DOCSLIB.ORG

What Is Fusion? Two Fusion Types

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
What Is Fusion? Two Fusion Types October 2016 October 2016 WHAT IS FUSION? TWO FUSION TYPES NEUTRONIC ANEUTRONIC TWO FUSION TYPES NEUTRONIC ANEUTRONIC TWO FUSION TYPES NEUTRONIC ANEUTRONIC produces neutrons produces NO neutrons NEUTRONIC FUSION • D+T -> He3 + n Deuterium + Tritium -> Helium-3 + neutron • Some radioactive waste, heat converted to electricity • Government funded, mainly • Far more expensive to build and maintain safely ANEUTRONIC FUSION • p+ B11 -> 3 He4 Hydrogen + Boron11 -> 3Helium-4, no neutrons • NO radioactive waste • direct conversion to electricity, no turbines needed • potentially far cheaper • Privately funded, mainly TWO FUSION TYPES NEUTRONIC ANEUTRONIC • D+T -> He3 + n • p+ B11 -> 3 He4 Deuterium + Tritium -> Hydrogen + Boron11 -> 3Helium-4, no neutrons Helium-3 + neutron • Some radioactive waste, • NO radioactive waste heat converted to • direct conversion to electricity electricity, no turbines • Government funded, needed mainly • potentially far cheaper • Far more expensive to build and maintain safely • Privately funded, mainly ANEUTRONIC FUSION Aneutronic → No neutrons → No Radioactive waste THE INGREDIENTS OF NET FUSION ENERGY TEMPERATURE T CONFINEMENT TIME DENSITY n EFFICIENCY THE INGREDIENTS OF NET FUSION ENERGY TEMPERATURE T CONFINEMENT TIME DENSITY n EFFICIENCY THE INGREDIENTS OF NET FUSION ENERGY TEMPERATURE T CONFINEMENT TIME DENSITY n EFFICIENCY THE INGREDIENTS OF NET FUSION ENERGY TEMPERATURE T CONFINEMENT TIME DENSITY n EFFICIENCY THE INGREDIENTS OF NET FUSION ENERGY TEMPERATURE T CONFINEMENT TIME DENSITY n EFFICIENCY FUSION YARDSTICK n T n T DENSITY CONFINEMENT TIME TEMPERATURE FUSION YIELD YARDSTICK: LAWSON CRITERION FOR NET ENERGY T * * n › 1 Billion TeVsec/cm3 Temp. Confinement Time Density THE OLD FUSION RACE THE OLD FUSION RACE FUNDED BY GOVERNMENTS THE OLD FUSION RACE FUNDED BY GOVERNMENTS NEUTRONIC THE OLD FUSION RACE NEUTRONIC PROJECTS OVERVIEW NIF ITER, JET, EAST Ignitor, MIT Arc W7-X Z-Machine THE OLD FUSION RACE NEUTRONIC PROJECTS OVERVIEW NIF - Laser ITER, JET, EAST - Tokamaks Ignitor, MIT Arc – Compact Tokamaks W7-X - Stellarator Z-Machine – Z Pinch LASERS: NIF TEMPERATURE UNIT keV – kilo electron Volt, or one thousand electron volts keV – 11 million C NATIONAL IGNITION FACILITY - NIF NIF NIF - National Ignition Facility Temperature, T = 8 keV Confinement Time, = 0.16 ns Density, n = 8x 1024 /cm3 Energy in: 400 MJ Deuterium Energy out: 20 J Cost: $5 Billion April 11, 2017 NIF NATIONAL IGNITION FACILITY Performance Funding Tech Info Temperature, T = 8 keV Category: Confinement Time, = 0.16ns Government Neutronic Density, n = 8x 1024 /cm3 funded: Type: Laser $5 Billion Experiments with: Deuterium Energy in: 400 MJ Plans to run with: Deuterium Energy out: 20 J Country: USA Deuterium & Tritium Results: Published April 11, 2017 NIF - PROBLEM: MIXING FUSION ENERGY AND H – BOMBS IS A BAD IDEA TOKAMAKS: ITER JET EAST ITER ITER ITER ITER - International Tokamak Experimental Reactor Cost: $20 Billion+ Not built yet First experiments scheduled: 2032+ April 11, 2017 ITER INTERNATIONAL TOKAMAK EXPERIMENTAL REACTOR Performance Funding Tech Info Not built yet Cost: $20 Billion+ Category: Neutronic Expected to be built Funded by Type: Tokamak by 2027-2035 governments of: Experiments with: Russia, China, US, N/A First