Deuterium and nuclear fusion

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
User avatar
Cuicui
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3547
Registration: 26/04/05, 10:14
x 6

Re: Deuterium and nuclear fusion




by Cuicui » 23/09/08, 14:39

C moa wrote:Let's be clear, I'm not saying that hydrogen-boron has no future. I'm just saying that I find it a bit quick to say that ITER and consors could be easily replaced.

Hello C moa
- No one is asking to stop ITER, nor to "replace it easily", but simply to devote a very small fraction of this budget to research on hydrogen-boron fusion. And may the best win. It won't cost more.
- JPP does not say either says "that in one year we can do everything", but that in less than a year we could set up a z-machine more powerful than those of the Americans in order to explore the phenomena for the less disconcerting resulting from the magnetic compression, and, from there, to define the elements necessary for the design of a proto fusion power plant. You have to start at one end. Let us remember all the same that it is a rustic technique that can be realized now, relatively quickly, with current means, much cheaper than ITER and MEGAJOULE. It is for this reason that it represents an unexpected threat for fission power plants.
- The fission industry obviously knows that its days are numbered. That's why it needs to buy time to make them last as long as possible to amortize its significant research costs and to satisfy its shareholders.
- ITER is not a prototype of a power station, it is only a research tool, like the z-machine.
- The hydrogen-boron fusion will never be perfected, the reaction will never be modeled, no prototype will be released, there will be no industrialization as long as the entire research budget will remain dedicated to ITER and MEGAJOULE ( military).
0 x
C moa
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 704
Registration: 08/08/08, 09:49
Location: Algiers
x 9

Re: Deuterium and nuclear fusion




by C moa » 23/09/08, 15:33

Cuicui wrote:- No one is asking to stop ITER, nor to "replace it easily", but simply to devote a very small fraction of this budget to research on hydrogen-boron fusion. And may the best win. It won't cost more.
Is !!! I had probably misinterpreted your first messages. : Oops:
- JPP does not say either says "in one year we can do everything", but thatin less than a year we could mount a z-machine more powerful than those of the Americans
Just that, that's a nice bullshit. it's been a few years now that I'm working on big projects and I can tell you that in less than a year, you can do a lot but it's impossible to build a Z-machine. The time to study basic, basic design, FEED, launch EPC tenders, aquire the grounds and finally start the construction, make the pre-comm, the comm and finally the start. It will take well over a year even with an experienced team.
It is in these moments that people like JPP lose all credibility in my eyes (even if it does not detract from their OTHER skills).
Let's remember, however, that it is a rustic technique that can be achieved now, relatively quickly, with the current means
The z-machine is known and rustic but it only serves "only" to produce basic energy. What about the heart that will allow the fusion? heat exchangers to recover the energy released ?? All the regulation and control of this brand new technology ?? The GTA that will have to be created ?? Nothing tells us that these elements will be cheap and easy to implement.
- The hydrogen-boron fusion will never be perfected, the reaction will never be modeled, no prototype will be released, there will be no industrialization as long as the entire research budget will remain dedicated to ITER and MEGAJOULE ( military).
Honestly I hope you're wrong because it would be a shame to cut a track. Personally I think that work is underway on the subject but probably not in Europe (we can not be everywhere). It's not because we hear nothing that nothing is done.

In general, I know that the world of fusion is very small and that exchanges are between the teams so ... wait and see.
0 x
User avatar
wirbelwind262
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 238
Registration: 29/06/05, 11:58
Location: Fouras
x 29




by wirbelwind262 » 23/09/08, 17:44

Hello
is there no other way than thermodynamics (or we know that ...)?, because given the apocalyptic reactions of fusion (temperature, pressure and radiation), a steam boiler to convert l produced energy may be a great waste of resources and energy. : Evil:
the uranium boiler promised until 2050 at least> see the CEA projects ... : Evil:
Good luck !
0 x
C moa
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 704
Registration: 08/08/08, 09:49
Location: Algiers
x 9




by C moa » 23/09/08, 18:16

wirbelwind262 wrote:Hello
is there no way other than thermodynamics (or we only know that ...)?
First of all, as I have already said in other posts, we should start by reducing our electrical expenses as we did with oil. With a few simple actions, we could easily close (at least not renew) at least 5 6 slices in France. Now if we develop electric cars ... : Cheesy:

To answer your question, like that, in two minutes, I see two paths not sufficiently explored: cold fusion on the one hand and fuel cells on the other.
For cold fusion (which remains a thermodynamic process but in theory much easier to master), the main problem is the lack of resources even if it advances (slowly say some but it goes). The indifference and denial that framed the early works have greatly diminished the credibility of the technique and therefore the means that should have come. Researchers working on this subject are still regularly compared to alchemists : Evil: : Evil: : Evil: .

