power to the people!

[LurchGS]

I did a search, and didn't see this anywhere on the board... so I apologize if I've been ToSeeked.

http://www.emc2fusion.org/

I've read some of the papers posted here, and, without seeing the math, I have to say fusion power looks very possible in the near future. I have tremendous respect for Dr. Bussard, and none of what he describes clashes with my understanding of the working world.

[farmerjumperdon]

I'm a bit confused about Fusion and the Control of Election Losses.

Is this something the Republicans should be studying closely?

[LurchGS]

I'm a bit confused about Fusion and the Control of Election Losses.

Is this something the Republicans should be studying closely?

**BAP**

[mr obvious]

From the web-page:
Successful Phase 2 Marks the End of Fossil Fuels

So apparently, to achieve a successful phase 2, they require all of the remaining fossil fuels left in the universe.

More seriously, can you please describe how they generate fusion with a positive power outflow? The main PDF is inaccessible to me at the moment.

[Ronald Brak]

Unlike fussion reactors, fission reactors have to pay for fuel and disposal of nuclear waste. However, as this is only a small part of the total cost of building a nuclear plant, I would be concerned that because of even higher capital costs, fusion power might be no cheaper than fission power.

Fingers crossed that it won't be too expensive.

[LurchGS]

lol - I'd not thought of it that way. I like it

nah - all they need is about $ 200 M to build a fully working prototype.

I can't explain it in detail, but basically, Bussard uses open rings of high power electromagnets to generate very high gaus fields inside the reactor. The central void is injected with a neutral, non-reactive gas (he likes Boron). Electrons are fed into the system.

The magnetic fields have the dual atribute of creating a large 'well' (difference in energy potential between the 'outside' and 'inside' of the reactor), and creating a small pocket in the center.

The design of the system also 'recycles' electrons/ions that miss collision on the first pass(es). (this is significantly different from the solid-wall systems the DoE is dropping billions into).

The outcome, apparently, for a system only 2 to 3 meters in diameter - is a sustained output of 100 MW. The proof-of-concept experimental models managed a sustained positive output for .. I think it was .4 seconds. Might be .4 miliseconds. Still, a LOT longer than anthing the DoE has managed so far. The big problem seems to be cooling the beastie. Gihugic currents run through the electromagnet to start the thing.. and of course the wires get very hot. He's been unable to engineer a powerful enough cooling system for the small devices.

For the past 15 or so years, he's been financed by the Navy - but with recent budget cuts, they've cut his project. When he attempted to appeal, the Navy forwarded his papers to the DoE, who, of course, said his system couldn't possibly work.

(so goes the paper publised on the website)

[Van Rijn]

Apparently this is about the "polywell" IEC fusion reactor concept. See here:

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

It's like the Farnsworth Fusor, but without the physical electrical grids that limit output.

I have very mixed feelings about this. On one hand, it's a neat idea, and it would be nice if IEC worked out. On the other hand, fusion is hard, p-11B especially so. I remember when he was pushing the Riggatron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riggatron) and got private interests to spend money on it, though it likely would have never worked. Quite frankly, I don't trust Bussard, but it would be nice if this worked.

[Identity 4]

Step 1: Build Polywell-type fuser
Step 2: ....
Step 3: Profit

It would be neat if that worked... I just hope it doesnt melt! eek..lol

-=Identity 4=-