experiments 28 EU states, scheduled: 2032+ Switzerland, Plans to run with: Japan, South Deuterium & Tritium Korea, India Results: N/A Location: France April 11, 2017 JET JET- Joint European Torus Temperature, T = 16 keV Confinement Time, = 5s Density, n = 6x 1012 /cm3 Energy in: 10 GJ Deuterium Energy out: 60 kJ Cost: $2 Billion April 11, 2017 JET JOINT EUROPEAN TORUS Performance Funding Tech Info Temperature, T = 16 keV Category: Neutronic Confinement Time, = 5s EU funded: Type: Tokamak Density, n = 6x 1012 /cm3 $2 Billion Experiments with: Deuterium Energy in: 10 GJ Country: Plans to run with: Deuterium & Tritium Deuterium Energy out: UK 60 kJ Results: published April 11, 2017 EAST EAST EAST– Experimental Advanced Super - conducting Tokamak Temperature, T = 5 keV Confinement Time, = 100 s Density, n = 3x 1013 /cm3 Energy in: 1 GJ Deuterium Energy out: 10 J Cost: $40 Million April 11, 2017 EAST EXPERIMENTAL ADVANCED SUPERCONDUCTING TOKAMAK Performance Funding Tech Info Temperature, T = 5 keV Category: Neutronic Confinement Time, = 100 s Government Type: Tokamak Density, n = 3x 1013 /cm3 Funded: $40 Experiments with: Million Deuterium Energy in: 1 GJ Plans to run with: Deuterium Energy out: 10 J Country: Deuterium & Tritium China Results: published April 11, 2017 NET ENERGY : ENERGY OUT OF THE DEVICE ENERGY INTO THE DEVICE >1 April 11, 2017 LAWSON CRITERION FOR FUSION YIELD: DENSITY * CONFINEMENT TIME * TEMPERATURE 1,000,000,000 NET ENERGY 100,000,000 EAST NIF 10,000,000 ) 3 JET 1,000,000 /cm 100,000 sec 10,000 TeV ( 1,000 T n 100 10 1 st nd rd 0 1 2 3 4 Place April 11, 2017 LAWSON CRITERION FOR FUSION YIELD: DENSITY * CONFINEMENT TIME * TEMPERATURE 1 Billion NET ENERGY 100 Million EAST NIF 10 Million ) 3 JET 1 Million 100,000 sec/cm 10,000 TeV ( 1,000 T T n 100 10 1 st nd rd 0 1 2 3 4 Place April 11, 2017 FUSION RACE: PRESURE * TIME PRODUCT 10 Billion NET ENERGY 1 Billion 100 Million EAST NIF 10 Million JET 1 Million 100,000 Time - 10,000 1,000 Pressure 100 10 1 st nd rd 0 1 2 3 4 Rank April 11, 2017 WALL - PLUG EFFICIENCY: FUSION ENERGY YIELD AS A PERCENTAGE OF ENERGY INPUT INTO THE DEVICE 100 % NET ENERGY 10 % 1 % one tenth % one hundredth % JET one thousandth % Wall Plug Efficiency Wall Plug Efficiency one ten-thousandth % NIF one hundred-thousandth % EAST (Fusion (Fusion deuterium yield /input energy) st nd rd one millionth % 0 1 2 3 4 Rank April 11, 2017 COMPACT TOKAMAKS Ignitor - under construction in Russia – MIT idea, Italy’s gov. co-funding Bruno Coppi MIT ARC Tokamak No Results Yet W7-X STELLARATOR W7-X Wendelstein 7-X Temperature, T = 8 keV Confinement Time, = 0.25 s Density, n = 3x 1014 /cm3 Cost: $1.3 Billion April 11, 2017 W7-X WENDELSTEIN 7 - X Performance Funding Tech Info Temperature, Category: Neutronic T = 8 keV Government Type: Stellarator Confinement Time, funded Experiments with: Hydrogen = 0.25 s $1.3 Billion Plans to run with: Density, Deuterium & Tritium 14 Country: n = 3x 10 /cm3 Results: published Germany April 11, 2017 Z-MACHINE Z-MACHINE Temperature, T = 400 keV Confinement Time, = 3.2 x ns Density, n = 2 x 1020 /cm3 Energy in: 22 MJ Energy out: 40 J Cost: $140 Million April 11, 2017 Z-MACHINE Performance Funding Tech Info Temperature, T = 400 keV Category: Confinement Time, Government Neutronic = 3.2 x ns funded Type: Z-pinch Density, n = 2 x 1020 /cm3 $140 Million Experiments with: Deuterium Energy in: 22 MJ Plans to run