ITER and Weapons Proliferation

[MSimon]

1. Proliferation really isn't an issue with Polywells. If you introduce neutrons into the system (via D-D or D-T) you destroy the coils. These are inherently advanced fuel systems.

Yikes! Am I understanding this correctly? Does this mean that a full-scale D-D Polywell is entirely out of the picture with regard to Commercial Power Plants (as described on the "Power Systems Applications" page of askmar.com's "Should Google Go Nuclear")?

If the D-D polywell does indeed destroy its coils so readily, it would seem that p-B11 in the only way to go, and building the WB-100 as a D-D polywell should not even be an option.

No. I have a design (BOE) for a superconducting coil D-D machine. About 2 to 20 years before coil replacement. Plus the coils need only be re-annealed.

[jmc]

If you put the coils on the outside, then you can run D-D or mybe even DT.

[MSimon]

If you put the coils on the outside, then you can run D-D or mybe even DT.

You can't put the magnets in any position where the fields would pass through a conductor. That generates losses.

I have figured a way to run D-D or D-T with coils inside the reactor. It just requires the proper shielding. Not hard.

[Keegan]

I have done some BOE engineering and MgB2 superconductors with dual water jackets (for cooling and moderation) and B10 neutron absorbers should have adequate lifetimes (2 to 10 years with D-D) to be used as proliferation devices.

Hey Simon, those are some nice calculations. Just wondering if you have done any estimates on flow, water pressures and temps.

Getting the water in and out of the coils in recirculating machines has always seemed a large bottleneck to me.

If B11 fusion becomes viable would anyone else on this forum support a Treaty banning Neutronic Polywells ? It seems to me this would elimate all political and environmental issues that i fear could be used by legacy energy sectors to stiffle development.

Besides it appears it would be easier and more economic to impliment net power power machines whose reaction products were alpha particles instead of Neutrons.

-K

[MSimon]

I have done some BOE engineering and MgB2 superconductors with dual water jackets (for cooling and moderation) and B10 neutron absorbers should have adequate lifetimes (2 to 10 years with D-D) to be used as proliferation devices.

Hey Simon, those are some nice calculations. Just wondering if you have done any estimates on flow, water pressures and temps.

Getting the water in and out of the coils in recirculating machines has always seemed a large bottleneck to me.

If B11 fusion becomes viable would anyone else on this forum support a Treaty banning Neutronic Polywells ? It seems to me this would elimate all political and environmental issues that i fear could be used by legacy energy sectors to stiffle development.

Besides it appears it would be easier and more economic to impliment net power power machines whose reaction products were alpha particles instead of Neutrons.

-K

Water temps in the 250C range on the outer most loop. Delta T of 100 C. Flow drop of 100 PSI. Doable at around 1 MW/sq m. Most of the max temp allowed calculation is based on how big you want your waste heat cooler to be. Say 20 MW/6. ~ 3.5 MW/ coil. = 3.5 Mj/sec. 100 C delta T = 35,000 j/degC. 1 Kg = 1,000 j/degC = 35Kg/sec. = 9 gal/second = 360 gpm/coil. Brisk. Not too hard.

Well sure it is easier to do non-alpha machines from a life standpoint. The point is that neutron machines could get done.

BTW treaties are only as good as the people keeping them.

[Brent]

I remember that there was a website speaking of nuclear proliferation, and the implications of countries going nuclear. I remember that it was both a blessing and a curse to be a nuclear power. For any country that is a nuclear power, they must be always be weary of conflicts going nuclear. Therefore, any nuclear power must weigh their military options much more carefully than those that are not nuclear powers.

The website also spoke about the nature of nuclear blasts, and how the amount of fallout is regulated by the distance that the nuclear blast is from the ground. It spoke of various targets that may require detonations at various distances from the ground.

Unfortunately, I lost the url to this website. Someone did link to it from one of the many forums on the net, but I cannot locate it.

Does anyone remember?

[ravingdave]

I remember that there was a website speaking of nuclear proliferation, and the implications of countries going nuclear. I remember that it was both a blessing and a curse to be a nuclear power. For any country that is a nuclear power, they must be always be weary of conflicts going nuclear. Therefore, any nuclear power must weigh their military options much more carefully than those that are not nuclear powers.

The website also spoke about the nature of nuclear blasts, and how the amount of fallout is regulated by the distance that the nuclear blast is from the ground. It spoke of various targets that may require detonations at various distances from the ground.

Unfortunately, I lost the url to this website. Someone did link to it from one of the many forums on the net, but I cannot locate it.

Does anyone remember?

I may be wrong, but It sounds like you are talking about MSimon's "Power and Control" blog. He had articles which I think were entittled "Nuclear warfare 101" or some such.

Here's a link.


http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/200 ... ssons.html

David

[Brent]

I may be wrong, but It sounds like you are talking about MSimon's "Power and Control" blog. He had articles which I think were entittled "Nuclear warfare 101" or some such.

Yes, this is it. I did not know that MSimon had such a post. Thanks Dave.