For fuel cells (which is a direct conversion of fuel into electricity), the main problem arises in the fact that at room temperature, it is necessary to use hydrogen. We need to develop hydrogen production methods that are really economical to produce electricity in bulk. It is also possible to use methanol or other alcoholic derivatives, but in this case, the T ° rise rapidly (800 to 1000 ° C) so a way has to be found to reduce this T ° to reduce the incoming energy.

These are the two processes that come to mind to produce energy en masse. There may be (probably) others ....
0 x
User avatar
wirbelwind262
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 238
Registration: 29/06/05, 11:58
Location: Fouras
x 29




by wirbelwind262 » 23/09/08, 21:46

Bonsoir
Thank you for your answer C moa
it is true that this branch of physics has been denigrated, but there is hope> http://www.lenr-canr.org/
otherwise, between steam turbines and the future industrialization of fuel cells, the diversity of energy conversion processes is limited ...
good luck
0 x
User avatar
Cuicui
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3547
Registration: 26/04/05, 10:14
x 6




by Cuicui » 23/09/08, 22:22

wirbelwind262 wrote:Hello
is there no other way than thermodynamics (or we know that ...)?, because given the apocalyptic reactions of fusion (temperature, pressure and radiation), a steam boiler to convert l produced energy may be a great waste of resources and energy. : Evil:
the uranium boiler promised until 2050 at least> see the CEA projects ... : Evil:
Good luck !

The advantage of hydrogen-boron fusion is that it produces a charged radiation that can be captured by solenoids and transformed directly into electricity without going through the boiler-steam-turbine-alternator cycle.
0 x
User avatar
Cuicui
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3547
Registration: 26/04/05, 10:14
x 6

Re: Deuterium and nuclear fusion




by Cuicui » 23/09/08, 22:36

C moa wrote:it's been a few years now that I'm working on big projects and I can tell you that in less than a year, you can do a lot but it's impossible to build a Z-machine. The time to study basic, basic design, FEED, launch EPC tenders, aquire the grounds and finally start the construction, make the pre-comm, the comm and finally the start. It will take well over a year even with an experienced team.

The principle of the z-machine is well-known. One can also decide to improve the Gramat z-machine.
I find it unfortunate that France, which was a leader in the field of magnetic compression, is not devoting a small part of its budget to hydrogen-boron fusion for civilian purposes instead of focusing on ITER, which is probably a technological stalemate. .
0 x
User avatar
Cuicui
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3547
Registration: 26/04/05, 10:14
x 6

Re: Deuterium and nuclear fusion




by Cuicui » 23/09/08, 23:41

C moa wrote:The z-machine is well-known and rustic [/ b] but it only serves "only" to produce basic energy. What about the heart that will allow the fusion? heat exchangers to recover the energy released ?? All the regulation and control of this brand new technology ?? The GTA that will have to be created ?? Nothing tells us that these elements will be cheap and easy to implement.
wait and see.

The z-machine is not intended to produce energy (even if unexplained energy has been found), it consumes it to produce R x and heat. It is the fusion reaction that will produce energy.
I did not pretend that building a fusion plant was easy, but that engineers and technicians must be given the means to work to solve technical problems. I said that the design was rustic (compared to ITER) and did not pose any unresolved theoretical problem like ITER.
Wait and see? Well, no, precisely, because if you give up nothing will not move.
Last edited by Cuicui the 24 / 09 / 08, 09: 35, 1 edited once.
0 x
Bibiphoque
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 749
Registration: 31/03/04, 07:37
Location: Brussels




by Bibiphoque » 24/09/08, 07:46

Hello,
Just like you, cuicui, I saw the importance that the Z-machine can have, but apparently Sandia lab does not give up anything about the "R" version, did you find any other info?
@+
0 x
This is not because we always said that it is impossible that we should not try :)
User avatar
Cuicui
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3547
Registration: 26/04/05, 10:14
x 6




by Cuicui » 24/09/08, 09:16

Bibiphoque wrote:Hello,
Just like you, cuicui, I saw the importance that the Z-machine can have, but apparently Sandia lab does not give up anything about the "R" version, did you find any other info?
@+

Hello Bibiphoque
I have no news and I'm afraid Sandia will not let go. The high temperatures of the z-machine device allow the military to design thermonuclear bombs based on various substances (perhaps also non-polluting hydrogen-boron) instead of the classic deuterium-tritium primed by radioactive bomb A. Civil applications (power plants) do not interest them.
The only way out is to launch studies in France since we are lucky enough to have the necessary specialists and equipment. The cost, compared to ITER and MEGAJOULE, would be ridiculous. The nuclear fission lobby and the military are obviously trying to curb this project, particularly through misinformation, and we understand them. It will require strong political will. But politicians only react if voters demand it (they are too scared not to be re-elected). So, must inform, inform, inform. This is why the controversies on this forum are welcome because they are an opportunity to expose the problem.
0 x

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 263 guests