Re: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Some LENR systems produce tritium and this decays into He3. Could a LENR system be engineered to supply enough He3 to make this sort of hot fusion practical? No, because tritium is a very minor product of LENR. If LENR worked, the energy created by this process could be used directly without the need to create a big machine to use the He3. Ed Thanks for this reminder. Can you imagine any reasons why hot fusion researchers might divert some of their own money into LENR research because it could advance their own program? Or will funding for hot fusion research dry up soon after the first public investment is made in LENR research? Are the two energy programs fundamentally antagnasitic with respect to public funding? Harry
Re: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for this reminder. Can you imagine any reasons why hot fusion researchers might divert some of their own money into LENR research because it could advance their own program? Or will funding for hot fusion research dry up soon after the first public investment is made in LENR research? Are the two energy programs fundamentally antagnasitic with respect to public funding? Harry I mean antagonistic. Harry
Re: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
On Jan 26, 2013, at 11:08 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Some LENR systems produce tritium and this decays into He3. Could a LENR system be engineered to supply enough He3 to make this sort of hot fusion practical? No, because tritium is a very minor product of LENR. If LENR worked, the energy created by this process could be used directly without the need to create a big machine to use the He3. Ed Thanks for this reminder. Can you imagine any reasons why hot fusion researchers might divert some of their own money into LENR research because it could advance their own program? Tom Claytor has a way of making tritium based on LENR that might supply tritium to the hot fusion program. Nevertheless, once LENR is understood, who needs hot fusion? Public funding is not determined by logic, facts, or even rational analysis. It is controlled by politics, i.e. self-interest. The sooner people realize this, the quicker we can make progress getting support. Ed Or will funding for hot fusion research dry up soon after the first public investment is made in LENR research? Are the two energy programs fundamentally antagnasitic with respect to public funding? Harry
Re: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Tom Claytor has a way of making tritium based on LENR that might supply tritium to the hot fusion program. Nevertheless, once LENR is understood, who needs hot fusion? Public funding is not determined by logic, facts, or even rational analysis. It is controlled by politics, i.e. self-interest. The sooner people realize this, the quicker we can make progress getting support. Well, our nuclear arsenal has depleted of tritium by 50% since the turn of the millennium. Not that is necessarily a bad thing.
Re: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
That might be as good as cold fusion, according to some simulations they did with some configurations. They surprisingly got a COP of 1000x. 2013/1/24 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=south-korea-makes-billion-dollar-bet-fusion-power South Korea has embarked on the development of a preliminary concept design for a fusion power demonstration reactor in collaboration with the US Department of Energy's Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) in New Jersey. more Such a waste. Imagine if they redirected that $1B to LENR! -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
My response: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=south-korea-makes-billion-dollar-bet-fusion-powerposted=1#comment-18 18. jabowery http://www.scientificamerican.com/page.cfm?section=my-account06:21 PM 1/24/13 From a founder of the US Tokamak Fusion Program to Congress: The DoE committment to very large fusion concepts (the giant magnetic tokamak) ensures only the need for very large budgets; and that is what the program has been about for the past 15 years - a defense-of-budget program - not a fusion-achievement program. As one of three people who created this program in the early 1970's (when I was an Asst. Dir. of the AEC's Controlled Thermonuclear Reaction Division) I know this to be true; we raised the budget in order to take 20% off the top of the larger funding, to try all of the hopeful new things that the mainline labs would not try. Each of us left soon thereafter, and the second generation management thought the big program was real; it was not. Ever since then, the ERDA/DoE has rolled Congress to increase and/or continue big-budget support. This worked so long as various Democratic Senators and Congressmen could see the funding as helpful in their districts. But fear of undermining their budget position also made DoE bureaucrats very autocratic and resistant to any kind of new approach, whether inside DoE or out in industry. This led DoE to fight industry wherever a non-DoE hopful new idea appeared. See http://www.oocities.org/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter.html On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=south-korea-makes-billion-dollar-bet-fusion-power South Korea has embarked on the development of a preliminary concept design for a fusion power demonstration reactor in collaboration with the US Department of Energy's Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) in New Jersey. more Such a waste. Imagine if they redirected that $1B to LENR!
