Should Google Go Nuclear? Clean, cheap, nuclear power (no, really)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1996321846673788606
Robert Bussard on Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Fusion (IEC)

Once again I must thank Larry Klaes for including me on his posts.

Do you have 1 hr 32 min 37 sec to view an on-line video of a talk given at
Google by Robert Bussard on the work that he has done trying to develop
fusion power with limited funding?

If you do, then also listen between the lines as to why it is hard to get
funding from government sources that have their own supporters.  You will
hear this in other science experiment settings as well.

One other thread is that the youth that studied his field of physics are now
old men and finding a good peer review team will be a problem.

Also listen for who took over the equipment when the government funding
stopped because the Navy R&D budget was reduced due to IRAQ.
Hint: Space Ship One.

Get mad, and if you know an angel investor, put a bug in their ear.
Oh, oh, this was recorded at GOOGLE. :-)
- LRK -

--------------------------------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._Bussard
Robert W. Bussard
>From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Robert W. Bussard (born 1928) is an American physicist working primarily in
nuclear fusion energy research. Recipient of the Schreiber-Spence
Achievement Award for STAIF-2004.[1] Fellow of the International Academy of
Astronautics.

Snip
Recent activities

On March 29, 2006, Bussard claimed on the fusor.net forum that EMC2 had
developed an inertial electrostatic confinement fusion process that was
100,000 times more efficient than previous designs.[2] However, the
company's funding ran out, and Bussard is looking for additional funding to
develop a full-scale fusion power plant. On June 23, 2006, Bussard provided
more details of the breakthrough and the circumstances of the shutdown of
this work by the government.[3] In November of 2006, Bussard held a Tech
Talk at Google on his research and development of IEC fusion reactors.[4] An
informal overview[5] of the last decade of work was presented at the 57th
International Astronautical Congress in October 2006.

Snip
--------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for looking up with me.

Larry Kellogg

Web Site: http://lkellogg.vttoth.com/LarryRussellKellogg/
BlogSpot: http://kelloggserialreports.blogspot.com/
RSS link: http://kelloggserialreports.blogspot.com/atom.xml
Newsletter: https://news.altair.com/mailman/listinfo/lunar-update
==============================================================
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1996321846673788606
Robert Bussard on Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Fusion (IEC)
- LRK -
--------------------------------------------------------------
Should Google Go Nuclear? Clean, cheap, nuclear power (no, really)

Google engEDU

1 hr 32 min 37 sec - Nov 9, 2006

www.google.com

Google Tech Talks November 9, 2006

ABSTRACT This is not your father's fusion reactor! Forget everything you
know about conventional thinking on nuclear fusion: high-temperature
plasmas, steam turbines, neutron radiation and even nuclear waste are a
thing of the past. Goodbye thermonuclear fusion; hello inertial
electrostatic confinement fusion (IEC), an old idea that's been made new.
While the international community debates the fate of the
politically-turmoiled $12 billion ITER (an experimental thermonuclear
reactor), simple IEC reactors are being built as high-school science fair
projects.

Dr. Robert Bussard, former Asst. Director of the Atomic Energy Commission
and founder of Energy Matter Conversion Corporation (EMC2), has spent 17
years perfecting IEC, a fusion process that converts hydrogen and boron
directly into electricity producing helium as the only waste product. Most
of this work was funded by the Department of Defense, the details of which
have been under seal. until now.

Dr. Bussard will discuss his recent results and details of this potentially
world-altering technology, whose conception dates back as far as 1924, and
even includes a reactor design by Philo T. Farnsworth (inventor of the
scanning television).

Can a 100 MW fusion reactor be built for less than Google's annual
electricity bill? Come see what's possible when you think outside the
thermonuclear box and ignore the herd.

