DailyDirt: Just Fuse Some Atoms Already...
from the urls-we-dig-up dept
Most of the time, when people are talking about nuclear energy, they're talking about fission. Fission gets all the attention because it's already commercially available, and every so often there's an accident that makes the news and scares people away from all kinds of nuclear energy. But fusion is entirely different. Aside from the fact that no one has ever actually built a reactor that has generated more useful energy than needed to ignite atomic fusion (hydrogen bombs don't count!), fusion energy could be a great source of energy. We've covered fusion a few times before, but here are just a few more interesting links on fusing atoms together.- The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) may be one of the most expensive nuclear energy projects ever. It's scheduled to start testing in 2020, and hopefully, it'll lead to a better understanding of how to harness fusion. [url]
- An Indiegogo campaign is looking to raise $200,000 to help build a fusion generator that is much smaller than ITER. This project has lofty goals, but it won't be surprising if it doesn't actually achieve a practical form of fusion that can generate more energy than it consumes. [url]
- Prometheus Fusion Perfection was an open source project aiming to build a Bussard fusion reactor (aka a Polywell). The project has shut down, citing that it would need at least $200 million to achieve its goals. [url]
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: energy, fusion, fusor, international thermonuclear experimental reactor, iter, nuclear, prometheus fusion perfection, reactor
Companies: indiegogo
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
National Ignition facility
Although it in a secure, secretive lab, you can see parts of the NIF in the movie Star Trek into Darkness
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
there a few that are close,
see this page
http://nextbigfuture.com/2014/06/summary-of-nuclear-fusion-projects.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Indiegogo campaign is to purchase a specific reactor part, for an approach called Focus Fusion. The team published a 2012 paper in the leading fusion journal, showing it'd attained the 1.8 billion degree temperature and the confinement time necessary for boron fusion. What remains is to increase plasma density. The crowdfunded part is a key part of that. They've spent $3 million so far and it'll take another million total to finish their testing.
To attain net power they have to be right about several things. However, they're doing science that's solid enough for publication in serious journals, so we should learn something however things turn out. Given that it's thousands of times cheaper than ITER, and they've gotten good results so far, it seems worth a shot.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Seeing them able to model how the sun does it is just incredible. I wish the article described more how they actually collect the resulting energy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
With ITER, the energy is released as neutron radiation and heat, so you're pretty much limited to heating up a fluid and running a turbine.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
thorium reactors
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Just fuse some atoms
The only form of terrestrial nuclear fusion that has ever produced any net energy at all in 60 years of hard research effort is fission/fusion or fission ignited fusion. Fission ignited fusion worked in 1952 in the Ivy-Mike nuclear test and continues to be the only real technology demonstrated to produce reliable energy from fusion at a practical industrial level.
Millions of dollars are budgeted each year to pure fusion projects based on diffuse energy ignition of fusion plasma.
Today there is almost no one that advocates use of fission-fusion, even though it is the only practical demonstrated fusion technology in existence that has ever produced energy break even and a fusion gain factor Q=>1.
Ivy Mike fission ignited fusion achieved net energy and Q>=100,000 using the low cost, sustainable D-D fusion reaction.
Fission Ignited Inertial Confinement Fusion is practical nuclear fusion that works now (not always just 50 years from now).
In modern implementations[1], Fission Ignited Fusion can use as little as 0.25 grams of fissile (U-233 or Pu-239) to ignite about 16 grams of Deuterium using D-D fusion and produce, with help of a fusion driver, a fusion burst of about 250 Gigajoules per shot (the energy released in efficiently burning about 1947.5 gallons of gasoline).
Comparison of current ICF fusion approaches -
All current Inertial Confinement Fusion concepts currently are repetitive pulse energy generators producing energy through a succession of controlled small fusion bursts.