with: Country: USA Deuterium & Tritium Deuterium Energy out: 40 J Results: published April 11, 2017 October 2016 THE NEW FUSION RACE THE NEW FUSION RACE PRIVATELY FUNDED FUSION PROJECTS THE NEW FUSION RACE PRIVATELY FUNDED FUSION PROJECTS GENERAL FUSION GENERAL FUSION GENERAL FUSION Temperature, T = 0.4 keV Confinement Time, = 2 ms Density, n = 5x 1014 /cm3 Cost: $80 Million+ April 11, 2017 GENERAL FUSION Performance Funding Tech Info Temperature, Category: Liner T = 0.4 keV Gov. and Private Implosion Confinement Time, funding: Type: Neutronic $80 Million+ Experiments with: = 2 ms Deuterium Density, Plans to run with: n = 5x 1014 /cm3 Country: Canada Deuterium & Tritium Results: published April 11, 2017 LAWSON CRITERION FOR FUSION YIELD: DENSITY * CONFINEMENT TIME * TEMPERATURE - NEUTRONIC FUSION PROJECTS ONLY- 1,000,000,000 NET ENERGY 100,000,000 EAST NIF 10,000,000 ) 3 W7-X JET 1,000,000 Z-Machine 100,000 10,000 TeVsec/cm ( T T 1,000 General Fusion n 100 10 1 0 1 st 2 nd 3 rd 4 th 5 th 6 th 7 Place April 11, 2017 LAWSON CRITERION FOR FUSION YIELD: DENSITY * CONFINEMENT TIME * TEMPERATURE - NEUTRONIC FUSION PROJECTS ONLY- 1 Billion NET ENERGY 100 Million EAST NIF ) 3 10 Million W7-X JET 1 Million Z-Machine 100,000 TeVsec/cm ( 10,000 T T n 1,000 General Fusion 100 10 1 st nd rd th th th 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Place April 11, 2017 FUSION RACE: PRESSURE * TIME PRODUCT - NEUTRONIC FUSION PROJECTS ONLY- 10 Billion NET ENERGY 1 Billion ) 100 Million EAST NIF 10 Million W7-X JET 1 Million Time Z-Machine - microseconds 100,000 – 10,000 Pressure 1,000 General Fusion atmosphere ( 100 10 1 st nd rd th th th 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Rank April 11, 2017 WORLD LEADING FUSION ENERGY RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS: FUNDING IN MILLIONS ($) EAST, $40 JET, $3,000 EMC2, $12 Z-Machine, $140 W7-X, $1,300 Focus Fusion, $5 NIF,$5,000 General Fusion, $80 ITER, $20,000 PALS, $3 Tri-Alpha, $500 April 11, 2017 WORLD LEADING FUSION ENERGY RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS: FUNDING IN MILLIONS ($) EAST, $40 JET, $3,000 EMC2, $12 Z-Machine, $140 W7-X, $1,300 Focus Fusion, $5 NIF, $5,000 General Fusion, $80 ITER, $20,000 PALS, $3 Tri-Alpha, $500 April 11, 2017 WORLD LEADING NEUTRONIC FUSION ENERGY R & D PROJECTS: FUNDING IN MILLIONS ($) EAST, $40 JET, $3,000 EMC2, $12 Z-Machine, $140 W7-X, $1,300 Focus Fusion, $5 NIF,$5,000 General Fusion, $80 PALS, $3 ITER, $20,000 Tri-Alpha, $500 April 11, 2017 October 2016 ANEUTRONIC FUSION PROJECTS Tri-Alpha EMC2 PALS Focus Fusion Helion April 11, 2017 ANEUTRONIC FUSION PROJECTS Tri-Alpha – Reversed Field Conf. EMC2 - Polywell PALS - LASER Focus Fusion – Dense Plasma Focus Helion – Reversed Field Configuration April 11, 2017 TRI-ALPHA TRI-ALPHA Temperature, T = 1 keV Confinement time, = 10 ms Density, n = 3x 1013 /cm3 Cost: $0.5 Billion+ April 11, 2017 TRI-ALPHA Performance Funding Tech Info Category: Aneutronic Temperature, T = 1 keV
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Richard G. Hewlett and Jack M. Holl. Atoms
