Directory:Inertial-Electrodynamic Fusion Device
From PESWiki
<< A Top 100 Energy Technology >>
Dr. Bussard and his team at Energy/Matter Conversion Corporation, after close to 20 years of hard work, have developed a revolutionary radiation-free fusion process that takes boron-11 and fuses a proton to it, producing, in its excited state, a carbon-12 atom. This excited carbon-12 atom decays to beryllium-8 and helium-4. It was developed under a DOD contract and has recently been made public.
| Table of contents |
About
| This is a new page! |
|---|
|
Official Website
looking
Latest Developments
Aug. 23, 2007
An anonymous tip reports: "Dr. Bussard's Polywell Fusion Reactor has had it's DOD funding restored."
Dr Bussard's former assistant Tom Ligon confirmed Navy funding for WB7 here: [1] (http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?t=128)
How it Works
According to http://www.science.edu/TechoftheYear/TechoftheYear.htm
- "The fusion process recommended by Dr. Bussard takes boron-11 and fuses a proton to it, producing, in its excited state, a carbon-12 atom. This excited carbon-12 atom decays to beryllium-8 and helium-4. Beryllium-8 very quickly (in 10-13 s) decays into two more helium-4 atoms. This is the only nuclear-energy releasing process in the whole world that releases fusion energy and three helium atoms -- and no neutrons. This reaction is completely radiation free.
- "[The fusion process that powers stars is enabled by the gravitational force field that draws particles directly together]. Only one other force is known to be like gravity: this is the electric field force or "coulomb" force, between electrically-charged particles.
- "Charged particles of opposite signs attract each other with direct forces; charged particles in electric fields feel forces directly along field gradients. Thus, fusion fuel plasmas could be held together efficiently by electric forces and electric fields. This is called "Electric Fusion".
- "The basic approach of electric fusion is the following:
- * Quasi-spherical magnetic fields trap injected energetic electrons to form spherical negative potential well.
- * Fusion ions trapped in this spherical well focused through central region oscillate across the "core" until they are reacted.
- * The system acts like a spherical colliding beam device.
- * Fuel gas is input at the potential well edge. Fusion products escape to system walls.
- * Ion fusion power generation occurs in a central region.
- * Electron drive power is decoupled from the fusion process.
- * Power balance is set by injected electron losses; the main losses occurring through the magnetic cusps and to walls.
- * Magnetic confinement of electrons is critical.
- * "Wiffle Ball" (WB) effect insures cusp sealing.
- * Magnetic insulation of the walls is important.
- * "Magrid" (MG) effect reduces power and raises gain.
Main Features
In summary, Dr. Bussard's Inertial Electrostatic Fusion offers [2] (http://www.science.edu/TechoftheYear/TechoftheYear.htm)
- Small, efficient power reactors, 1-3% the size of current magnetic confinement reactors.
- Clean, radiation-free energy utilizing p B-11.
- Relatively simple engineering with commercial viability in 6-10 years.
- Low cost ($150-200 million from program inception to demonstration of clean power.)
Videos
- Should Google Go Nuclear? Clean, cheap, nuclear power (no, really) (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1996321846673788606) (1:32 hours) - Dr. Robert W. Bussard gives a lecture for Google. (Google Video)
Patents
list here
Company Profile
list here
Awards
- Inertial-Electrodynamic Fusion Device receives 2006 Technology of the Year Award (http://www.science.edu/TechoftheYear/TechoftheYear.htm) - Feature page about the technology at the International Academy of Sciences website.
Inventor: Robert W. Bussard
http://www.science.edu/TechoftheYear/TechoftheYear.htm - A brief bio of Dr. Robert W. Bussard is found at the end of the page.
American physicist, received his PhD from Princeton.
Co-founder and director of Energy/Matter Conversion Corporation.
Former Assistant Director to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. Has held prominent positions at Los Alamos National Laboratories, Oakridge Labs, and TRW Systems.
See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._Bussard
In the News
- Vital Electric Fusion: Proven, Safe, Cheap (http://pesn.com/2007/05/09/9500470_Electric_Fusion/) - Energy device in funding limbo for two decades -- dying on the vine for lack of nuclear weapons potential. Method developed by US Physicist, Dr. Robert W. Bussard, does not need to release neutrons (radioactivity) as part of the fusion process. (PESN; May 9, 2007)
Comments
post here
(Just click on the "[edit]" button to the top, right of the header for this section. You will need to log in.)
NEC Comments
Not Cheap; Not Soon
On Jan. 5, 2006, a New Energy Congress member wrote:
6-10 years is a long way out, and $150-200 million is NOT cheap.
- Rebuttal: On Jan. 9, 2007, Dr. Bussard wrote:
- It can make power at about 5/8 the cost of conventional plants (most is BOP costs) process steam at 1/3 the cost of others, make syfuels (ethanol) at less than 0.5/gallon, destroy nuclear waste, and make space engines commercial, etc, etc. The basic physics is summarized in my IAC paper in October. And in much earlier papers in the early 1990's. All still valid.
- The physic is essentially done, in the 11 years we worked under publishing embargo. Now the real engineering is needed to build a full scale demo plant, which is the next logical step. Cost $ 200 M for the whole thing, and five years for 100 MW. Marks the end of fossil (and fission) fuels.