Re: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
Sorry, I thought this was a case of plasma pinch. This is the old Tokamak, so I mistook this project with another one. 2013/1/24 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com That might be as good as cold fusion, according to some simulations they did with some configurations. They surprisingly got a COP of 1000x. 2013/1/24 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=south-korea-makes-billion-dollar-bet-fusion-power South Korea has embarked on the development of a preliminary concept design for a fusion power demonstration reactor in collaboration with the US Department of Energy's Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) in New Jersey. more Such a waste. Imagine if they redirected that $1B to LENR! -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
BTW: I don't know why rational fusion people don't continually rub the noses of pseudoskeptics in this letter. On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:23 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: My response: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=south-korea-makes-billion-dollar-bet-fusion-powerposted=1#comment-18 18. jaboweryhttp://www.scientificamerican.com/page.cfm?section=my-account06:21 PM 1/24/13 From a founder of the US Tokamak Fusion Program to Congress: The DoE committment to very large fusion concepts (the giant magnetic tokamak) ensures only the need for very large budgets; and that is what the program has been about for the past 15 years - a defense-of-budget program - not a fusion-achievement program. As one of three people who created this program in the early 1970's (when I was an Asst. Dir. of the AEC's Controlled Thermonuclear Reaction Division) I know this to be true; we raised the budget in order to take 20% off the top of the larger funding, to try all of the hopeful new things that the mainline labs would not try. Each of us left soon thereafter, and the second generation management thought the big program was real; it was not. Ever since then, the ERDA/DoE has rolled Congress to increase and/or continue big-budget support. This worked so long as various Democratic Senators and Congressmen could see the funding as helpful in their districts. But fear of undermining their budget position also made DoE bureaucrats very autocratic and resistant to any kind of new approach, whether inside DoE or out in industry. This led DoE to fight industry wherever a non-DoE hopful new idea appeared. See http://www.oocities.org/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter.html On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=south-korea-makes-billion-dollar-bet-fusion-power South Korea has embarked on the development of a preliminary concept design for a fusion power demonstration reactor in collaboration with the US Department of Energy's Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) in New Jersey. more Such a waste. Imagine if they redirected that $1B to LENR!
RE: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
This is not 'Fusion' proper; This is Plasma Breach Reactor technology. (which 'can' support fusion but which would be so monumentally counter productive) and so much so that simply using the Plas-Breach Reactor in 'INCIPIENT'-Plas-Breach(restrained-eye)XO-Plasma bleed-through mode provides a self sustaining EM-induction production level that makes nuclear power appear a clumsy wasteful dinosaur. This is seriously both GREEN and CLEAN. . . And once 'online' eg. Giga-High-Denstiy jump-started it goes into self-sustaining mode and the up-keep expense is 'nill.' I always knew that the inevitable MONSTER STAG-FLATION of the world economy would finally be that which brought this Plas-Breach/XO-Plas tech into the opening. And this because only relative low cost full energy independence coupled with relative low cost Super-Weapons systems would bring the GUNS BUTTER equation back to relative Global Stabilization. Sister tech 2 this is Electro-Plasmic-Meteor Broadcast 'incipient Plasma-Breach toroid' missle interdiction systems. They are just announcing this now because it's already been installed. The Electro-Plasmic Meteors Broadcast units (which are mini-low-power Plas-Breach Reactors) needs be arrayed across an latitudinal grid line because the FLY-PATTERN follows the geo-magnetic grid NORTHward(only). The Magneto-Gravionic Wake creates a long-path devastating airborne hyper gravity 'sump' effect which is more like hypr-grav trenches in the sky. In UK I watched the prototype literally RIP 5 jet-fighters out of the sky across about a nautical mile. It tends to make a believer out of you. This was public but few commentators had a clue as to what exactly they were watching. . . ultimate stealth equals INVISIBLE but the effects are stunning. This technology being installed in South Korea will CUT OFF NORTH KOREAN missle launches OFF AT THE KNEES since it is instantaneous 1/2 C/light speed response. If the Electro-Plasmic Meteor(Hyper-grav frisbees-toroid fields and wakes) is launched at a shallow enough horizon skimming trajectory it stands to RIP A TRENCH in any installation in its path for a least as far north as the northern most border of North Korea. Note the 'timing' and location: This is an American project 'totally.' Jack Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 18:11:36 -0500 From: hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=south-korea-makes-billion-dollar-bet-fusion-power South Korea has embarked on the development of a preliminary concept design for a fusion power demonstration reactor in collaboration with the US Department of Energy's Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) in New Jersey. more Such a waste. Imagine if they redirected that $1B to LENR!
