Talk-Polywell.org

While DD would allow electricity via thermal conversion (however you wanted to do it) I would definitely NOT say "it is done" when that happens. Direct DC conversion to electricity has much higher efficiency than running things through a thermal cycle, so the effort of getting the decelerator grids...

So, I know that Bussard was a big fan of the idea of using p+B11 fusion to generate power using a decelerator grid. I was reading the article over at Focus Fusion about the status update on WB-8 (linked to in another thread here on the forum), and I got to wondering. . . If they end up building WB-8...

@Robthebob: Have you looked at the University of Cincinnati? I honestly don't know if they have what you are looking for, but they have a very good engineering college, which has an "Energy" program/department which includes nuclear engineering (I believe). I don't know if they have anyone working o...

I believe Bussard at one point published something in which he envisioned Polywells on ships processing biowaste into fuel, which becomes cost-effective when you have cheap fusion energy. We're probably headed somewhere like that if Polywell pans out. I'm a bit confused. . . if you have a polywell ...

Fusion power would greatly extend the life of the oil and coal industries, though it would reduce the influence of oil on politics. Transportation and refinement costs would drop off. With oil wells where the pressure has dropped off, it becomes possible to literally dig right down to the pool and ...

Honestly, if it happens, I don't think in the big picture, it matters who holds the patents. It'd be nice (from my pespective as a U.S. citizen/resident) if it was a U.S. Corp, but patents aren't forever. If polywell works, it will be useful far, far after the patents expire. Polywell isn't an iPad ...

Before the discussion progresses much further, I would like to explicitly state my initial post was a direct application of Poes Law, and that no one called me out usage of the tone implied with words like liberal conspiracy and penetrate speaks to the atmosphere in the overall forum. I didn't figu...

On the topic of the NIF, could someone explain something to me - it's my understanding (which might be wrong, not sure), that each pellet will burn for like a few millionths of a second, or milliseconds - very short duration, anyhow. How would this concept be used to generate continuous energy? I gu...

Once they had the Mach 3 Blackbird flying, the downside of ultra high speed set in. Word has it that it takes three states to turn the SR-71 around at that speed, and the states are Texas, Alaska, and Hawaii. Dogfighting becomes moot at those speeds. I thought the point of high speeds was A) the ab...

ladajo wrote:I am thinking that if they get funding for 8.1 (PB&J) that means that they are entering the no kill zone.

OK, I gotta ask - what does PB&J stand for? Since the 8.1 "option", to my understanding is to test the Proton-Boron-11 option, I guess. . .

Proton, Boron, and Joules?

Betruger wrote:Especially considering journalists' tendency to get technical details wrong half the time.

Wait. Let me get this straight. You think journalists get technical details RIGHT 50 percent of the time?!

c'mon. lighten up guys! Just having a bit of fun. It won't be long now before Polywell limps into line behind tokamaks in the 'flunked out fusion' queue. But I'll give it another.. how long was it now?... 12mths or so before assuming the worst. April. Man, they should *definitely* make an announcem...

Yes, Reprocessing can help - some. You have the problem with unfissionable isotopes being formed. So, once you get too much Pu-240 or U-234, or whatever in your used fuel, you can't put it into the core again, because it will poison the reaction, and ALSO contaminate any additional breeding. Isn't ...

Kiteman, I haven't seen anyone claiming > 80% burnup for any fuel cycle; that was an advanced Thorium design. The trouble with high burnup is that your K gets more and more unsure, and your residual heat load goes up also (as fission products are typically much higher lambda). I guess I should ask ...

The MIT "Future of Nuclear Power" paper, has this to say: "Typical LWR spent fuel today reaches a burnup of 50,000 MWD/MT" There is a lot of information in the MIT study and it is definitely worth reading. A burn-up of 50 GWd/MTIHM (50 gigawatt.day per metric ton of initial heavy metal) is typical ...