DOCSLIB.ORG

LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY of THEUNIVERSITYOF Californiao LOSALAMOS NEW MEXICO

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY of THEUNIVERSITYOF Californiao LOSALAMOS NEW MEXICO APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE ● 9 ● ** ●● “* ● m ● *9 00:0:0 .*---* ● AEC RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT REPORT LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY OF THEUNIVERSITYOF CALIFORNIAo LOSALAMOS NEW MEXICO Classmwtiollchanged to Vmussmm by authority of the U. S Atomic Thwrg By REPORT LIIEMI?Y NONWEAPONS ACTMTIES AT L S LAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY PartQ I Controlled Thermonuclear Reactions . -.---’ -.. -,. .. .._ .&. .— ..-. —— .——-— — . .—— — .--— -, ‘ ——— .—— ..—. — ? ..— — .? APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE .———- APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE ● 9 ● 9* ● * ● ●OO. : ●°0 ● *O ● ● ● *,* . ● :;. ● :000 ● 9 .* 9.9.= . 9 * $’ ● ☛ ●✎✚ 9:- ● 00 ●:0 ● * ● 9 ● .9m **a: ● * ● 00 ● 9** : :0 :0 ● 0 90 , ,“. - ‘ UflCIA$SIFIEi’”’i “f .. .> ~. .. i-’”~-. -$ ~ ,., -. .? ,. .,. ,. .- . N.” ,. This rej%rt was piej$iid is M account “OfGwern: ment sponsor~d work. Neither the United States, nor the Commissionl ~or any person,,. acting. on. beh~f of. 02. Corn-J mtision: ‘ “’ . .~.., A. Ms&sany”wiur~ti01’+ii-eb~a!>w e,~ress or’;implie+~~ ‘~>-ih“respec~~co, the .qGcgrai~J.. completeness, Or usefidness of the information contained in this report, or that the & of any ifior”ination B apparatus, method, or prt)cess” dl$closed in this rexy’t gay.not infxjng? PrlvatelY oiviied rights: or .<. - . ,; ,.B-. .&*es .~y ~iaWWeF.+W r+.spect ,to. *e Fe ofA-o; for,. d~&@” r~&”i@fig frQm the use “of any infer - fn atldn, app”ar?tus, me fiodJ or process disclosed in this report. .. k &ed’ ~ the &vq,. !~pers~n jxting on ,~’h~f. of the Co+rnissiof,’‘“-‘Cl@es’my q~ployee or contractor=of We. CQqmissw. ;~e -e~te~~”~t, such employee or. Cwtraq. fox prepare~-mK an~es, orrdistrjt?utesx .Qr provides access to, -“My informa~ion pur&&t to his employment or con- tract with ti.q .Commission. “, ,$ .! Prfhted in ?,S” . Charge 45,+ce~ts...- Av+laple .~rQrn ‘h~. Y. S. Atomic”. ?e!gy~ G?rnwrn!?sio ,. T.ectitic @ @fOrPatiQn Sei%ice &&en’s!on, P. O. Box iOOf, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. PLe~e dir@” to &e same address inquiries cover$g the procimement of other classified AEC reports. ... -3 ,. ,. “, ., .... 4 . APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE .!i. APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE — PUBLICLYReleasable .00 ●:* :00 ●:0 :00 ● 0 ● ● ● * ● ● 0 :: / ?%”9 LA-2046 CONTROLLED THERMONUCLEAR PROCESSES (Distributed according to M-3679, 18th edition) This document consists of 46 pages No=_ 165 copies, Series‘_ A LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY OF THE UNIVERSITYOF CALIFORNIA LOS ALAMOS NEW MEXICO REPORT WRITTEN June 1956 REPORT DISTRIBUTED: N13V-2 1956 NONWEAPONS AC’ITVITIES AT LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY Part I Controlled Thermonuclear Reactions by Samuel Glasetone I Contract W-7405 -ENG. 36 with the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission —--... _, ~ ., ● ● m 9 ● O::* ● ● ● ● ● .m* ‘*CLASS Y!!ME=O ● ● ● ● **O . * ::.*8 APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE — APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE ● ☛ ● a ● O*: : .: b ● *98 : ● ● :0 :0 ● e ● * WCLASS\F\tD CONTROLLED THERMONUCLEAR PJ?OCESSES LA-2046 Los Alamos Report Library 1-47 Air Force Cambridge Research Center 48 Albuquerque Operations Office 49 Argonne National Laboratory- 50-53 Armed Forces Special WeapoiIs Project, Washington 54 Assistant Secretary of the Air Force, R&D 55 Atomic Energy Commission, Washington 56-61 Brookhaven National Laboratory 62-64 Chicago Operations Office 65 Chief of Naval Research 66 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Ashby) 6?