work by one or more of the above methods.

"A hydrogen fuel cell in your house would provide all your electricity, some or all of your hot water and a by-product of pure water, and would be powered by the methane gas from your sewer line."

A methane fuel cell isn't the same as one using free (as in not bound to any other element) hydrogen.

And how much methane do you think is available in the average sewer line? How many could use it at once?

(You *can* however, get emergency generators today, powered by conventional natural gas [which is mostly methane] from your utility, whose pressure will normally continue in a power failure...)

"Maybe someone can explain if they are making a real sun or a theoretical "sun"? If it was a real sun, would it be too small for a gravitational collapse?"


You're quite right. Gravity is insignificant here. This is why magnetic, electrostatic or other forces are used to compress a plasma of fusion fuel to temperatures and densities long enough for fusion to occur. (though it's a bit more complicated with the Polywell approach) The plasma dissipates, the moment those forces are removed.
" I'm no scientist..."

  Forgive me, but it shows.

"...but the thought of this thing exploding sends shivers down my spine...Have they even thought that through ?"

Part of the reason successful controlled fusion hasn't happened yet is that it's very *difficult* to create and maintain the conditions under which it can happen. There is NO way this can run away from you as a fission reactor might, in a loss of cooling accident. *Stopping* it is all too easy. Stop feeding in fuel and/or turn off the magnetic or electrostatic fields or the lasers, depending yon how you're doing it. The plasma is all *too* happy to expand, cool and dissipate in a heartbeat...

BTW, we *already* have fusion (hydrogen) bombs, and even those took a great deal of engineering development and they only have to achieve fusion for a few brief (albeit intense) seconds, requiring an exploding fission trigger and a lot has to happen just right, in a *very* short time for those to work, as well.
"If fusion is such a hallucination how come we have 100 trillion + stars in the sky?"

Bikini Atoll was no hallucination either, but we simply can *not* produce fusion the same way that stars (or bombs) do.

Consider: Birds are natural proof heavier-than-air flight is possible, but there are reasons that flying machines don't look or work quite like birds...
J. Overlin,

Where does the Hydrogen for the fuel cell come from?  What process to produce the hydrogen does not consume more energy to first produce it?

Hydrogen only make sense if you have an uber-cheap electric generation source like Polywell.

Otherwise, you are just playing second-law of Thermodynamics shenanagans fooling yourself.
"I would like someone here to show me how we are going to (or currently) able to circumvent the basic law of conservation of energy in which we cannot gain more energy than what was put into it. "

Because Aaron,

You CAN convert MATTER into energy.  E=MC^2 does not violate the second law of thermodynamics in an way.

Fusion is E=MC^2.

I am glad you are here to explain to the high energy Physicists how they are wasting their time.

Did you sleep thru physics?
Thank you,Ripster, for answering my question. I believe I get the idea now.
Also, thank you for your answer, Mr. Glover. As I said, I am not in any Physics classes yet, but this is an interesting subject, so I wanted to know more.
Another real turd of a "science" article.

Science reporting in this country is a joke-- a mixture of gee-whiz marketing of techno-toys, dumbasses selling "science" to even dumber-asses, and straight out propaganda and dis-information.
if we had all of this "free power" the pol's couldn't get money from us. they need us to feed them. so don't look for any useful power source until the game in washington changes.
"Promise little, but do much." - Old Japanese saying.

Dr. Nebel is quietly moving toward a next iteration
proof (or disproof) of principal machine; 2 years, $500M, all done.

The mainstream fusion approches are "pure" science;
they have nothing in their charter about commercial
use, i.e. producing and selling power for _money_.
Worse, if they could be made to work, the plants would be: "the largest structures ever built by Man, and insanely radioactive."

Dr. Bussard's legacy, on the other hand, is a 100MW
modular design, with little or no radioactive waste,
and direct conversion to electricity.

"Game Changer" my asymptote; This could, by itself,
produce enough economic hope, and scientific change,
to save us all from spending the rest of our lives in the 19th century.
This may seem like an overly simplistic question, but what keeps the fuel feeder assembly from melting down if they get that thing to work on a susustainable basis? Wouldn't it just slag down anything on the planet from a large constant production of intense heat?

Is the output so small scale in comparison to a production device that it dosen't truly generate much heat?



