Major Electronics Magazine Picks Up On Polywell

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

MSimon
Posts: 14333
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Concerning cooling, if corrosion can be controlled, wouldnt ocean water work for the heat exchanger?
Sure. Steam ships do it. However, the material cost goes way up. It may not be too significant in overall plant cost. However, I'm unaware of significant land based power plants that use sea water cooling.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

MSimon
Posts: 14333
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

But chris, you are always telling us ITER is a much better bet than Polywell. Count the neutrons you tell us.

We say when evaluating a plan it may be useful to count the estimated dollars in the estimated final product in order to best allocate the research money.

===

In any case. Too late for that now. If Polywell proves out in two years and goes on to a power plant design two years after that it won't matter. If it doesn't it won't matter. It would be good though to pump up alternate approaches. Just in case.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Post by TallDave »

Blithering on about whether 2GW is better than 20GW is nonsense. You won't really understand the practical and/or financial implications until the first one is built.
This is just mind-bogglingly stupid. Of course we can estimate these things ahead of time. It would be ridiculous not to.

This is like arguing we can't tell whether a bridge from New York to London makes financial sense until we build one.
This isn't some new model of car being built; it's not predictable by the reptilious accountancy species. I'm only interested in the glorious triumphs of humans, so don't bore me with the filthy politico/accountant's business.
Yes, let the shining glorious scientists waste billions of dollars without the petty concerns of how it's paid for or whether they're actually producing anything of value. Never mind the ugly capitalist system that pays for all this, and gives humans ever-higher living standards.

The truth is scientists produce lots of abstract information, while engineers and accountants are the ones who make it useful to humans.
One day, you won't have money as you understand it, and those that read these ancient websites will wonder what on earth you're talking about
They already have that glorious utopia in Cuba and North Korea. It doesn't look much like Star Trek; the former can't afford toilet paper and in the latter millions starve to death.
Last edited by TallDave on Wed Sep 23, 2009 11:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.

MSimon
Posts: 14333
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Chris,

It is already well into the grimy engineering approach.

We are not talking new science here. Some glorious search for knowledge for knowledge's sake.

We are well into the engineering phase. Can we make a diverter that works? Can we solve the first wall problem? Will the Polywell SC magnets be strong enough to deflect alphas? Can the Polywell burn B11? What is the cost of power conversion. What is the power gain? What size of plant will be required to generate economical electricity? How big will the vacuum pumps need to be. What is the cost of power supplies? etc. etc. etc.

None of the questions being asked are science questions (we will use the scientific method to find answers). The questions confronting us with all proposed fusion methods are engineering questions.

The short version: we already know how to do fusion. The question now is can we do it at a profit?

Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

MSimon
Posts: 14333
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

chris,

You are a prime example of how most scientists are not very good at engineering as I posited above. I can now safely rest my case.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

chrismb wrote: It's like listening to people debating the existence of God, but missing out the 'existence' part and just moving straight on to how much His house cost and what cubic capacity His pick-up has got under the hood!!
Nope, don't agree with your analogy. Everyone agrees that God (fusion) exists, the argument is what "way" or ways should be used to bottle his beneficence. If there are several ways that might work and if they do will provide his beneficence at $5 per $10 beneficence bottle (well worth the price) and one way that is almost certain to work but to all expectations will only provide it at $500 a $10 beneficence bottle (certainly not worth it), where should limited resources be placed to develop "the way" to God?

So far, many folks I have some respect for say that the tokomak route will never give us <$10 per bottle. Are they wrong? How?

KitemanSA
Posts: 6114
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

MSimon wrote:
Concerning cooling, if corrosion can be controlled, wouldnt ocean water work for the heat exchanger?
Sure. Steam ships do it. However, the material cost goes way up. It may not be too significant in overall plant cost. However, I'm unaware of significant land based power plants that use sea water cooling.
Basically just those that have as a secondary purpose the desalination of seawater.

JLawson
Posts: 423
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: Georgia
Contact:

Post by JLawson »

MSimon wrote:
Concerning cooling, if corrosion can be controlled, wouldnt ocean water work for the heat exchanger?
Sure. Steam ships do it. However, the material cost goes way up. It may not be too significant in overall plant cost. However, I'm unaware of significant land based power plants that use sea water cooling.
Seems to me like sucking up ocean water would be an ideal setup to preheat water for a multi-stage flash desalination plant. With a few extra 'free' degrees input temperature, I'd think you'd be able to get a significantly higher freshwater output with less of an energy expenditure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-stag ... stillation

You've got the heat, might as well get some extra revenue out of it, right?

