Max Velocity Tactical



Your Ad Here - Email for Info

You Can Shop At Amazon and Help Support Emergency-Preps.com Without It Costing You One Thin Dime - Click Here to Learn How!

Author Topic: In the race for fusion energy, lightning thunders over lasers  (Read 1625 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ken

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1008
  • Karma: +8/-0
  • Gender: Male
In the race for fusion energy, lightning thunders over lasers
« on: August 06, 2011, 09:07:39 PM »
I missed this, sorry.

http://www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/index.php?option=com_lyftenbloggie&view=lyftenbloggie&category=0&Itemid=90

In fusion race, lightning thunders over lasers
Posted in News on July 11, 2011 by Derek Shannon
In the race for fusion energy, lightning thunders over lasers

With latest results at international conference, NJ start-up can already fuse atoms almost four times more efficiently than government’s National Ignition Facility…for a fraction of the cost

For Immediate Release - July 11, 2011

Contact: Derek Shannon, 732-356-5900, media@LPPhysics.com

Middlesex, NJ – Scientists and officials from the National Ignition Facility (NIF) were rightfully proud of their fusion research progress unveiled last month at a major physics conference in Chicago. But by one key measure, the $3 billion-plus NIF project was upstaged by a New Jersey start-up whose fusion device has advanced on a budget of less than $3 million. This measure—which reflects the amount of fusion energy a device puts out relative to the energy scientists put in—is essential in gauging the race for the ultimate energy prize: A fusion machine that can produce more energy than it uses, with the excess clean power flowing to the grid. And by this measure, scientists from Lawrenceville Plasma Physics (LPP) are at least four and perhaps as much as sixty times ahead of NIF as they squeeze thunderbolts of electricity through a tiny fusion reactor that would be lost amidst NIF’s football-stadium-sized arrays of lasers.

Below left: A worker dwarfed within NIF’s 10m central chamber (credit LLNL). Below right: LPP’s Aaron Blake holds FoFu-1’s central chamber in his hands (standalone image). A commercial system would be on the same scale.



In presentations at the gathering of over one thousand scientists—the 38th International Conference on Plasma Science—the NIF researchers reported producing an impressive 400 trillion neutrons from the fusion reactions in their best experiments. But NIF uses a lot of energy to accomplish this feat, some 422 million joules of electric energy. To understand that energy, imagine the energy of motion of 400 one-ton vehicles all moving at 100 miles per hour. Instead of actual vehicles colliding, picture that energy used to generate laser light and focus it on a pellet of frozen deuterium and tritium fusion fuel. (Deuterium and tritium, or DT for short, are isotopes of hydrogen.) That’s the energy NIF uses to generate its neutrons.

At LPP’s much more modest research facility, fusion is generated by a device called a dense plasma focus. LPP’s Focus Fusion-1 (“FoFu-1”) device uses a much smaller amount of electric energy, and instead of powering lasers, this electricity flows directly to electrodes in a central vacuum chamber where it kinks and twists itself to confine a small ball of plasma. In other words, sitting in a space the size of a small garage, FoFu-1 unleashes a bolt of lightning that lassos itself into a knot, and LPP’s patented approach appears to be much more efficient in generating those all-important fusion reactions. FoFu-1’s best experiments required less than a tenth of one-percent the energy NIF used—thirty-five thousand joules instead of over four hundred million—but still generated 130 billion fusion neutrons. How can we compare these large numbers? Ultimately, any fusion device that produces net energy has to produce more fusion energy than is fed in, so fusion neutrons per joule is a good overall measure of success. NIF produces just a bit less than a million neutrons per joule of energy. FoFu-1 has produced 3.7 million neutrons per joule, almost 4 times better than NIF.

A truly fair comparison is even more favorable to lightning over lasers, since FoFu-1 has the disadvantage of using pure deuterium fuel (with the reaction represented as DD), not the deuterium mixed with tritium (DT) used by NIF. Since DT is much easier to burn as a fusion fuel, this gives NIF a major advantage. If FoFu-1 achieved the same conditions with DT fuel as it had with DD, it would have achieved results some 60 times better than NIF. But LPP has even bigger plans—Instead of NIF’s radioactive tritium, the company will instead be transitioning to the fuel of regular hydrogen and the common element boron, a reaction which in itself doesn’t make any neutrons at all. This gives LPP’s technology another huge advantage, because it completely avoids the generation of any nuclear waste, while allowing for cheap conversion of fusion energy directly into electricity.

LPP scientists Eric Lerner and Murali Subramanian did not hear of any neutron per joule fusion yields better than those they presented from FoFu-1’s during the conference, which are further supported by comparable results from other dense plasma focus experiments over the past decade. NIF researchers hope to improve enough to reach ignition in a year, but LPP expects to substantially better its own results next month as major upgrades to FoFu-1 are completed. Yet, to judge from the work of most scientists at the conference, an observer might think that there were only two possibilities for fusion: NIF and the equally enormous ITER, a 100-foot tall “plasma donut” that may finish construction in France by 2025.