    ATOMS PEACE WAR Eisenhower and the Atomic Energy Commission Richard G. Hewlett and lack M. Roll With a Foreword by Richard S. Kirkendall and an Essay on Sources by Roger M. Anders University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London Published 1989 by the University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, California University of California Press, Ltd. London, England Prepared by the Atomic Energy Commission; work made for hire. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Hewlett, Richard G. Atoms for peace and war, 1953-1961. (California studies in the history of science) Bibliography: p. Includes index. 1. Nuclear energy—United States—History. 2. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission—History. 3. Eisenhower, Dwight D. (Dwight David), 1890-1969. 4. United States—Politics and government-1953-1961. I. Holl, Jack M. II. Title. III. Series. QC792. 7. H48 1989 333.79'24'0973 88-29578 ISBN 0-520-06018-0 (alk. paper) Printed in the United States of America 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 CONTENTS List of Illustrations vii List of Figures and Tables ix Foreword by Richard S. Kirkendall xi Preface xix Acknowledgements xxvii 1. A Secret Mission 1 2. The Eisenhower Imprint 17 3. The President and the Bomb 34 4. The Oppenheimer Case 73 5. The Political Arena 113 6. Nuclear Weapons: A New Reality 144 7. Nuclear Power for the Marketplace 183 8. Atoms for Peace: Building American Policy 209 9. Pursuit of the Peaceful Atom 238 10. The Seeds of Anxiety 271 11. Safeguards, EURATOM, and the International Agency 305 12.
    [Show full text]
  • STATUS of FUSION ENERGY Impact & Opportunity for Alberta Volume II
    STATUS OF FUSION ENERGY Impact & Opportunity for Alberta Volume II Appendices Prepared by Alberta/Canada Fusion Energy Program March 2014 ALBERTA COUNCIL OF TECHNOLOGIES Gratefully acknowledges the support of: Alberta Energy Stantec Corporation University of Alberta Alberta/Canada Fusion Energy Advisory Committee Gary Albach Nathan Armstrong Brian Baudais Will Bridge Robert Fedosejevs Peter Hackett Chris Holly Jerry Keller Brian Kryska Axel Meisen Rob Pitcairn Klaas Rodenburg John Rose Glenn Stowkowy Martin Truksa Gary Woloshyniuk Perry Kinkaide Allan Offenberger A special thank you is extended to the institutions (identified in this report) that were visited and to the many persons who so graciously hosted our site visits, provided the briefing material presented in this status report and thereby assisted our fusion assessment. Report Authors Allan Offenberger Robert Fedosejevs Klaas Rodenburg Perry Kinkaide Contact: Dr. Perry Kinkaide [email protected] 780-990-5874 Dr. Allan Offenberger [email protected] 780-483-1740 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Acronyms ………………………………………………………………………….. iii List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………… iv Appendix A: Assessment of Major Global Fusion Technologies 1.0 Context - Global Energy Demand……………………………………………………… 1 1.0.1 Foreward ……………………………………………………………………… 1 1.0.2 Energy Trends………………………………………………………………… 2 1.0.3 Energy From Fusion Reactions……………………………………………… 4 1.1 Major Approaches to Fusion Energy………………………………………………….. 7 1.1.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………. 7 1.1.2 Fusion Reactions & the Fuel Cycle………………………………………….. 8 1.1.3 IFE Approaches to Fusion…………………………………………………… 11 1.1.3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………….. 11 1.1.3.2 Indirect Drive…………………………………………………………14 1.1.3.3 Direct Drive…………………………………………………………. 16 1.1.3.4 Fast Ignition………………………………………………………… 17 1.1.3.5 Shock Ignition………………………………………………………..19 1.1.3.6 IFE Power Reactor Systems……………………………………….20 1.1.3.7 Modeling Codes…………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Conceptual Design Report on JT-60SA ___1. JT-60SA
