Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

The Polywell Guy

(25 posts)
Thu Jan 29, 2015, 01:00 AM Jan 2015

Updates on Polywell Fusion (Talk at MICROSOFT)

Hello All,

It's been a little while since I posted here. I have a new blog post. .

The Post: "An Industry Emerges" is a analysis of 16 companies working towards fusion power. I estimate that there is about 330 people engaged in these organizations, with a total funding of 430 million. By comparison, the KSTAR tokamak has 2X that amount invested.

I feel like these little companies (Trying everything from Polywells, Fusors, Focus Fusion, Magnetized Target Fusion, Lockheed's machine and beam fusion) are innovating much faster and are far closer to fusion than monsters like ITER.

Things have been happening fast in the polywell fusion world. Here is a short update:

In July, both Science and Nature reported on alternative fusion [31, 32]. This was a major milestone. It energized researchers who had been laboring away in obscurity. Natures’ article was more critical - covering Tri Alpha, Helion and General Fusion. The Science article was longer and more upbeat. It detailed General Fusion, focus fusion, Tri Alpha and the polywell. The author Daniel Clery has just published a new book on fusion [38].


In August, Phoenix Nuclear Labs announced it could churn out 100 billion neutrons a second, for an entire day [34, 35]. Wow. That is 24 hours of constant fusion. This shows a hint of what is possible when you use an electric field to heat ions to fusion conditions. Also in August, the government finally moved into alternative fusion. ARPA-E started a program named alpha. The budget of 30 million should fund about ten projects [13]. They see only two paths to fusion power. Laser fusion makes a high density plasma, while tokomaks makes a low density plasma. They want a third, middle range, high repetition option. By middle densities, they mean 1E18 to 1E23 ions per cubic centimeter [14]. Dr. Bussards’ polywell got there (1E19) but Dr. Park’s did not (1E16) [18, 3]. This request tells us much about the governments’ antiquated thinking. First, these new devices do not all pulse. Fusors can run continuously. Secondly, many schemes have no need for ‘drivers’ and ‘targets’. General Fusion and Tri Alpha are notable exceptions [19,20]. But, the polywell, the dynomak and Lockheeds’ designs do not work this way [21, 1, 27, 28].

In September, the fifth paper was published by the University of Sydney [29]. Their old papers are explained on this blog [39 - 45]. Their new polywell has better electron injectors and is ten times stronger. The team also built a new capacitance probe and validating it was difficult. The probe was used to measure the voltage in the polywell, under different conditions. The coil made electrons that were attracted to the positive rings. As they approached the magnetic field overpowered, drawing the electros into the trap. The probe measured the amount trapped. The team found that trapping increased when more electrons were emitted. It also got stronger as the magnetic field rose. This is not surprising. Of the two variables, emission was more powerful. Trapping was connected to these variables with some rough math. You should read the paper yourself [39].

In October, Lockheed Martin revealed its fusion technology. This got international press [46 - 52]. Lockheed failed to give any data. They opted for a dreamy video and three patents [27, 28, 52]. This is unacceptable. We are building the case for fusion power. This is a long term effort. It can only be sustained by a community. A community of teachers, engineers, investors, policy makers, academics and businessmen. Everyone has a role here. The community needs to hear the newest data, presented in a clear manner. When this system breaks down – bad things happen. Lockheed should have done a paper before issuing a press release. Finally, the 16th IEC conference was held at University of Wisconsin Madison. The polywell had a bigger impact this year. Dr. Park gave a polywell keynote and Dr. Santarius discussed his modeling efforts [53]. Devlin Baker premiered his excellent modeling code and George Miley discussed the IEC family of technologies. Dr. Hirsch predicted that ITER funding would fall and IEC research could rise in its’ place [53]. It was a good conference.