-68 Naval Research Laboratory 69-70 New York Operations Office 71 New York University 72-74 Oak Ridge Operations Office (Dr. H. M. Roth) 75 Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OP-361) 76 Patent Branch, Washington Princeton University 78-Z Princeton University (Smyth) 84 San Francisco Operations Office 85 Sandia Corporation 86 Schenectady Operations Office (Dr. W, F, Westendorp) 87 State University of Iowa (Van Allen) 88 Union Carbide Nuclear Company (ORNL) 89-91 University of Alabama 92 University of California Radiation Laboratory, Berkeley 93-98 University of California Radiation Laboratory, Livermore 99-103 University of Illinois 104 University of Michigan 105 Westinghouse Electric Company (Alpert) 106 Westinghouse Electric Company (Shoupp) 107 USAF Project RAND 108 National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Cleveland 109 Technical Information Service Extension (For Official AEC Use) 110-114 Technical Information Service Extension, Oak Ridge 115-164 Special Distribution: Manager, ALO (Russell Ball) 165 UNCLASS\f\tD ● O.. O:: ●:oa ● se.ididdi=-*. 9*. APPROVED● 9 FOR●**. PUBLIC.em RELEASE● APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE FOREWORD Ln the early part of 1954, there were issued two reports (LA-1632 and 1633) summarizing the weapons activities at Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory. These reports were intended primarily for the information of new staff members of the Laboratory and for interested representatives of the Armed Forces and the Atomic Energy Commission. During the past two or three years, the work of the Laboratory has greatly expanded into applications of nuclear energy which are significant for national defense and security, but are not directly connected with weapons development. It was felt, therefore, that a description of the nonweapons activities of the Lab- oratory would serve a useful purpose at this time. For classification reasons, it has been necessary to issue the report in three parts; the first is concerned with controlled thermonuclear reac- tions, the second with nuclear propulsion, and the third with power reactor experiments. As with the reports on weapons activities, the present re- ports are not intended to discuss the various topics in great detail, but rather to describe the underlying principles. Their basic purpose is to present a general background of the subject and to indicate the lines along which work is in progress in the Laboratory. It is in the hope that the mate- rial contained in them will prove useful to new staff members and to others concerned with the activities of the Laboratory that these reports have been prepared. Norris E. Bradbury Director APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE — APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - :: UNCLASSIFIED -...:; { ‘~ ~ :0: ACKNOWLEDGMENT I wish to take this occasion to express my sincere thanks to the many members of the Laboratory who helped, in one way or another, in the prep- aration of this report. Their generous and wholehearted cooperation not only greatly simplified my task, but made it a pleasure and a privilege. I would also like to thank the Director of the Laboratory and his staff for giving me the unique opportunity to write this series of reports, and for providing the facilities which made the work possible. Samuel Glasstone UNCLASSIFIED m“” APPROVED● * FOR.* 8..... PUBLIC RELEASE APPROVED;:~::~*.-.-:O:O”: FOR PUBLIC___,___, RELEASE . ● ● .000.0 :~;mir!!!● **O ● 0 ,,,,,,,,,,,, ● :c - ● ● . .e Introduction From the known masses of the neutron and of the lightest atomic nuclei, it can be shown that many of the reactions involving these nuclei are accompanied by the release of appreciable amounts of energy. It will be seen below that certain of these reactions can be initiated (and maintained) at high temperatures, and so they are referred to as “thermonuclear ● reactions. 