Well well well I have read all your comments. Now let me tell you all about the REAL solution to the entire world's energy crisis. But before I do let me state that I am a mechanical engineer with my degree in power plant design and analysis+ energy conservation and conversion. Any takers out there?? Any other engineers?? Ok Well for startersman can't create energy only transform matter into energywhichreally is amatter of creating heat in the process. The absolute REAL solution  to not only meet our current but projected needs for electricity will have to met largely by OTEC= Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion.I have been researching every form of energy production known to man for the last 35 years. If you take nuclear (20% currently), natural gas 10% coal 60% off the table beacause of their problems with nuclear waste and coal waste and CO2 output even optimistically ALL the rest of the renewables might supply only 30-35% in the future. The rest will have to come from OTEC whichwoulduse the greatest source of heat STORED on the planet which is in the oceans at the equator. These heat engines will use the delta T from the surface water to the miles deep cold ocean water to produce steam to drive a turbine to produce electricity at the platform to then produce either hydrogen or ammonia whichcouldbe then transported  anywhere by ship to then be burned in newly designed power plants to burn either.( hydrogen will turn back to water and ammonia would produce more nitrogen neither of which would harm the planet any more. We could then start to reverse the effect of CO2 output by using finally more elec cars as well cut our oil consumption around the plant by more than half kill the nuke industry off before they kill everyone even with the current plants( By the way I used to work in relicensing of nuke plants and it is really a joke and the children at the NRC are as crooked as the industry,they are in bed with each other)and the coal industry well it is what it is you have coal flyash loaded with toxins and  more CO2 output event thoughithas gotten way better it will never be totally gone, nor will natural gas. Andas for this fusion well we still all of us have to live with the terrorists and any kind of nuclear fuel willjust addmore fuel to the fire when it comes to anything nuclear  so why make our world more challenged and less safe for future generations. Dont any ofyouthinkwehave already done enough damage to the planet. Lets use the KISS pricipal and go with OTEC  finally  and make the  planet whole lot safer and cleaner for all of us now and for future generations not to be burdened with exotic means of electric generation. Just so everyone knows Lockhead Martin in
Norfolk Va is working on a mini OTEC plant but what is really neededisto quit wasting more time and money on all these other farfetched ideas suchas  more fission plants and now fusion and really dump enough money into OTEC to make it work.If you are so inclined write your favorite congressman or senator and ask why they cantdump a few BILLION into OTEC and get it moving on a fast track. Lets face they are passing the money out like it was candy. OTEC WILL change the future of the entire planet and put the ARABS the coal and nuclear boys down and out and make our planet operate safely at least until the day comes that the SUN wont shine anymore................
Alan,

Judging from the responses, there certainly seems to be a lot of confusion about the science of power generation. Maybe you should write another post to clear up some of the many misconceptions that have been voiced in these comments. Things like:

1. Does fusion power violate the conservation of energy?
2. Will we run out of water if we use hydrogen as fuel?
3. Does helium eventually turn back into hydrogen?
4. Can fuel cells produce unlimited cheap energy?

A science journalist's work is never done!

[ALAN ADDS: The more I think about it, the more I think it would be cool to do something more in-depth about fusion ... so hold that thought. I would say the answers here would be no, no, not without energy input, and it depends on what you mean by "cheap" and "unlimited."]
Aaron,
  You might want to check your physics, becasue helium DOES NOT break back down into hydrogen without adding energy, therfore it will be very unlikely for it to eventually return to hydrogen. In the realm of Fission/Fusion, Iron is the balance point, all elements with an atomic number less than iron's release energy when fused, and require energy to break it apart. Anything with an atomic number greater than iron will release energy when broken apart, and requires energy to fuse. Heavier elements are believed to be the result of Supernovae.
Actually turning hydrogen into helium IS the point, its not adding an electron, its forcing 2 Protons together with enough force that it overcomes the repulsive forces of the 2 similarly charged protons. The resulting Helium's mass is slightly less than the 2 hydrogen atoms that extra mass is where the energy comes from.

[...]
"You CAN convert MATTER into energy.  E=MC^2 does not violate the second law of thermodynamics in an way."

Exactly my point Mike. You missed it completely for some reason. You said it yourself. Convert matter into energy does not equal "create" energy in the pure sense. You are transfering one form of stored energy (matter) into another form. Quite simple and you even understood the concept yet you thought I was arguing.