- We are looking for private money, not government.
Exciting Possibilities
On January 9, 2007, New Energy Congress member, Robert Indech, PhD PE wrote:
This work is exciting in that it offers the possibility to remove our civilization from the petroleum standard. For our readers, I will attempt to give my interpretation of its methods of operation, limitations, and possible place in the energy scheme of things.
To begin with, it is not a "free energy" device, but rather a method to fuse two lighter nuclei into a heavier nucleus, with an accompanying substantial conversion of matter (due to the strong nuclear binding force) to heat energy. Presumably, such heat energy released would then be conventionally processed into electric power on the national grid; or, alternatively, high energy alpha particles released from the reaction could be used as the output thruster of a spacecraft.
The device utilizes one major method of confinement: magnetic fields placed in a modified spherical assembly -- in this case a 6 sided polyhedron. The ionized reactants are confined by the magnetic fields, eventually repeatedly passing through a geometrical center point, where they assume a high concentration, and a high enough velocity so that when they collide fusion occurs. Such general magnetic confinement has been used for many years in conventional hot fusion devices, but not of this exact geometry. In conventional fusion devices, instabilities in the hot plasma flow lead to extreme losses through the magnetic confinement fields, making a practical device, at present, not possible. In the present geometry, the magnetic fields are themselves static, but the influence of these fields upon the ions is dynamic. This is in contrast to the older Farnsworth type designs, whereby the positive ions were confined by a static electrostatic field, but which led to jet-like instabilities before a critical power density could be reached for a usable device.
Twenty years of experimentation has ironed out many of the theoretical difficulties associated with this technology: primarily the requirement to reduce to almost (or equal to) zero, the amount of metal in contact with the energetic ions. However, the inventor does state that 6-10 years of further work and $150-200 million would be required to develop a full scale working prototype. If this work were a national objective, such monies would be readily available, and the time scale would be substantially reduced by parallel development projects. However, we are a society heavily dominated by oil interests, and this technique would not sit well with them. Thus, private monies would be required, and, on this scale, hard to come by.
Upon reading the IEC attached report [awaiting permission to post] one fact does stand out: the magnetic confinement fields themselves are static. In conventional hot fusion devices, the magnetic fields themselves are pulsed to further heat the hot plasma and drive energy into it. Sequential squeezing across each major axis by pulsing opposing magnetic fields may provide an immediate gain in heating the hot plasma so generated so that cusp loss effects are further minimized, and may also allow a much smaller unit to be built for energy breakeven. Thus, pulsing may substantially reduce this given time and expense estimate. Further, placing a water jacket around the coils would provide an instant method to extract the heat energy so generated, which could be then used to produce electricity.
This device should be placed in the top ten, and elevated in position if funding is achieved for the next development step.
Other Comments
post here
(Just click on the "[edit]" button to the top, right of the header for this section. You will need to log in.)
RogerFox 13:50, 22 Sep 2007 (EDT)
A few of points.
1) Dr Bussard has used DD fuels, not P-B11. His results do indicate P-B11 fusion can occur in a small device such as WB-6, with a hi enough drive level.
2) Fuel ions are generally not confined by the McGrid or magnetic fields. Fuel ions are accelerated by the potential well. Fuel ions' behavior is generally dictated by the breadth & depth of the potential well.
3) Bussard states that 200 million and about 5 yrs can yield a proof of concept, not a prototype.
4) A D-D fueled polywell of net power size would likely use heat/steam much as current fission plants do to generate electricity.
5) A P-B11 fueled Polywell of net power size would use electrostaic grids to trap alphas, to generate electricity.
6) WB-6 was a cube. WB-7 will likely be a truncated cube, WB-8 a truncated dodec.
WB-6 Magnet assembly.
7) P-B11 fusion is aneutronic, meaning it creates no neutrons. That is not to say there is no radioactivity.
To get to He, lIRC there is some fission. The Carbon 12 must split, as well as the Be.
8) Cusp loss effects: electrons recirculate,. Dr Bussard has inferred that the truncated cube or dodec may may improve electron loss figures & general efficiencies by 3 to 5 times. As is, since electrons recirculate, this is a minor issue. See You Tube video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmp1cg3-WDY
It may be that at one point LN2 is used for cooling in a smaller device such as WB-6, LN2 would allow for 100's of seconds of run time vs the milli second pulses that WB-6 performed. LN2 cooling and sufficient drive levels would allow exploration of areas where theory say PB-11 fusion occurs. The ability to explore P-B11 fusion in a small device (30cm on a side) means proof of P-B11 fusion at a reasonable cost (10 million ?), possibly on the order of a few minutes run time. Regardless, LN2 cooling is an intermediate step to proof of concept which will likely require super conducting magnets.
A schematic look at the "McGrid".
Contact
current(?): Manassas, Virginia, USA
Energy/Matter Conversion Corporation (EMC2)
680 Garcia St.
Santa Fe, NM 87505
See also
- Other Directory listings
• Latest
• A-I
• J-R
• S-Z
• Tree
• News
- PESWiki home page