    Conceptual Design Report on JT-60SA ＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿ 1. JT-60SA Mission and Program 1.1 Introduction Realization of fusion energy requires long-term research and development. A schematic of fusion energy development is shown in Fig. 1.1-1. Fusion energy development is divided into 3 phases before commercialization. The large Tokamak phase achieved equivalent break-even plasmas in JET and JT-60 and significant DT Power productions in TFTR and JET. A programmatic objective of the ITER phase is demonstration of scientific and technical feasibility of fusion energy. A primary objective of the DEMO phase is to demonstrate power (electricity) production in a manner leading to commercialization of fusion energy. The fast track approach to fusion energy is to shorten its development period for fusion energy utilization by adding appropriate programs (BA program) in parallel with ITER. Program elements are advanced tokamak/simulation studies and fusion technology/material development. Fig. 1.1-1 Schematic of fusion energy development To specify program elements needed in parallel with ITER, we have to identify the concept of DEMO. Typical DEMO concepts of Japan and EU are shown in Fig.1.1-2. Although size spans widely, operation mode is unanimously “steady-state”. Ranges of the normalized beta are pretty close each other, βN=3.5 to 4.3 for JA DEMO and 3.4 to 4.5 for EU DEMO. Fig. 1.1-2 Cross section and parameters of JA-EU DEMO studies ave 2 The neutron wall load of DEMO exceeds that of ITER (Pn =0.57MW/m ) by a factor of 3-6.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Fusion
    Copyright © 2016 by Gerald Black. Published by The Mars Society with permission NUCLEAR FUSION: THE SOLUTION TO THE ENERGY PROBLEM AND TO ADVANCED SPACE PROPULSION Gerald Black Aerospace Engineer (retired, 40+ year career); email: [email protected] Currently Chair of the Ohio Chapter of the Mars Society Presented at Mars Society Annual Convention, Washington DC, September 22, 2016 ABSTRACT Nuclear fusion has long been viewed as a potential solution to the world’s energy needs. However, the government sponsored megaprojects have been floundering. The two multi-billion- dollar flagship programs, the International Tokamak Experimental Reactor (ITER) and the National Ignition Facility (NIF), have both experienced years of delays and a several-fold increase in costs. The ITER tokamak design is so large and complex that, even if this approach succeeds, there is doubt that it would be economical. After years of testing at full power, the NIF facility is still far short of achieving its goal of fusion ignition. But hope is not lost. Several private companies have come up with smaller and simpler approaches that show promise. This talk highlights the progress made by one such private company, namely LPPFusion (formerly called Lawrenceville Plasma Physics). LPPFusion is developing focus fusion technology based on the dense plasma focus device and hydrogen-boron 11 fuel. This approach, if it works, would produce a fusion power generator small enough to fit in a truck. This device would produce no radioactivity, there would be no possibility of a meltdown or other safety issues, and it would be more economical than any other source of electricity.