Re: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
This type of hot fusion has three problems that have not been solved or even widely acknowledged. 1. The fusion is between D+T. The tritium must be created because it is not a natural isotope. The plan is to convert the neutron flux into tritium which is fed back into the reactor. Unfortunately, this conversion process is not 100% efficient because many neutrons are lost without making tritium. This missing tritium must be made using a fission reactor or accelerator, with the added expense this gives. 2. The first wall is exposed to an intense flux of radiation. As a result, its integrity is gradually compromised. Replacement is a major problem and requires shutting down the reactor for an extended time. During this time, the missing power must be supplied by expensive backup generators, thereby increasing the average cost of power. 3. The system is very complex and as a result has many failure modes, most of which have not been identified. These will only be identified after the money has been spent and the machine is put into service. Consequently, more money will be required, but at this stage too much will have been invested to abandon the method, which seems to be the case even now. The comment below is exactly correct. This program is a waste of money and will never produce commercial power. The method was given its chance to prove its worth and it has failed. Yet it goes on. In contrast, cold fusion was never given a chance to prove its worth. Ed Storms On Jan 24, 2013, at 4:23 PM, James Bowery wrote: My response: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=south-korea-makes-billion-dollar-bet-fusion-powerposted=1#comment-18 18. jabowery 06:21 PM 1/24/13 From a founder of the US Tokamak Fusion Program to Congress: The DoE committment to very large fusion concepts (the giant magnetic tokamak) ensures only the need for very large budgets; and that is what the program has been about for the past 15 years - a defense-of-budget program - not a fusion-achievement program. As one of three people who created this program in the early 1970's (when I was an Asst. Dir. of the AEC's Controlled Thermonuclear Reaction Division) I know this to be true; we raised the budget in order to take 20% off the top of the larger funding, to try all of the hopeful new things that the mainline labs would not try. Each of us left soon thereafter, and the second generation management thought the big program was real; it was not. Ever since then, the ERDA/DoE has rolled Congress to increase and/or continue big-budget support. This worked so long as various Democratic Senators and Congressmen could see the funding as helpful in their districts. But fear of undermining their budget position also made DoE bureaucrats very autocratic and resistant to any kind of new approach, whether inside DoE or out in industry. This led DoE to fight industry wherever a non-DoE hopful new idea appeared. See http://www.oocities.org/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter.html On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=south-korea-makes-billion-dollar-bet-fusion-power South Korea has embarked on the development of a preliminary concept design for a fusion power demonstration reactor in collaboration with the US Department of Energy's Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) in New Jersey. more Such a waste. Imagine if they redirected that $1B to LENR!
Re: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
Indeed, However plasma physics is by itself interesting, so it is nice to have some big science experiments running. Science is not about profit but having fun! If plasma physicist would like really do something that could spawn profits on a long run, then they should study helium-3 fusion. It is nicer, because it does not produce a neutron flux, but it emits fast protons. This means in practice that protons can be captured with magnets and their kinetic energy can be transformed directly into electricity with high efficiency (over 70%). This would negate at least your arguments (1) and (2) that are devastating for the deuterium based plasma fusion to have any economical prospects. However argument (3) is still valid and it hard to see how even he-3 plasma fusion could compete economically with solar electricity, wind power and 4th gen nuclear. China is already building quite promisingly cheap 4th gen helium cooled nuclear plant at Rongcheng. —Jouni Sent from my iPad On Jan 25, 2013, at 1:54 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: This type of hot fusion has three problems that have not been solved or even widely acknowledged. 1. The fusion is between D+T. The tritium must be created because it is not a natural isotope. The plan is to convert the neutron flux into tritium which is fed back into the reactor. Unfortunately, this conversion process is not 100% efficient because many neutrons are lost without making tritium. This missing tritium must be made using a fission reactor or accelerator, with the added expense this gives. 2. The first wall is exposed to an intense flux of radiation. As a result, its integrity is gradually compromised. Replacement is a major problem and requires shutting down the reactor for an extended time. During this time, the missing power must be supplied by expensive backup generators, thereby increasing the average cost of power. 3. The system is very complex and as a result has many failure modes, most of which have not been identified. These will only be identified after the money has been spent and the machine is put into service. Consequently, more money will be required, but at this stage too much will have been invested to abandon the method, which seems to be the case even now. The comment below is exactly correct. This program is a waste of money and will never produce commercial power. The method was given its chance to prove its worth and it has failed. Yet it goes on. In contrast, cold fusion was never given a chance to prove its worth. Ed Storms