This month the polywell was presented at MICROSOFT.


research.microsoft.com/apps/video/default.aspx?id=238715&r=1


Sincerely,
The Polywell Guy
http://thepolywellblog.blogspot.com/


7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Updates on Polywell Fusion (Talk at MICROSOFT) (Original Post) The Polywell Guy Jan 2015 OP
Interesting stuff, thanks. Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #1
I do not know. The Polywell Guy Feb 2015 #5
Just to add The Polywell Guy Feb 2015 #6
Thank you for all this. Warren DeMontague Feb 2015 #7
So, if Polywell gets there first delrem Jan 2015 #2
Some structural elements in the reactors Stryst Jan 2015 #3
Thanks. I'm quite ignorant but I sure don't like that hot spent fuel delrem Jan 2015 #4

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
1. Interesting stuff, thanks.
Thu Jan 29, 2015, 01:09 AM
Jan 2015

This, to me, is the potentially game-changing story almost no one is paying attention to.

Quick question: You say Lockheed-Martin was scarce on data, I agree, although they sure made themselves sound confident. What do you think they're actually doing over there, or it is all hot air?

The Polywell Guy

(25 posts)
5. I do not know.
Sun Feb 1, 2015, 01:40 PM
Feb 2015

Warren,

I do not know exactly why they did not publish first. If I were to guess, I would say Dr. McGuire wanted to but management would not let him.

The Polywell Guy

(25 posts)
6. Just to add
Sun Feb 1, 2015, 02:02 PM
Feb 2015

Just to add,


I am not the expert on this. But based on their patent applications: their idea is both similar to and different from the polywell. They are trying to trap plasma using sharply bent fields (like the polywell). But (as I understand it) they are heating the plasma using means other than electric fields. Techniques like moving plasma using magnetic oscillations or microwave heating. You can read this their own patents:

http://www.google.com/patents/US20140301519
http://www.google.com/patents/US20140301518
https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US20140301518.pdf

From what I understand, they went public to attract more funding and more researchers. Dr. McGuire has also indicated he may publish something this year. He was hired in late 2007, so he has had plenty of time to develop something. The team also expanded a fair amount in the past year (meaning someone is approving funding). Last March they hired Jonathon Heinrich from the Air Force and Dr. Regina Sullivan from MIT.


Lockheed faces the same issue that runs right through all this research: transparency. What do we share? What do we hide? People argue that fusion power is a such a colossal technology, that it must be hidden. We must have it - no one else. Hence, they get very protective of their information. This theme is nearly constant in the decades long search for fusion. From companies to universities to government funded research. But unfortunately: Secrecy. Kills. Research. It is a classic catch-22. If you hide information, then nobody else is following in your footsteps. No one else is there to help when you hit issues. This is why - for many years - I have always tried to be overtly open with my information. Because ultimately: we need fusion if we ever hope to supplant fossil fuels and stop climate change.


Cheers!





delrem

(9,688 posts)
2. So, if Polywell gets there first
Thu Jan 29, 2015, 02:08 AM
Jan 2015

it can acquire some patents and a lead time. Then, if Polywell sells a massive number of units before anyone else catches up, Polywell will make some massive profits. There had better be massive profits considering that each person engaged in Polywell is funded to the tune of over $1-million.

Whatever Polywell does, whatever it produces and tries to sell, I sure hope to hell that there's plenty of regulation in place, in particular w.r.t. possible environmental damage (esp. disposal of waste) with Polywell investors paying the guarantees up front.

Stryst

(714 posts)
3. Some structural elements in the reactors
Thu Jan 29, 2015, 12:55 PM
Jan 2015

would eventually become radioactive from neutron bombardment, but there isn't any "hot" spent fuel. Then environmental impact should be much less than for fission, and a LOT less than from burning coal/oil.

delrem

(9,688 posts)
4. Thanks. I'm quite ignorant but I sure don't like that hot spent fuel
Thu Jan 29, 2015, 11:35 PM
Jan 2015

leaking from....
or being used willy-nilly in munitions or wherever to cause untold harm to innocent populations.

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Science»Updates on Polywell Fusio...