    [Show full text]
  • Thermonuclear AB-Reactors for Aerospace
    1 Article Micro Thermonuclear Reactor after Ct 9 18 06 AIAA-2006-8104 Micro -Thermonuclear AB-Reactors for Aerospace* Alexander Bolonkin C&R, 1310 Avenue R, #F-6, Brooklyn, NY 11229, USA T/F 718-339-4563, [email protected], [email protected], http://Bolonkin.narod.ru Abstract About fifty years ago, scientists conducted R&D of a thermonuclear reactor that promises a true revolution in the energy industry and, especially, in aerospace. Using such a reactor, aircraft could undertake flights of very long distance and for extended periods and that, of course, decreases a significant cost of aerial transportation, allowing the saving of ever-more expensive imported oil-based fuels. (As of mid-2006, the USA’s DoD has a program to make aircraft fuel from domestic natural gas sources.) The temperature and pressure required for any particular fuel to fuse is known as the Lawson criterion L. Lawson criterion relates to plasma production temperature, plasma density and time. The thermonuclear reaction is realised when L > 1014. There are two main methods of nuclear fusion: inertial confinement fusion (ICF) and magnetic confinement fusion (MCF). Existing thermonuclear reactors are very complex, expensive, large, and heavy. They cannot achieve the Lawson criterion. The author offers several innovations that he first suggested publicly early in 1983 for the AB multi- reflex engine, space propulsion, getting energy from plasma, etc. (see: A. Bolonkin, Non-Rocket Space Launch and Flight, Elsevier, London, 2006, Chapters 12, 3A). It is the micro-thermonuclear AB- Reactors. That is new micro-thermonuclear reactor with very small fuel pellet that uses plasma confinement generated by multi-reflection of laser beam or its own magnetic field.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Physics: Science, Technology and Applications
    Prof. Kim Molvig April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) DDD-T--TT FusionFusion D +T → α + n +17.6 MeV 3.5MeV 14.1MeV • What is GOOD about this reaction? – Highest specific energy of ALL nuclear reactions – Lowest temperature for sizeable reaction rate • What is BAD about this reaction? – NEUTRONS => activation of confining vessel and resultant radioactivity – Neutron energy must be thermally converted (inefficiently) to electricity – Deuterium must be separated from seawater – Tritium must be bred April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) ConsiderConsider AnotherAnother NuclearNuclear ReactionReaction p+11B → 3α + 8.7 MeV • What is GOOD about this reaction? – Aneutronic (No neutrons => no radioactivity!) – Direct electrical conversion of output energy (reactants all charged particles) – Fuels ubiquitous in nature • What is BAD about this reaction? – High Temperatures required (why?) – Difficulty of confinement (technology immature relative to Tokamaks) April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) DTDT FusionFusion –– VisualVisualVisual PicturePicture Figure by MIT OCW. April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) EnergeticsEnergetics ofofof FusionFusion e2 V ≅ ≅ 400 KeV Coul R + R V D T QM “tunneling” required . Ekin r Empirical fit to data 2 −VNuc ≅ −50 MeV −2 A1 = 45.95, A2 = 50200, A3 =1.368×10 , A4 =1.076, A5 = 409 Coefficients for DT (E in KeV, σ in barns) April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) TunnelingTunneling FusionFusion CrossCross SectionSection andand ReactivityReactivity Gamow factor . Compare to DT . April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) ReactivityReactivity forfor DTDT FuelFuel 8 ] 6 c e s / 3 m c 6 1 - 0 4 1 x [ ) ν σ ( 2 0 0 50 100 150 200 T1 (KeV) April 20, 2006: 22.012 Fusion Seminar (MIT) Figure by MIT OCW.
    [Show full text]
  • Article Thermonuclear Bomb 5 7 12
    1 Inexpensive Mini Thermonuclear Reactor By Alexander Bolonkin [email protected] New York, April 2012 2 Article Thermonuclear Reactor 1 26 13 Inexpensive Mini Thermonuclear Reactor By Alexander Bolonkin C&R Co., [email protected] Abstract This proposed design for a mini thermonuclear reactor uses a method based upon a series of important innovations. A cumulative explosion presses a capsule with nuclear fuel up to 100 thousands of atmospheres, the explosive electric generator heats the capsule/pellet up to 100 million degrees and a special capsule and a special cover which keeps these pressure and temperature in capsule up to 0.001 sec. which is sufficient for Lawson criteria for ignition of thermonuclear fuel. Major advantages of these reactors/bombs is its very low cost, dimension, weight and easy production, which does not require a complex industry. The mini thermonuclear bomb can be delivered as a shell by conventional gun (from 155 mm), small civil aircraft, boat or even by an individual. The same method may be used for thermonuclear engine for electric energy plants, ships, aircrafts, tracks and rockets. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Key words: Thermonuclear mini bomb, thermonuclear reactor, nuclear energy, nuclear engine, nuclear space propulsion. Introduction It is common knowledge that thermonuclear bombs are extremely powerful but very expensive and difficult to produce as it requires a conventional nuclear bomb for ignition. In stark contrast, the Mini Thermonuclear Bomb is very inexpensive. Moreover, in contrast to conventional dangerous radioactive or neutron bombs which generates enormous power, the Mini Thermonuclear Bomb does not have gamma or neutron radiation which, in effect, makes it a ―clean‖ bomb having only the flash and shock wave of a conventional explosive but much more powerful (from 1 ton of TNT and more, for example 100 tons).