My real point is to warn people to be very careful of any person or company making a claim they are producing more energy than what they are putting into it. This breaks so many fundemental laws of thermodynamics that if they prove factual, it would require an almost total re-write of our currently understood laws of physics.

Perhaps you, Mike, should make sure you fully understand the ways one must get around the first, second and third law of thermodynamics to have a situation of true over-unity production. If you claim to know and understand physics then you already know it isn't possible.

Am I saying Fusion itself isn't possible? No, not at all as it already follows the laws of thermodynamics completely. There are many real world examples readily available for study.

Do I believe in the work these scientists are performing to try and achieve new forms of usable energy? I certainly do. Why would anyone think otherwise? As I said, my only point is making sure people understand the limits and laws of reality before ever claiming they are surpasing them. The people working for NIF are clearly operating within the bounds of those laws of nature but the article has a couple of references of companies claiming over-unity. That was where I warned caution.

Perhaps I wasn't clear in stating that I don't have issue with this new amazing NIF facility and the work it will perform so my apologies if I didn't make that clear.
to, aaron,ma                                                  you evidently do not understand the difference between a chemical reaction and a nuclear reaction.the balloon explosion you describe is a chemical reaction in which 2H2+O2=2 H2O.the energy released is the difference in the stability of the water vs hydrogen & oxygen. only electrons become shared. fusion is where deuterium (an isotope of hydogen, containing 1 proton, 1 neutron,1 electron)combines with another deuterium atom so that you now have a singe atom that contains 2 protons,2 neutrons,2 electrons,IE. HELIUM.the helium atom contains less mass than the two hydrogen atoms because of "mass defect", that mass difference is converted into energy by einsteins e=mc2.the energy release is nothing like your exploding balloon.also helium does not break down into hydrogen by any natural process.
<i>Meanwhile our atmosphere is loading up with carbon dioxide from that oh-so-easy combustion and we don't have 50 years to wait for fusion to take over while climate change fries our biosphere.</i>

Since the climate seems to be cooling while CO2 is rising the new theory is that below 350 ppm CO2 causes warming and above 350 ppm it causes cooling. This is based on the scientific fact that CO2 does what ever  it needs to do to keep government money flowing.

In fact CO2 is a miracle gas. Not only can it perform warming or cooling as needed on earth but it also affects the number of spots on the sun by emitting invisible rays of electromagnetic energy that cool the outer layers of the sun and absorb magnetic energy. Which explains the current low value of the suns magnetic field. After all no other explanations have been offered so it must be CO2.
Wow some people need to do some research.  The reason "fission" isn't used as much is because there hasn't been a new reactor built in over 20 years.  There is a whole new series of Generation IV Molten Salt Reactors (MSR) that would work light years beyond our current Light Water Reactors (LWR) and produce significantly less waste.  Just the NRC won't approve anymore reactors to be built, and nobody wants to pump the initial capital into something that won't see returns for a decade or more.

The cool thing about most of this fusion stuff is that due to the nature for the reactions and materials involved, it completely bypass's most of the regulations and red-tape that fission reactors have to deal with.  Fusion doesn't use uranium or plutonium, so their not subject to the nuclear proliferation laws.

Now for those people who don't understand E=MC^2.  Basically energy and mass represent the same thing and are interchangeable.  Mater is so energy dense its amazing.  In fission we split large heavy atoms into smaller atoms, this process actually converts some of the mater into energy, as expressed through heat and radiation.  In fusion we're taking small atoms and slamming them together to create larger atoms, again some of the mater is converted into energy.

Basically 1000g mater in, 998g mater out, 2g mater completely annihilated producing very large quantities of energy.
Let's keep our eye on the ball!!!
Quite apart from the economic perspective the biggest driver for continued, or better yet, accelerated effort on getting one of the many fusion efforts to work is environmental.  That will be the true beneficiary of any success at obtaining fusion energy from the Boron or Deuterium cycles. (no long term radiation)  
Anyone who has not seen the writing on the wall should perhaps take a stroll out here where I live (just at the edge of the Arctic Circle) and all doubt would vanish quickly as to the very real and very present effect of global warming.
Regardless of whether you believe that it is due to human disregard of the consequences of our burning fossil fuels or for whatever other reason, it should be clear that we simply cannot take ANY CHANCE that burning carbon based fuels is not implicated.  
All arguments to the contrary are, at best, wishful thinking, but more likely the simple "bury head in sand" reaction of an animal overwhelmed by events it cannot control or even understand.
I have been following the efforts of the various groups that are trying to achieve sustainable and controllable fusion (some for over 20 years!!!) and I am confident that within five years at least one of these will break through.  Not only that, it's more likely to be one of the 'upstarts', General Fusion, Polywell, LENR (not exactly an upstart), DPF, etc..