Even with superior results, LPP’s FoFu-1 must improve its performance by orders of magnitude to demonstrate the feasibility of net energy. In addition, if feasibility is proven, major engineering efforts will also be needed to build a working prototype generator. All this takes funding. But LPP hopes that decision makers will look beyond just two huge approaches, and instead expand both private and governmental fusion investment to include far more ideas, including a little lightning in a bottle.
“If mankind is to survive, then throughout man’s history except for a very few years the word “ship” will mean “space ship.”
Arthur C. Clarke

Offline Bandit5

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: In the race for fusion energy, lightning thunders over lasers
« Reply #1 on: August 07, 2011, 12:26:10 PM »
While any of the new fusion concepts would change the world considerably, none would do so more than focus fusion.  Polywell would fit in a ship; focus fusion might fit in a car.  The rest require industrial power plants.


Offline AuricTech

  • Interrogator at Large
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 766
  • Karma: +12/-1
    • AuricTech Thoughts
Re: In the race for fusion energy, lightning thunders over lasers
« Reply #2 on: August 07, 2011, 03:12:28 PM »
While any of the new fusion concepts would change the world considerably, none would do so more than focus fusion.  Polywell would fit in a ship; focus fusion might fit in a car.  The rest require industrial power plants.
Would it fit in a Ford Focus, or would a Ford Fusion be a better fit?  ;D

By saying that "focus fusion might fit in a car," what exactly do you mean?  Could a focus fusion plant conceivably be made small enough to power a car?  Or are you simply stating that a focus fusion plant might be no larger than a car?
American parachutists...devils in baggy pants...are less than 100 meters from my outpost line. I can't sleep at night; they pop up from nowhere and we never know when or how they will strike next. Seems like the black-hearted devils are everywhere....

Offline Ken

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1008
  • Karma: +8/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: In the race for fusion energy, lightning thunders over lasers
« Reply #3 on: August 07, 2011, 04:59:31 PM »
Would it fit in a Ford Focus, or would a Ford Fusion be a better fit?  ;D

By saying that "focus fusion might fit in a car," what exactly do you mean?  Could a focus fusion plant conceivably be made small enough to power a car?  Or are you simply stating that a focus fusion plant might be no larger than a car?

Polywell's version of the focus fusion plant is about the size of a small three bedroom home (100MW of power) and LPP's version is 9ft X 3ft X 3ft for 5MW of power (enough for 40,000 homes) the actual reactor is a 3ft cube, with the rest of the generator in the rest of the plant.  Neither uses radioactive fuels, and fusion cannot continue, if the reactors are breached.
“If mankind is to survive, then throughout man’s history except for a very few years the word “ship” will mean “space ship.”
Arthur C. Clarke

Offline Bandit5

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: In the race for fusion energy, lightning thunders over lasers
« Reply #4 on: August 08, 2011, 11:43:13 AM »
Would it fit in a Ford Focus, or would a Ford Fusion be a better fit?  ;D

By saying that "focus fusion might fit in a car," what exactly do you mean?  Could a focus fusion plant conceivably be made small enough to power a car?  Or are you simply stating that a focus fusion plant might be no larger than a car?
A subcompact, probably not.  But, a semi?  A tank?  With miniaturization, could it be scaled down to power a large truck or SUV?

Make it small enough, cheap enough, and reliable enough to compete, and somebody'll build something around it that people will buy.

Offline Ken

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1008
  • Karma: +8/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: In the race for fusion energy, lightning thunders over lasers
« Reply #5 on: August 08, 2011, 01:26:09 PM »
A subcompact, probably not.  But, a semi?  A tank?  With miniaturization, could it be scaled down to power a large truck or SUV?

Make it small enough, cheap enough, and reliable enough to compete, and somebody'll build something around it that people will buy.

Absolutely.  And with that much mobile power, you can do some pretty nifty things.

Like: Israeli's version of a deflector shield, using plasma.  Or using some high powered combat lasers.
Or even have "HoverTanks" :D

a lot of the technologies that would be needed are already being tested with the Joint Tactical Electric Vehicle, aka RST-V (Reconnaissance, Surveillance and Targeting Vehicle)
“If mankind is to survive, then throughout man’s history except for a very few years the word “ship” will mean “space ship.”
Arthur C. Clarke

Offline Drang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2442
  • Karma: +29/-3
    • The Cluemeter
Re: In the race for fusion energy, lightning thunders over lasers
« Reply #6 on: August 08, 2011, 02:51:34 PM »
A subcompact, probably not.  But, a semi?  A tank?  With miniaturization, could it be scaled down to power a large truck or SUV?

Make it small enough, cheap enough, and reliable enough to compete, and somebody'll build something around it that people will buy.
All together now:
I've been workin' on the railroad...
The United States Constitution
(c) 1791.
All Rights Reserved.

Offline Bandit5

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: In the race for fusion energy, lightning thunders over lasers
« Reply #7 on: August 08, 2011, 03:06:53 PM »
All together now:
I've been workin' on the railroad...
Don't forget ships.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
455 Views
Last post September 30, 2010, 04:35:19 PM
by Drang
14 Replies
960 Views
Last post October 08, 2012, 10:31:01 PM
by Bill Quick
46 Replies
1173 Views
Last post March 31, 2014, 09:49:36 PM
by Bill Quick
1 Replies
126 Views
Last post March 24, 2014, 12:35:41 PM
by Mr. Bingley
0 Replies
140 Views
Last post April 04, 2014, 01:18:40 PM
by Bill Quick


Your Ad Here - Email for Info
Help Support E-P.com
Even A Buck Makes A Difference!
Or Make Convenient Monthly
Donations By Selecting
A Payment Option
Payment Options