3 ms·
Mankind is currently in possession of a practical fusion technology. It might be worthwhile to remember that Ivy-Mike fission-fusion technology worked the very
by robertsteinhaus 8y ago
Mankind is currently in possession of a practical fusion technology.
It might be worthwhile to remember that Ivy-Mike fission-fusion technology worked the very first time it was tried in 1952. Mike technology was the basis of the first thermonuclear weapons in the US arsenal. Adapting Mike technology to be pure hybrid DT-DD fusion opens up many new applications in economical power generation.
In 60 years, no other fusion technology (Magnetic Confinement or Inertial Confinement) has ever produced any net energy (more energy out of the fusion reaction than it takes to get the fusion plasma to fusion conditions).
In 60 years, all existing MCF and ICF fusion systems have never worked (in the sense that they have not produced more energy from fusion than it took to get the fusion plasma to fusion conditions).
Mike fission-fusion technology worked the first time it was tried and produced huge amounts of net energy (and has never failed).
Rather than placing our faith in scaling laws while we build ever larger and more expensive Magnetic Confinement fusion experiments (tokamaks and stellarators) while trying to achieve break even energy generation -
why not go back to the field and adapt technology that has never failed to finally find success in fusion?
- mathw 8y agoSo, how do you turn a bomb into a practical source of power that doesn't destroy the surrounding area the moment you turn it on?
- pfdietz 8y agoThey looked at this. It's grossly uneconomical as a power source. "In a 1975 review of the various Plowshares efforts, the Gulf University Research Consortium (GURC) considered the economics of the PACER concept. They demonstrated that the cost of the nuclear explosives would be the equivalent of fuelling a conventional light-water reactor with uranium fuel at a price of $328 per pound."