National Ignition Facility produces a 1.8 Megajoules burst per shot which is the energy produced from burning 0.014 gallons of gasoline (while producing no net energy)
Sandia z-pinch experiment produces a 30 Megajoules burst per shot which is the energy produced by burning 0.23 gallons of gasoline (while producing no net energy)
California Energy Commission proposal TN-72616 fusion (mini-Mike)[2] is designed to produce 250 x 10^3 Megajoules of energy per shot which is the energy produced by burning about 1947 gallons of gasoline (with commercially significant, large, usable amounts of net energy)
1970s LLNL PACER Fusion (3 kt. size device) produce 1.2552 x 10^7 Megajoules per shot which is the energy produced burning 95,264 gallons of gasoline (with commercially significant large amounts of net energy)
[1] - Winterberg, F. "A Third Way Towards the Controlled Release of Nuclear Energy by Fission and Fusion" - http://www.znaturforsch.com/aa/v59a/s59a0325.pdf
[2] - CEC ICF Fusion reactor (proposal TN-72616) submitted for 2015 – 2917 CEC Triennial Investment Plan support – http://bit.ly/1fTRJWY
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Rate of shots for ICF
ICF fusion has the advantage that the rate of shots can be adjusted over a wide range to produce different amounts of power on demand (and to back up unpredictable renewable energy).
The NIF laser fusion power plant concept is called LIFE. LLNL has proposed that a LIFE laser fusion power plant capable of generating net fusion yields of 35 to 75 MJ per shot at 10 to 15 Hz (i.e., ~ 350- to 1000-MWt fusion and ~1.3 to 3.6 x 1020 neutrons/s), coupled to a compact subcritical fission blanket, could be used to generate several GW of thermal power (GWt) while avoiding carbon dioxide emissions, mitigating nuclear proliferation concerns and minimizing the concerns associated with nuclear safety and long-term nuclear waste disposition. The subcritical fission blanket could be fueled with fissile (example. “excess” military Pu-239) or abundant inexpensive fertile fission fuels like U-238 or Thorium, or run on separated Minor Actinides from LWR spent nuclear fuel (burning long half-live transuranics down to short half life fission products.
TN-72616 fusion (mini-Mike)would use about 150 micrograms of D-T fuel to ignite a tapered column of pure cryo-deuterium; producing a total yield per shot of 250 GJ. Only one mini-Mike device need be ignited per minute to produce power at an average 1 GWe rate.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Last Word
“Just fuse some atoms
"no one has ever actually built a reactor that has generated more useful energy than needed to ignite atomic fusion (hydrogen bombs don't count!"The only form of terrestrial nuclear fusion that has ever produced any net energy at all in 60 years of hard research effort is fission/fusion or fission ignited fusion. Fission ignited fusion worked in 1952 in the Ivy-Mike nuclear test and continues to be the only real technology demonstrated to produce reliable energy from fusion at a practical industrial level.
Millions of dollars are budgeted each year to pure fusion projects based on diffuse energy ignition of fusion plasma.
Today there is almost no one that advocates use of fission-fusion, even though it is the only practical demonstrated fusion technology in existence that has ever produced energy break even and a fusion gain factor Q=>1.
Ivy Mike fission ignited fusion achieved net energy and Q>=100,000 using the low cost, sustainable D-D fusion reaction.
Fission Ignited Inertial Confinement Fusion is practical nuclear fusion that works now (not always just 50 years from now).
In modern implementations[1], Fission Ignited Fusion can use as little as 0.25 grams of fissile (U-233 or Pu-239) to ignite about 16 grams of Deuterium using D-D fusion and produce, with help of a fusion driver, a fusion burst of about 250 Gigajoules per shot (the energy released in efficiently burning about 1947.5 gallons of gasoline).
Comparison of current ICF fusion approaches -
All current Inertial Confinement Fusion concepts currently are repetitive pulse energy generators producing energy through a succession of controlled small fusion bursts.
National Ignition Facility produces a 1.8 Megajoules burst per shot which is the energy produced from burning 0.014 gallons of gasoline (while producing no net energy)
Sandia z-pinch experiment produces a 30 Megajoules burst per shot which is the energy produced by burning 0.23 gallons of gasoline (while producing no net energy)
California Energy Commission proposal TN-72616 fusion (mini-Mike)[2] is designed to produce 250 x 10^3 Megajoules of energy per shot which is the energy produced by burning about 1947 gallons of gasoline (with commercially significant, large, usable amounts of net energy)
1970s LLNL PACER Fusion (3 kt. size device) produce 1.2552 x 10^7 Megajoules per shot which is the energy produced burning 95,264 gallons of gasoline (with commercially significant large amounts of net energy)
[1] - Winterberg, F. "A Third Way Towards the Controlled Release of Nuclear Energy by Fission and Fusion" - http://www.znaturforsch.com/aa/v59a/s59a0325.pdf
[2] - CEC ICF Fusion reactor (proposal TN-72616) submitted for 2015 – 2917 CEC Triennial Investment Plan support – http://bit.ly/1fTRJWY