First Light Fusion News
Re: First Light Fusion News
Saw that article. I think they have a chance, but they still have a very long way to go.
Re: First Light Fusion News
Nick Hawker, First Light Fusion founder and CEO, has a blog (https://nickhawker.com/).
Last month he started publishing a series about fusion fuels. He writes:
"The topic of fuels for fusion is much talked about in the fusion start-up community. What fuel are you using is a common question, particularly from US VC investors. Yet it is barely discussed in the publicly funded fusion programmes, neither magnetic nor inertial. This post is the first in a series where I will outline why it is not discussed in the mainstream of fusion. To me, the answer is simple; it is because deuterium-tritium is the only viable fuel (my emphasis)."
Basically, he argues that ignition is a necessary condition for net energy production, and that it is impossible to achieve with any other fuel (he considers D-T, D-D, D-3He, and p-11B).
I know that ignition is nice to have, since it frees the machine from having to keep dumping energy onto the plasma to keep it hot, but I fail to see why it should be indispensable.
First Light machines are pulsed, not steady state, ignition should be even less of a requirement for them, shouldn't it.
Last month he started publishing a series about fusion fuels. He writes:
"The topic of fuels for fusion is much talked about in the fusion start-up community. What fuel are you using is a common question, particularly from US VC investors. Yet it is barely discussed in the publicly funded fusion programmes, neither magnetic nor inertial. This post is the first in a series where I will outline why it is not discussed in the mainstream of fusion. To me, the answer is simple; it is because deuterium-tritium is the only viable fuel (my emphasis)."
Basically, he argues that ignition is a necessary condition for net energy production, and that it is impossible to achieve with any other fuel (he considers D-T, D-D, D-3He, and p-11B).
I know that ignition is nice to have, since it frees the machine from having to keep dumping energy onto the plasma to keep it hot, but I fail to see why it should be indispensable.
First Light machines are pulsed, not steady state, ignition should be even less of a requirement for them, shouldn't it.
"The problem is not what we don't know, but what we do know [that] isn't so" (Mark Twain)
Re: First Light Fusion News
The whole blog is written to be on favor of their solution skipping most of the latest advancement in research (as example the latest pB11 cross-section review that we discussed few weeks ago here).charliem wrote: ↑Fri Apr 07, 2023 6:19 pmNick Hawker, First Light Fusion founder and CEO, has a blog (https://nickhawker.com/).
That said, the real game changer that will move their solution out of the feasible ones are the various superconductor field advancements and new insulators designs (see Moein Borghei from Avalanche) that are enabling high voltage feed-through to high vacuum.
These are in my opinion the two techs that will give a new boost to existing fusion teams as well as enabling a plethora of new fusion solution that has been on the waiting line for a proper technological breakthrough.
I do not really see a future for a "gun design (or impact design)" fusion system.
A society of dogmas is a dead society.
Re: First Light Fusion News
New video about First Light on Youtube. This one is by Dr. Ben Miles:
Inside The UKs Breakthrough Fusion Reactor - First Light Fusion
It includes a few minutes of engineering porn (regarding rail guns, high power switches, vacuum vessels, and more).
Nice.
Inside The UKs Breakthrough Fusion Reactor - First Light Fusion
It includes a few minutes of engineering porn (regarding rail guns, high power switches, vacuum vessels, and more).
Nice.
"The problem is not what we don't know, but what we do know [that] isn't so" (Mark Twain)