I only wish I could be contributing somehow, and I thank them for their courage and persistence (much too often in the face of irrational vindictiveness from people who for whatever reason detest those who refuse to follow the 'bury head in sand' strategy).

I'm betting on the winners.
To begin with, what the all fusion reactors currently under development have in common is this little known nuclear methodology called fluoride molten salt technology. This was conceived and perfected by the Idaho national lab (INL) back in the 1970’s and could offer the world an abundant source of carbon free electric power today, not years from now.

The Liquid fluoride thorium reactor (Lftr) has already been designed, prototyped and demonstrated to be safe and effective. But research on the Lftr was canceled to leave the field open for breeder reactor development when plutonium was important to the national defense, but now the government feels it is dangerous. In stead of fusion to produce nuclear heat, the Lftr burns nuclear waste; something we have plenty of.

In his open letter to President Obama, the climatologist Dr. Jim Hanson recommended the Thorium fuel cycle and the Lftr. Dr. Edward Teller, the father of Fusion, after a lifetime of work on every aspect of nuclear technology had at the last month of his life came to this conclusion in his final study: “the LFTR is the best of all possible reactor types”. (see http://www.geocities.com/rmoir2003/moir_teller.pdf)

The LFTR, a GEN IV reactor, which is currently in development in France, Japan, and Russia, is an elegant type of reactor that can compliment renewable energy by allowing for base load, load following, or peak power production. It can start up on any kind of nuclear fuel, bomb material, or nuclear waste product to produce very efficient, high temperature heat and at the same time breed more fuel in the bargain. This thrifty approach to nuclear energy greatly appeals to me, but I became even more interested in the LFTR when the details of a new patent were revealed by Dr LeBlanc (see below @ minute 53). It opens up the possibility of building a very compact but powerful reactor that can run for 30 years without refueling. With no danger of a core meltdown or runaway reaction, this air cooled reactor can be deployed anywhere and operated remotely in an unattended fully automated intrusion detecting mode and sited underground while it breeds self perpetuating new fuel within the thorium structure of the reactor itself.

The Lftr is highly proliferation resistant. In order to get to its fuel, U233 that has been produced inside the very solid metal walls of this 200 ton reactor 1800 degree, white hot containment vessel, a proliferator must destroy and disassemble the reactor, lift its heavy reactor core out of a 100 meter deep reinforced aircraft crash proof hole in the ground, then cut the thorium containment vessel up into small pieces while enduring heavy killing gamma radiation exposure, next reprocess these reactor pieces using isotopic separation since the U233 is denatured with enough U238 to make chemical separation of bomb grade U233 impossible, and do all this without being detected. Now, this is a tall order for any bad guy and may just be an impossible assignment.

The Lftr burns its fuel at 99.8 % efficiency. At the end of the service life of the Lftr, the reactor vessel is sent back to the factory where it is reduced to liquid fluoride salts that become the feedstock of the next new Lftr. This feedstock can only be used by the new Lftr and not for bombs. A few handfuls of waste products are held at the factory for a few hundred years to cool down before they are mined for the many precious elements contained within like platinum and iridium. Now that is what I call a safe, efficient and thrifty mode of operation!

I thank you for the opportunity to bring this little know nuclear technology to your attention.

