Aneutronic fusion

[Aeronaut]

Seemed like a simple enough question, but the best Google could do was send me here, and using lots of ANDs on the board's search function hasn't narrowed it down that far.

To be clear, I back pB11 fuel in the Focus Fusion reactor, which self-generates its containment fields, and directly converts the He ions and the X-rays into electricity using a variation of the 1973 Lawrence Livermore paper quoted above.

This still requires around a meter of water, topped off with a few cm of boron and a few cm of lead or boronated polyethylene to keep them pesky neutrons below background levels.

I want to heat the shielding water to provide low pressure steam and industrial heat. It works on paper, provided that the (thermal) neutrons don't make the water radioactive.

What think?

Thanks in advance

[chrismb]

Seemed like a simple enough question, but the best Google could do was send me here, and using lots of ANDs on the board's search function hasn't narrowed it down that far.

To be clear, I back pB11 fuel in the Focus Fusion reactor, which self-generates its containment fields, and directly converts the He ions and the X-rays into electricity using a variation of the 1973 Lawrence Livermore paper quoted above.

This still requires around a meter of water, topped off with a few cm of boron and a few cm of lead or boronated polyethylene to keep them pesky neutrons below background levels.

I want to heat the shielding water to provide low pressure steam and industrial heat. It works on paper, provided that the (thermal) neutrons don't make the water radioactive.

What think?

Thanks in advance

I think you've not actually got a question but would like to dig more into focus fusion - for which there is a site http://focusfusion.org/index.php/forums/

Dense plasma focus's are well known, and are also well known to produce neutrons (using DD) and x-rays in abundance. I am not sure what Eric Lerner's idea brings extra to the table - his patent seems to have been awareded on the fact that his device adds a 'twist' to the plasma. That might well add some efficiencies, seems a good idea to me. But if DPF's haven't yet got anywhere near break-even (by several orders of mag) then I don't really think an extra 'twist' will do it. But, hey, it's all to play for, and all to prove by Eric Lerner.

If you've more to add, you can start a new thread. But I'm not aware of any new *news* on DPFs, though personally I would be happy to read more on any *new* news.

Again, as per my crticisms of ITER and Polywell, DPF's can be easily run with deuterium and proven to pump out net neutrons, so they should just get on and show something active and positive, like showing it works with DD/neutrons, which are easily and positively detected. Arguments to run p11B sound like a smoke-screen of pretending to do more that can be reasonably claimed - there is no issue with getting a good neutron flux out of an early prototype that some suitable radiological management wouldn't deal with. There would then be a strong argument that something worthwhile is being done. As it is, Eric Lerner has been running this story for years and hasn't come up with the goods. It's nothing new, I'm afraid to say.