Speaker: Dr. Robert Bussard

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1996321846673788606

==============================================================
I don't belong to IEEE so have not read the paper. - LRK -
--------------------------------------------------------------
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=640696
Discharge characteristics of the spherical inertial electrostatic
confinement (IEC) device

Miley, G.H.   Yibin Gu   DeMora, J.M.   Stubbers, R.A.   Hochberg, T.A.
Nadler, J.H.   Anderl, R.A. 
Fusion Studies Lab., Illinois Univ., Urbana, IL ;

This paper appears in: Plasma Science, IEEE Transactions on
Publication Date: Aug 1997
Volume: 25,  Issue: 4
On page(s): 733-739
Meeting Date: 07/21/1996 - 07/26/1996
Location: Berkeley, CA, USA
ISSN: 0093-3813
References Cited: 12
CODEN: ITPSBD
INSPEC Accession Number: 5719828
Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/27.640696
Posted online: 2002-08-06 21:10:46.0

Abstract
The University of Illinois inertial electrostatic confinement (IEC) device
provides 107 2.5 MeV D-D neutrons/second when operated with a steady-state
deuterium discharge at 70 kV. Being compact and lightweight, the IEC
potentially represents an attractive portable neutron source for activation
analysis applications. The plasma discharge in the IEC is unique, using a
spherical grid in a spherical vacuum vessel with the discharge formed
between the grid and the vessel wall, while the -70 kV grid (cathode) also
serves to extract high-energy ions. Two key features of the IEC discharge
are discussed: 1) the breakdown voltage characteristics as a function of
pressure-grid/wall distance (pd), and 2) the formation of ion
"microchannels" that carry the main ion flow through grid openings

Index Terms
Available to subscribers and IEEE members.
References
Available to subscribers and IEEE members.
Citing Documents
Available to subscribers and IEEE members.
Snip
==============================================================
http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/iecworkshop/PDF/ANS_Newsletter_Dec_02.pdf
Progress in Inertial-Electrostatic Confinement Fusion

John F Santarius, Gerald L Kulcinski, and Robert P Ashley
University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin

Snip

Alternative IEC concepts exist that aim to overcome the disadvantage of
finite grid transparency, which leads to excessive grid heating at high
power densities. These utilize either Penning-trap geometry [7] or
magnetically trapped electrons as a virtual cathode [8].

In summary, U.S. IEC research programs explore neutron and proton production
for detecting clandestine materials and generating radioisotopes, with
longer range goals of electricity production and space propulsion. The
Japanese and Australian IEC efforts primarily focus on neutron production
for landmine detection. All groups use D-D fuel at voltages up to 80 kV for
neutron production. The University of Wisconsin also uses voltages up to 170
kV to produce D-3He protons. The Los Alamos National Laboratory effort
explores the periodically oscillating plasma sphere mode of IEC operation.
Researchers have made considerable improvement in IEC parameters during the
past few years, and experiments presently hover at the edge of economic
attractiveness.

References:
[1] G.L. Kulcinski, "Non-Electric Applications of Fusion Energy-An Important
Precursor to Commercial Electric Power," Fusion Technology 34, Part 2, 477
(1998).
[2] G.L. Kulcinski, et al, "Alternate Applications of Fusion-Production of
Radioisotopes," American Nuclear Society 15th Topical Meeting on the
Technology of Fusion Energy (Washington, D.C., 17-21 Nov 2002), submitted to
Fusion Science and Technology.
[3] W.C. Elmore, et al., "On the Inertial-Electrostatic Confinement of a
Plasma," Physics of Fluids 2, 239 (1959).
[4] P.T. Farnsworth, "Electric Discharge Device for Producing Interactions
between Nuclei," U.S. Patent #3,258,402 (June 28, 1966).
[5] R.L. Hirsch, "Inertial-Electrostatic Confinement of Ionized Fusion
Gases," Journal of Applied Physics 38, 4522 (1967).
[6] R.A. Nebel and D.C. Barnes, "The Periodically Oscillating Plasma
Sphere," Fusion Technology 34, 28 (1998).
[7] D.C. Barnes, R.A. Nebel, and L. Turner, "Production and Application of
Dense Penning Trap Plasmas," Physics of Fluids B5, 3651 (1993).
[8] R.W. Bussard, "Some Physics Considerations of Magnetic
Inertial-Electrostatic Confinement: a New Concept for Spherical
Converging-Flow Fusion," Fusion Technology 19, 273 (1991).

Snip
==============================================================
http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=406&gTable=mtgpaper&gID=70314
Search Results    
   
Returned 1 records matching your Advanced Search criteria.
 