Re: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
On Jan 24, 2013, at 6:29 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: Indeed, However plasma physics is by itself interesting, so it is nice to have some big science experiments running. Science is not about profit but having fun! Well Jouni, when over 25 billion dollars are spent, the question is who has the fun from this money. As a tax payer, I could have had much more fun if the money had been sent on something that lowered my energy bill and reduced the risk of global warming . But to each his own. If plasma physicist would like really do something that could spawn profits on a long run, then they should study helium-3 fusion. Yes, and where do you get the He3? Yes, this is present on the Moon, but at what cost? It is nicer, because it does not produce a neutron flux, but it emits fast protons. This means in practice that protons can be captured with magnets and their kinetic energy can be transformed directly into electricity with high efficiency (over 70%). This would negate at least your arguments (1) and (2) that are devastating for the deuterium based plasma fusion to have any economical prospects. However argument (3) is still valid and it hard to see how even he-3 plasma fusion could compete economically with solar electricity, wind power and 4th gen nuclear. I agree. However, why not suggest just a little of this money be used to explore cold fusion? China is already building quite promisingly cheap 4th gen helium cooled nuclear plant at Rongcheng. Yes, China is on the front of many technologies now because the West is captured by various self-interests that have no relationship to general benefit. Ed —Jouni Sent from my iPad On Jan 25, 2013, at 1:54 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: This type of hot fusion has three problems that have not been solved or even widely acknowledged. 1. The fusion is between D+T. The tritium must be created because it is not a natural isotope. The plan is to convert the neutron flux into tritium which is fed back into the reactor. Unfortunately, this conversion process is not 100% efficient because many neutrons are lost without making tritium. This missing tritium must be made using a fission reactor or accelerator, with the added expense this gives. 2. The first wall is exposed to an intense flux of radiation. As a result, its integrity is gradually compromised. Replacement is a major problem and requires shutting down the reactor for an extended time. During this time, the missing power must be supplied by expensive backup generators, thereby increasing the average cost of power. 3. The system is very complex and as a result has many failure modes, most of which have not been identified. These will only be identified after the money has been spent and the machine is put into service. Consequently, more money will be required, but at this stage too much will have been invested to abandon the method, which seems to be the case even now. The comment below is exactly correct. This program is a waste of money and will never produce commercial power. The method was given its chance to prove its worth and it has failed. Yet it goes on. In contrast, cold fusion was never given a chance to prove its worth. Ed Storms
Re: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 9:27 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On Jan 24, 2013, at 6:29 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: Indeed, However plasma physics is by itself interesting, so it is nice to have some big science experiments running. Science is not about profit but having fun! Well Jouni, when over 25 billion dollars are spent, the question is who has the fun from this money. As a tax payer, I could have had much more fun if the money had been sent on something that lowered my energy bill and reduced the risk of global warming . But to each his own. If plasma physicist would like really do something that could spawn profits on a long run, then they should study helium-3 fusion. Yes, and where do you get the He3? Yes, this is present on the Moon, but at what cost? Some LENR systems produce tritium and this decays into He3. Could a LENR system be engineered to supply enough He3 to make this sort of hot fusion practical? Harry
Re: [Vo]:S.Korea Fusion
On Jan 24, 2013, at 8:06 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 9:27 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On Jan 24, 2013, at 6:29 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: Indeed, However plasma physics is by itself interesting, so it is nice to have some big science experiments running. Science is not about profit but having fun! Well Jouni, when over 25 billion dollars are spent, the question is who has the fun from this money. As a tax payer, I could have had much more fun if the money had been sent on something that lowered my energy bill and reduced the risk of global warming . But to each his own. If plasma physicist would like really do something that could spawn profits on a long run, then they should study helium-3 fusion. Yes, and where do you get the He3? Yes, this is present on the Moon, but at what cost? Some LENR systems produce tritium and this decays into He3. Could a LENR system be engineered to supply enough He3 to make this sort of hot fusion practical? No, because tritium is a very minor product of LENR. If LENR worked, the energy created by this process could be used directly without the need to create a big machine to use the He3. Ed Harry