To learn more see one of the following:

Aim High
http://rethinkingnuclearpower.googlepages.com/aimhigh

What Fusion Wanted To Be
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHs2Ugxo7-8

Liquid Fluoride Reactors: A New Beginning for an Old Idea
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F0tUDJ35So

Excuse my imagination here but it wants to run wild for a few minutes while typing this.  Could the focused power of the 192 lasers be used to compress a small amount of matter into a microscopic black hole?  Specifically the ones where even if formed, they will evaporate in a few femtoseconds.  Then could you not, feed that black hole a few atoms at a time just enough so that its evaporation rate vs feed rate can be adjusted such that it is continually evaporating and then use the 100% conversion of the energy of evaporation into useful heat, magnetism, electric charge..whatever?  From what I have read, black holes that small when they evaporate essentially convert matter to energy at 100% efficiency.  Possibly it might not be in a form easily captured to process to do useful work, but then again maybe it might.  Then again I haven't done any calculations to see if the ergs of energy just to get the fuel into the micro black hole, might exceed the energy out even at 100% conversion.  The answer might be to make it bigger, and thus more stable, but then we have a CERN consideration there too, since the black hole is stationary, and what happens if the containment lasers fail?  LOL  Oh well, wild imagination time over.
A fission Integral Fast Reactor destroys radioactivity, unless it is neutron-less a fusion reactor makes radioactivity as it destroys whatever device is used to create it.   Neutron-less fusion is thousands of times less efficient than fusion creating a high speed penetrating neutron flux.
Myron writes "Every living creature since life began on Earth has had to deal with natural climate change. It has been cooling for the last 10 years even though CO2 levels have risen. CO2 levels are still just a third of what they have been in the past. Solar output is down, cosmic ray impacts are rising which is leading to cooling. But somehow man is responsible."
I have no idea where you're getting your "facts", Myron. First, the atmosphere has NOT been cooling for the last ten years, although some limited in scope studies may indicate that to be the case. Do some research instead of parroting the climate-change deniers. Further, ten years is barely measurable when you're comparing it to billions of years, ie. geologic time. Second, if CO2 levels are a third of what they've been in the past, remember that mammals hadn't yet evolved. If you want to go back to that time be my guest. Third, your last two sentences contradict your own claims by saying solar output is down but cosmic ray impacts are rising and cooling the planet; that seems a self-contradictory statement at best! As for CO2 levels, they haven't been this high since dinosaurs roamed the earth, and have NEVER risen at the current rapid and accelerating pace. So yes, we are responsible. Your argument seems similar to saying that we're almost certainly going to have a cataclysmic climate change eventually, anyway, so why wait for that inevitable day when we can make our very own apocalyse in the here and now! It's mind-boggling that anyone would really value humanity so little.
What worries me most re the allocation of enormously large amounts of resources to uncertain efforts at energy production is that there seems to be little or no concern as to the substantive irrationality of putting all of our eggs in the science of the future instead of addressing basic human needs (food, clothing, shelter, security, education and so on). Should anyone have cake, when not everyone has bread?
Dang it I want my antimatter-powered dilithium reactors yesterday!  Seriously, the biggest problems with all atomic energy sources has been the desire to make materials for weapons - which is redundant now that we're actually TAKING THEM APART!
I don't believe in taking absolute positions in anything particularly science and the unknown, and I would caution the readership in siding with the loudest voices at the polar ends of this argument.  That said, I am strongly in agreement with the notion that sustained fusion is not possible with technologies present and proposed.  However, if I had to choose from amongst all the paths to the grail, it would be in inertial confinement fusion, and I find it astonishing that no one has mentioned Sandia Lab's "z machine."  They are making quantum, albeit quiet, leaps in the pursuit of aneutronic fusion, and ultimately toward commercial power production, imho.
As Edison said: Invention is
1% inspiration and 99% perspiration.

Keep trying different things.
Eventually some will work.

Si se puede!

Whether inertially confined, magnetically confined, or through the Polywell Device, fusion IS the future for mankind. When successful, this will be humanity's primary energy source, along with Solar, Wind, Water, and any other clean technologies that are out there, or will be there.


To the Oil barons, time is running out and so is the oil. To the critics of the technology, it might have not been feasible in the past, but this is not the past, and we are closer than before to an energy independent future. To the people who have come this far and only plan to go farther with this technology, thank you. Your efforts will insure a future for all of mankind. To the Government, the millions invested in these projects is chump change compared to the economic, military, and other high-ticket investments that have been handed money in the past. Not that money solves everything, but throw a billion dollars into one of these projects, and you might be surprised with the results.
What about CrossFire Fusor?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqHFowOge_M


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1872580

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google