(Looks like KitemanSA beat me to the idea. Dang!)
When opinion and reality conflict - guess which one is going to win in the long run.

MSimon
Posts: 14333
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Yes. Flash distillation. Done on steam ships. Used for plant make up water and drinking/cooking water.

These days I believe for land based use reverse osmosis is preferred.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

Aero
Posts: 1200
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 4:36 am
Location: 92111

Post by Aero »

MSimon wrote:
Concerning cooling, if corrosion can be controlled, wouldnt ocean water work for the heat exchanger?
Sure. Steam ships do it. However, the material cost goes way up. It may not be too significant in overall plant cost. However, I'm unaware of significant land based power plants that use sea water cooling.
From Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Onofre ... ng_Station
The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) is a nuclear power plant located on the Pacific coast of California. The 84-acre (34 ha) site is in the northwestern corner of San Diego County, south of San Clemente, and surrounded by the San Onofre State Park and next to the I-5 Highway. It provides nearly 20% of the electrical power to the residents of Southern California.

Unit 1 is no longer in service. This reactor was a first generation Westinghouse pressurized water reactor that operated for 25 years, closing permanently in 1992. Units 2 and 3, Combustion Engineering pressurized water reactors, continue to operate and generate 1,172 MWe and 1,178 MWe respectively.
Here's one, and there is another on up the coast. Unfortunately I don't recall its name but I do recall that both plants are cooled with sea water. Dumping the waste heat into the ocean is a big deal for the greenies in So. Cal.
Aero

MSimon
Posts: 14333
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Aero wrote:
MSimon wrote:
Concerning cooling, if corrosion can be controlled, wouldnt ocean water work for the heat exchanger?
Sure. Steam ships do it. However, the material cost goes way up. It may not be too significant in overall plant cost. However, I'm unaware of significant land based power plants that use sea water cooling.
From Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Onofre ... ng_Station
The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) is a nuclear power plant located on the Pacific coast of California. The 84-acre (34 ha) site is in the northwestern corner of San Diego County, south of San Clemente, and surrounded by the San Onofre State Park and next to the I-5 Highway. It provides nearly 20% of the electrical power to the residents of Southern California.

Unit 1 is no longer in service. This reactor was a first generation Westinghouse pressurized water reactor that operated for 25 years, closing permanently in 1992. Units 2 and 3, Combustion Engineering pressurized water reactors, continue to operate and generate 1,172 MWe and 1,178 MWe respectively.
Here's one, and there is another on up the coast. Unfortunately I don't recall its name but I do recall that both plants are cooled with sea water. Dumping the waste heat into the ocean is a big deal for the greenies in So. Cal.
Now if we could dump the greenies in the ocean. I wouldn't want to apply for the toxic waste permit though.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

Tom Ligon
Posts: 1871
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 1:23 am
Location: Northern Virginia
Contact:

Post by Tom Ligon »

The dirty little secret of SoCal is the water is too damned cold for swimming. A little strategic warming of the water along the beaches might help.

Just leave it cold where the seals and sea lions poop.

MSimon
Posts: 14333
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Tom Ligon wrote:The dirty little secret of SoCal is the water is too damned cold for swimming. A little strategic warming of the water along the beaches might help.

Just leave it cold where the seals and sea lions poop.
I used to body surf down there. The water was warm then. That would have been '67 or '68.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

mvanwink5
Posts: 1835
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:07 am
Location: N.C. Mountains

Post by mvanwink5 »

Saltwater condensers for steam turbines is not that unusual. There has been a learning curve though on what materials are best to use. We recently replaced our condensers with titanium tubes and tube sheets. Since the cold war end, titanium costs have become competitive. Barnacle and muscle growth requires either frequent cleaning or automated systems though.
Near term, cheap, dark horse fusion hits the air waves, GF - TED, LM - Announcement. The race is on.

jmc
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:16 am
Location: Ireland

Post by jmc »

I tend to agree that we're at the phase where engineering considerations are important fusion reactions were achieved with particle accelerators at the turn of the 20th century. What we're striving to do now is simply to balnce the books of energy in vs energy out. No dramatic new insights into the nature of the universe to be gleened here (although arguably plasma physics can be used to explain a number of astrophysical phenomena)

You can't plug 20GW into the national grid directly, but perhaps a 20GW nuclear fusion reactor could be used as a kind of in situ hydrogen refinery. I'm sure there are large oil refineries around the world who export an equivalent of 10 to 100 of GW in continous oil flows into tankers and internation pipelines etc.

Post Reply