   Score  Title / Citation

1.  
100%  
Fusion-electric propulsion for hypersonic flight

FRONING, H. D., JR. (Flight Unlimited, Flagstaff, AZ) BUSSARD, R.
W.(Energy/Matter Conversion Corp., Manassas, VA)
AIAA-1993-2611

View first page.
http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/1993/PV1993_2611.pdf
AIAA-93-2611
FUSION-ELECTRIC PROPULSION FOR HYPERSONIC FLIGHT
H.D. Froning, Jr.
Flight Unlimited
2800 Saddleback Way #31
Flagstaff, Arizona 86004, U.S.A.
R.W. Bussard

EnergylMatter Conversion Corporation
91 00 A Center Street
Manassas, Virginia 221 10, U.S.A.

Abstract
Recent studies by R.W. Bussard have shown that charged nuclei of certain
light element isotopes can be electrostatically compressed to sufficient
density for nuclear fusions to occur. And the resulting fusion reactions
involving such nuclei emit no neutrons and induce no radioactivity at all.
Such "clean" fusion reactions can develop 4 to 8 times more engine thrust
per fuel flow rate than chemical reactions with attractive engine
thrust-to-weight ratios - ratios in the 3 to 6 g range. This paper shows
that such
propulsion could enable a 2- to 5-fold improvement in the payload delivery
efficiency of earth-to-orbit aerospace planes and the accomplishment of
environmentally favorable hypersonic flight.

Introduction

The next breakthrough in manned space transportation may be accomplished by
aircraft-like vehicles that can take off from runways, reach orbit, and
return from space with a single fully reusable propulsive stage.  Moreover,
jet airliners derived from such hypersonic vehicles may enable extremely
swift travel between the major cities of Earth.  But adequate propulsive
power for such flight is difficult to achieve with chemical combustion, and
the exhaust products of chemical combustion pollute the atmosphere to some
degree.

In this respect, recent studies by Bussard show that inertial electrostatic
confinement of light element isotopes, such as Hydrogen nuclei and Boron 11,
could enable "clean", powerful fusion reactions that: emit no neutrons and
cause no radioactivity and that develop 4 to 8 times more thrust per fuel
flow rate than chemical reactions with significant ratios of engine
thrust-to-weight. Furthermore, the hot electric discharge from such fusion
produces significant ozone during high altitude flight, thereby enriching
the upper atmosphere with ozone production in the vehicle wake. Thus, this
paper explores use of such environmentally-favorable fusion propulsion
for cost-effective hypersonic flight.

Background

The use of inertial-electrostatic confinement (IEC) of fusion fieis was
first proposed by Elmore et al in (1) and IEC studies by Hirsch (2) showed
that high fusion reaction rates could be achieved by compressing ions with
grid potentials in a spherically concentric device. However, the amounts of
fusion were severely limited by drive power losses due to collisions
between particles and grids.

Copyright 1993 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Inc. All rights reserved.

Snip
--------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Maybe one of you belongs to AIAA and has read the whole paper.
- LRK -
==============================================================
http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=406&gTable=Paper&gID=32880
Returned 1 records matching your Advanced Search criteria.
 
   Score  Title / Citation

1.  
100%  
The Need for Fusion Propulsion Research

R. Adams, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Marshall Space Flight Center,
AL; and J. Cassibry, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL
AIAA-2005-4140
41st AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, Tucson,
Arizona, July 10-13, 2005

See First Page
http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/CDReadyMJPC2005_1177/PV2005_4140.pdf
41st AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit
10 - 13 July 2005, Tucson, Arizona
AIAA 2005-4140

41st AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit AIAA-2005-4140
Tucson, Arizona
July 10-13, 2005

The Need for Fusion Propulsion Research
R. Adams1
NASA Marshall Space Flight Center,
Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812
J. T. Cassibry2

University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH), Propulsion Research Center,
N239 Technology Hall, Huntsville, AL 35899

Fusion propulsion is inevitable if the human race remains dedicated to
exploration of the solar system. There are fundamental reasons why fusion
surpasses more traditional approaches to routine crewed missions to Mars,
crewed missions to the outer planets, and deep space high speed robotic
missions, assuming that reduced trip times, increased payloads, and higher
available power are desired. A recent series of informal discussions were
held among members from government, academia, and industry concerning fusion
propulsion. We compiled a sufficient set of arguments for utilizing fusion
in space. If the U.S. is to lead the effort and produce a working system in
a reasonable amount of time, NASA must take the initiative, relying on, but
not waiting for, DOE guidance. Arguments for fusion propulsion are
presented, along with fusion enabled mission examples, fusion technology
trade space, and a proposed outline for future efforts.