    [Show full text]
  • A European Success Story the Joint European Torus
    EFDA JET JETJETJET LEAD ING DEVICE FOR FUSION STUDIES HOLDER OF THE WORLD RECORD OF FUSION POWER PRODUCTION EXPERIMENTS STRONGLY FOCUSSED ON THE PREPARATION FOR ITER EXPERIMENTAL DEVICE USED UNDER THE EUROPEAN FUSION DEVELOPEMENT AGREEMENT THE JOINT EUROPEAN TORUS A EUROPEAN SUCCESS STORY EFDA Fusion: the Energy of the Sun If the temperature of a gas is raised above 10,000 °C virtually all of the atoms become ionised and electrons separate from their nuclei. The result is a complete mix of electrons and ions with the sum of all charges being very close to zero as only small charge imbalance is allowed. Thus, the ionised gas remains almost neutral throughout. This constitutes a fourth state of matter called plasma, with a wide range of unique features. D Deuterium 3He Helium 3 The sun, and similar stars, are sphe- Fusion D T Tritium res of plasma composed mainly of Li Lithium hydrogen. The high temperature, 4He Helium 4 3He Energy U Uranium around 15 million °C, is necessary released for the pressure of the plasma to in Fusion T balance the inward gravitational for- ces. Under these conditions it is pos- Li Fission sible for hydrogen nuclei to fuse together and release energy. Nuclear binding energy In a terrestrial system the aim is to 4He U produce the ‘easiest’ fusion reaction Energy released using deuterium and tritium. Even in fission then the rate of fusion reactions becomes large enough only at high JG97.362/4c Atomic mass particle energy. Therefore, when the Dn required nuclear reactions result from the thermal motions of the nuclei, so-called thermonuclear fusion, it is necessary to achieve u • extremely high temperatures, of at least 100 million °C.
    [Show full text]
  • Retarding Field Analyzer (RFA) for Use on EAST
    Magnetic Confinement Fusion C. Xiao and STOR-M team Plasma Physics Laboratory University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, Canada \ Outline Magnetic Confinement scheme Progress in the world Tokamak Research at the University of Saskatchewan 2 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Magnetic Confinement Scheme 3 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Charged particle motion in straight magnetic field A charged particle circulates around the magnetic field lines (e.g., produced in a solenoid) Cross-field motion is restricted within Larmor radius 푚푣 푟 = 퐿 푞퐵 Motion along the field lines is still free End loss to the chamber wall Chamber Wall 4 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Toriodal geometry is the solution However, plasma in simple toroidal field drifts to outboard on the wall 5 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Tokamak Bend solenoid to form closed magnetic field lines circular field line without ends no end-loss. Transformer action produces a huge current in the chamber Generate poloidal field Heats the plasma Tokamak: abbreviation of Russian words for toroidal magnetic chamber 6 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Stellarator • The magnetic field are generated by complicated external coils • No plasma current, no disruptions • Engineering is challenge 7 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Wendelstein 7-X, Greifswald, Germany • Completed in October 2015 • Superconducting coils • High density and high temperature have been achieved 8 CNS-2019 Fusion Session, June 24, 2019 Reversed Field Pinch • Toroidal field reverses direction at the edge • The magnetic field are generated by current in plasma • Toroidal filed and poloidal field are of similar strength.
