IIRC you do Nuclear Engineering. Which side of the anti-nuke movement? Hopefully pro-nucleardrmike wrote:the front lines of the anti-nuke movement
WB-6 tests results: FOUR successful tests. Lab notes
Quite definitely pro-nuke
It was really fun - I would go to rallies carrying pro-nukes signs and get 30 to 40 people to tag along. And then they would read the signs!!! It was hilarious.
But the net end result was that the pro-nuke PR was simply "trust us" rather than "work with us". At the time my attitude was "when they are freezing their butts off in the dark, they will change their minds." While true, it's also way too late.
We still have to prove fusion can work. The technical part is easy. The politics will be a lot harder.
It was really fun - I would go to rallies carrying pro-nukes signs and get 30 to 40 people to tag along. And then they would read the signs!!! It was hilarious.
But the net end result was that the pro-nuke PR was simply "trust us" rather than "work with us". At the time my attitude was "when they are freezing their butts off in the dark, they will change their minds." While true, it's also way too late.
We still have to prove fusion can work. The technical part is easy. The politics will be a lot harder.
Obviously we have to build a 100 MW job and try to make it fail.
Preferably inside a containment building that could handle a 10 GJ explosion. i.e. 100 seconds worth of fuel. An old fission reactor containment vessel from a decommissioned plant should do the trick. Or build a new one to those specs.
Deuterium fuel only.
Until we get pBj worked out.
The reason we build such an over designed containment structure is to give people confidence in the safety of the tests.
Of course that all assumes we can actually get these suckers to work.
Preferably inside a containment building that could handle a 10 GJ explosion. i.e. 100 seconds worth of fuel. An old fission reactor containment vessel from a decommissioned plant should do the trick. Or build a new one to those specs.
Deuterium fuel only.
Until we get pBj worked out.
The reason we build such an over designed containment structure is to give people confidence in the safety of the tests.
Of course that all assumes we can actually get these suckers to work.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
I would add that all the anti nuke Libs I hang out with, are very interested in Fusion, they look forward to my emails and blog posts. While many dems are taking a second look at Nuclear power in light of global warming and peak oil.drmike wrote: But being on the front lines of the anti-nuke movement and trying to talk sense to nut jobs taught me it won't be easy.
Barack Obama has taken a pro-nuclear stance.
For me. I dont see many new nukes being built in quantity over the next 20 years, and its not so much a safety issue with me. The Canadian Tar Sands needs as many as 10-12 nuclear reactors to make steam to heat the bitumen out of the soil. It might be that by the time one builds 10 nukes, Polywell will be well on its way.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.
That's good to hear. In the '70's when our dependence on foreign oil was a lot less than it is now it was obvious that nukes would help. Thank goodness for global warming, I think!Roger wrote: I would add that all the anti nuke Libs I hang out with, are very interested in Fusion, they look forward to my emails and blog posts. While many dems are taking a second look at Nuclear power in light of global warming and peak oil.
Barack Obama has taken a pro-nuclear stance.
No, but even a few keeps the engineers busy and trained. When a crunch really comes, those few can engineers can take on a bigger load.For me. I dont see many new nukes being built in quantity over the next 20 years, and its not so much a safety issue with me. The Canadian Tar Sands needs as many as 10-12 nuclear reactors to make steam to heat the bitumen out of the soil. It might be that by the time one builds 10 nukes, Polywell will be well on its way.
You can never have too much safety. Unless really hysterical people are involved.Helius wrote:IMHO; An over-designed containment vessel would be used as evidence of danger.
What ever is done will be used against the project.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Yes, this is important to understand, there will always be someone smearing something. There is no reason for anyone to get their panties in a bunch over it. No cowering in the corner allowed.MSimon wrote:
What ever is done will be used against the project.
The pivot point is Congress and other scientists, thats where the consensus needs to be built, as long as we have good results out of Santa Fe later this year.
If the Navy Manhattenizes WB7, I'm sure the Tokamakers will be watching, and some may even hop the fence to join the Polywell program. Of course if the Convincer is built, and gets PB-11 fusion.... IMHO the ITER may never be finished.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.
Convince Navy Engineers...
I agree with the comment about good results being required. But IMHO, the current target audience should be the US Navy - with the trained nuclear operators and government engineers/scientists. Oh, yeah. They are the ones with the contract right now, too...Roger wrote: ...The pivot point is Congress and other scientists, that's where the consensus needs to be built, as long as we have good results out of Santa Fe later this year.
If the Navy Manhattenizes WB7,...
If the device works, and you can convince the Navy to build a Q>1 Polywell, then "the fuse is lit." Having Navy contracts/programs will be a fait accompli that it works. Any possible charges of fakery will be significantly reduced. (There would be no profit motive for the Navy to misrepresent the system and how it works.) Put it on a ship - even better!
Once it generates a safe track-record with the Navy, and other environmental impacts are proven (shielding requirements, residual radioactive secondary materials, operational procedures), then power companies will be falling all over themselves to get one (or many) for themselves.
Then again, if it is really as good as we can hope, the politicians will be jumping up and down to develop this for domestic power as soon as they can.
It all depends on the results of the on-going work. (It would be very interesting to see behind that green door (WB-7/Santa Fe)!)
My 2 Cents
Be Safe
Mumbles
Re: Convince Navy Engineers...
Ok, sure. I'm looking beyond that. At a certain point the Navy might need some back up. Thats where building consensus in Congress and the scientific community comes in... no ?Mumbles wrote: But IMHO, the current target audience should be the US Navy
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.
Re: Convince Navy Engineers...
Check out the comments at ITER Is Big:Roger wrote:Ok, sure. I'm looking beyond that. At a certain point the Navy might need some back up. Thats where building consensus in Congress and the scientific community comes in... no ?Mumbles wrote: But IMHO, the current target audience should be the US Navy
http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives ... l#comments
I was surprised at how knowledgeable most were. We have done a fair job of education so far.
The big thing is that we are ready when this hits the public perception. The critics will have to learn what we already know.
Plus we already have the Google Rankings.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Re: Convince Navy Engineers...
Yeah, I was surprised to see my Polywell Update post at #4. I saw it there a couple weeks ago and realized I'd badly misstated several things. Apparently I learned a few things since then.MSimon wrote:Plus we already have the Google Rankings.
Joe's reference is #2, and Roger's post is #5.
-
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2013 4:41 pm
Re: WB-6 tests results: FOUR successful tests. Lab notes
Does anyone have a copy of the PDF listed in the original post?
bussard_wb6rpt080604fnl0107.pdf
If so, could you rehost it someplace? It has been taken down and can't find it anyplace else on the web.
bussard_wb6rpt080604fnl0107.pdf
If so, could you rehost it someplace? It has been taken down and can't find it anyplace else on the web.
Re: WB-6 tests results: FOUR successful tests. Lab notes
Might be the same as this -
http://www.emc2fusion.org/RsltsNFnlConc ... 120602.pdf
http://www.emc2fusion.org/RsltsNFnlConc ... 120602.pdf