LENR does not produce a radioactive mess On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:17 PM, <bobcook39...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jones – > > > > I My earlier answer to your comment about Thorium fission, I thought you > were suggesting fissioning by neutrons. In reading your earlier comment > on the Holmild process I realize you meant muon induced fission of Th-232. > > > > I agree with you that would be possible, but it would create a radioactive > mess. > > > > Bob Cook > > > > > > > > *From: *Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> > *Sent: *Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:48 PM > *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Could the future that started out as cold fusion be > ... tada... thorium fission ? > > > > Axil Axil wrote: > > The text covered by the picture as follows: > > > > ,,, metallic hydrogen produces reactions at a distance. This was shown in > the exploding wire experiments where uranium was fissioned in a separate > chamber isolated from the exploding wire by a glass wall. > > > I missed the citation for this? However, it does sound very much like what > I am suggesting but using thorium instead of uranium as the target of muon > production. > > The beauty of muon-induced fusion is that you do not need to be concerned > about critical mass and hunreds of tons of reactant, lots of moderators and > an optimal neutron economy etc - all of which require a large form factor > > In fact, with muon induced fission, the thorium fuel can actually be mixed > with boron to immediately convert free neutrons into energy before thorium > can absorb them. We want to avoid any proliferation risk. Smaller would be > better. > > Of course, LENR is preferable since it promises small devices with no > radioactivity at all, but that may not materialize as quickly as a larger > form factor, which is intermediate between grid power and home power. The > requirement for gamma shielding is still there .... with any kind of > fission or hot fusion, but one can imagine many applications for > medium-sized power plants and large vehicles which can accommodate adequate > shielding - locomotives, earth movers and boats. This could happen years or > decades sooner with thorium fission than LENR can be perfected and > introduced. > > Let's face it - there is no operational LENR today, nothing even close > thanks to Rossigate -- and yet we had operational thorium reactors in 1965 > (the MSRE at Oak Ridge) but that design was doomed from the start (by > needing enough fissile inventory to make a bomb, which is the main thing > that muon-induced fission avoids). > > I think there is a place for this technology - assuming of course that > Holmlid is correct. > > >