    [Show full text]
  • Inis: Terminology Charts
    IAEA-INIS-13A(Rev.0) XA0400071 INIS: TERMINOLOGY CHARTS agree INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, VIENNA, AUGUST 1970 INISs TERMINOLOGY CHARTS TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD ... ......... *.* 1 PREFACE 2 INTRODUCTION ... .... *a ... oo 3 LIST OF SUBJECT FIELDS REPRESENTED BY THE CHARTS ........ 5 GENERAL DESCRIPTOR INDEX ................ 9*999.9o.ooo .... 7 FOREWORD This document is one in a series of publications known as the INIS Reference Series. It is to be used in conjunction with the indexing manual 1) and the thesaurus 2) for the preparation of INIS input by national and regional centrea. The thesaurus and terminology charts in their first edition (Rev.0) were produced as the result of an agreement between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom). Except for minor changesq the terminology and the interrela- tionships btween rms are those of the December 1969 edition of the Euratom Thesaurus 3) In all matters of subject indexing and ontrol, the IAEA followed the recommendations of Euratom for these charts. Credit and responsibility for the present version of these charts must go to Euratom. Suggestions for improvement from all interested parties. particularly those that are contributing to or utilizing the INIS magnetic-tape services are welcomed. These should be addressed to: The Thesaurus Speoialist/INIS Section Division of Scientific and Tohnioal Information International Atomic Energy Agency P.O. Box 590 A-1011 Vienna, Austria International Atomic Energy Agency Division of Sientific and Technical Information INIS Section June 1970 1) IAEA-INIS-12 (INIS: Manual for Indexing) 2) IAEA-INIS-13 (INIS: Thesaurus) 3) EURATOM Thesaurusq, Euratom Nuclear Documentation System.
    [Show full text]
  • The Stellarator Program J. L, Johnson, Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey
    The Stellarator Program J. L, Johnson, Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, U.S.A. (On loan from Westlnghouse Research and Development Center) G. Grieger, Max Planck Institut fur Plasmaphyslk, Garching bel Mun<:hen, West Germany D. J. Lees, U.K.A.E.A. Culham Laboratory, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, England M. S. Rablnovich, P. N. Lebedev Physics Institute, U.S.3.R. Academy of Sciences, Moscow, U.S.S.R. J. L. Shohet, Torsatron-Stellarator Laboratory, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A. and X. Uo, Plasma Physics Laboratory Kyoto University, Gokasho, Uj', Japan Abstract The woHlwide development of stellnrator research is reviewed briefly and informally. I OISCLAIWCH _— . vi'Tli^liW r.'r -?- A stellarator is a closed steady-state toroidal device for cer.flning a hot plasma In a magnetic field where the rotational transform Is produced externally, from torsion or colls outside the plasma. This concept was one of the first approaches proposed for obtaining a controlled thsrtnonuclear device. It was suggested and developed at Princeton in the 1950*s. Worldwide efforts were undertaken in the 1960's. The United States stellarator commitment became very small In the 19/0's, but recent progress, especially at Carchlng ;ind Kyoto, loeethar with «ome new insights for attacking hotii theoretics] Issues and engineering concerns have led to a renewed optimism and interest a:; we enter the lQRO's. The stellarator concept was borr In 1951. Legend has it that Lyman Spiczer, Professor of Astronomy at Princeton, read reports of a successful demonstration of controlled thermonuclear fusion by R.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Analysis for the Connection of the Nuclear Reactor DEMO to the European Electrical Grid
    energies Article Energy Analysis for the Connection of the Nuclear Reactor DEMO to the European Electrical Grid Sergio Ciattaglia 1, Maria Carmen Falvo 2,* , Alessandro Lampasi 3 and Matteo Proietti Cosimi 2 1 EUROfusion Consortium, 85748 Garching, Germany; [email protected] 2 DIAEE—Department of Astronautics, Energy and Electrical Engineering, University of Rome Sapienza, 00184 Rome, Italy; [email protected] 3 ENEA Frascati, 00044 Frascati, Rome, Italy; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 31 March 2020; Accepted: 22 April 2020; Published: 1 May 2020 Abstract: Towards the middle of the current century, the DEMOnstration power plant, DEMO, will start operating as the first nuclear fusion reactor capable of supplying its own loads and of providing electrical power to the European electrical grid. The presence of such a unique and peculiar facility in the European transmission system involves many issues that have to be faced in the project phase. This work represents the first study linking the operation of the nuclear fusion power plant DEMO to the actual requirements for its correct functioning as a facility connected to the power systems. In order to build this link, the present work reports the analysis of the requirements that this unconventional power-generating facility should fulfill for the proper connection and operation in the European electrical grid. Through this analysis, the study reaches its main objectives, which are the definition of the limitations of the current design choices in terms of power-generating capability and the preliminary evaluation of advantages and disadvantages that the possible configurations for the connection of the facility to the European electrical grid can have.
    [Show full text]