Nomenclature
a = acceleration

Introduction

In order to successfully fulfill the President's vision for space
exploration, there must be a long term strategy to develop propulsion
systems that enable routine manned trips to Mars and manned missions to the
outer solar system. Technology to reach Mars is within near term reach in
the form of chemical, nuclear thermal, and perhaps nuclear electric
propulsion (NEP).  However, if fast trips times of the order of 3-4 months
are desirable then alternatives that permit high specific impulse (~5000 s)
and high specific power (~10 kW/kg) are required. Those constraints limit
the propulsion options to approaches such gas core fission and fusion.
Beyond Mars, only fusion and perhaps other, more exotic systems like
antimatter and solar sails can meet the performance criteria.

1 Professor, Propulsion Research Center, UAH member AIAA
2 Systems Engineer, Advanced Propulsion Technologies, senior member AIAA

Copyright C2005 by AIAA. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Inc., with permission.

1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

41st AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit
10 - 13 July 2005, Tucson, Arizona
AIAA 2005-4140

This material is declared a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject
to copyright protection in the United States.

==============================================================
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell
Polywell
>From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Polywell is a gridless inertial electrostatic confinement fusion process
designed by Robert Bussard under a Navy research contract, designed to
overcome the losses in the Farnsworth-Hirsch fusor and create a breakeven
fusion reactor

Design

A traditional Farnsworth-Hirsch fusor consists of a vacuum chamber
containing a positively charged outer grid and a negatively charged inner
grid within; essentially a large vacuum tube with spherical grids. Fusable
atomic nuclei are injected as ions into the system, repelled by the outer
grid, and accelerated toward the inner grid. Most of the time, the ions miss
the grid, but occasionally, given long enough, nuclei strike either the grid
or another high-energy nucleus. Most strikes with other nuclei do not result
in fusion, but occasionally fusion results. On a miss, the nuclei move
outwards, are repelled by the outer grid again, and return through the core.
Without the motion of electrons and magnetic fields, there are no
synchrotron losses and low levels of bremsstrahlung radiation.

The fundamental problem with the system is with the grid itself. Far too
often, nuclei strike the grid. This damages the grid, wastes the energy that
went into ionizing and accelerating the particle, and most critically, heats
the grid. Even if the former problems were not critical, having a fine mesh
grid in a reactor producing enough power to be used as a power plant would
almost certainly mean that it would be rapidly vaporized.

The Polywell concept is designed to avoid this problem. Most notably, it is
a gridless inertial electrostatic fusor. Electromagnets in the shape of a
truncated regular polyhedron (typically a truncated cube) create a cusped,
quasi-spherical magnetic trap, which confines electrons in a slightly
electron-rich plasma.[1] The electrostatic potential from the trapped excess
electrons, not a negatively charged grid, confine the fusion fuel ions
toward a dense focus in the center. The odds of collision with an electron
are vanishingly small, and there is no grid to overheat. While this concept
uses magnetic fields, which the original fusor managed to avoid, the fields
do not need to confine nuclei - only electrons, which are orders of
magnitude simpler to confine.[2] Despite initial difficulties in spherical
electron confinement, at the time of the research project's termination,
Bussard had reported a neutron rate of 109 per second (based on detection of
three neutrons, giving a wide confidence interval). He claims that this is
roughly 100,000 times greater fusion rate than Farnsworth managed to achieve
at similar well depth and drive conditions.[3][4]

He claims that, assuming superconductors for the coils, the only significant
losses are electron losses, meaning that the fusion power output of the
device scales as the seventh power of the radius, and the energy gain scales
as the fifth power. If true, this would enable a model only ten times larger
to be useful as a fusion power plant.[5]
Snip
==============================================================

WHAT THE MIND CAN CONCEIVE, AND BELIEVE, IT WILL ACHIEVE - LRK

==============================================================