1’ Such reactions occur in the sun and stars, and they have also been made to take place on earth by utilizing the energy from a fission bomb to obtain the required high tem- peratures. However, in this case the thermonuclear energy is released in an uncontrolled (explosive) manner. The controlled release of the energy appears to be a very much more difficult matter, and it is with this aspect of the problem that the present report is concerned. The basic principles underlying thermonuclear reactions till be described, and possible methods for bringing them about will be considered, with special reference to the work being done at Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory. The special interest in controlled thermonuclear power arises from the fact that the probable “fuel” material will be deuterium, the hydrogen isotope which is present to the extent of 1 atom to 6500 atoms of ordimry hydrogen in water. In spite of this apparently small 17 proportion, it is estimated that the oceans contain a total of more than 10 pounds of deute- rium. If this could be utilized, in apparently reasonable thermonuclear reactions, for the 20 controlled release of energy, the total available would be at least 10 kilowatt-years. The worldts present power consumption is at the rate of approxtmately 4 x 109 kilowatts. Hence, the deuterium in water represents, in principle, a virtually inexhaustible store of energy, even allowing for a considerable increase in future power demands. The price paid by the consumer for electricity is determined matnly by capital charges and distribution costs, and only to a minor extent by the cost of the fuel. Nevertheless, it is of interest to mention that deuterium would be a cheap fuel. At the present time, the AEC is selling heavy water (deuterium oxide) at $28 per pound; this is equivalent to about $140 per pound for the contained deuterium. It is probable that 1 lb of deuterium could produce about 2 x 107 kw-hr, so that the cost of the fuel would be less than 0.0014 cents per kw-hr. * Of the three isotopes of hydrogen, namely, hydrogen (Hi), deuterium (D2), and tritium (T3), the only reactions of interest are those between two deuterium nuclei and between a 235 239 * The fission of 1 lb of uranium or plutonium releases 107 kw-hr of energy. ● ☛ +0 UNCLASSIFIED =+++=== HmiiiB@!,_.● ● a ● :*: ,00. ● ..*.**● * APPROVED● e FOR PUBLIC RELEASE ● 9O 9* ● ● ● APPROVED FOR*. PUBLIC: “a RELEASE b ● 9..*: :: ● ● 0 ● ● * ● UNCLASSIFIED a 9* 9* ● 0 ● ● ● ● ● *mOe ●: ● 9 “*● 80000 ● ● ● ● e ● m .. deuterium ad a tritium nucleus, i. e. , the DD and DT reactions. Nuclear processes in which protona are one of the reacting species are not very important because their probabilities (or cross sections) are so small that impossibly high temperatures would be required for them to occur at useful rates. Further, reactions between two tritium nuclei, i. e., TT reactions, need not be considered for the release of energy because of the high cost and radioactivity of the tritium.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Iter: Os Caminhos Da Energia De Fusão E O Brasil (2015)
    ITER Os caminhos da energia de fusão e o Brasil MINISTÉRIO DAS RELAÇÕES EXTERIORES Ministro de Estado Embaixador Mauro Luiz Iecker Vieira Secretário -Geral Embaixador Sérgio França Danese FUNDAÇÃO ALEXANDRE DE GUSMÃO Presidente Embaixador Sérgio Eduardo Moreira Lima Instituto de Pesquisa de Relações Internacionais Diretor Embaixador José Humberto de Brito Cruz Centro de História e Documentação Diplomática Diretor Embaixador Maurício E. Cortes Costa Conselho Editorial da Fundação Alexandre de Gusmão Presidente Embaixador Sérgio Eduardo Moreira Lima Membros Embaixador Ronaldo Mota Sardenberg Embaixador Jorio Dauster Magalhães e Silva Embaixador Gonçalo de Barros Carvalho e Mello Mourão Embaixador José Humberto de Brito Cruz Embaixador Julio Glinternick Bitelli Ministro Luís Felipe Silvério Fortuna Professor Francisco Fernando Monteoliva Doratioto Professor José Flávio Sombra Saraiva Professor Eiiti Sato A Fundação Alexandre de Gusmão, instituída em 1971, é uma fundação pública vinculada ao Ministério das Relações Exteriores e tem a finalidade de levar à sociedade civil informações sobre a realidade internacional e sobre aspectos da pauta diplomática brasileira. Sua missão é promover a sensibilização da opinião pública nacional para os temas de relações internacionais e para a política externa brasileira. Augusto Pestana ITER Os caminhos da energia de fusão e o Brasil Brasília, 2015 Direitos de publicação reservados à Fundação Alexandre de Gusmão Ministério das Relações Exteriores Esplanada dos Ministérios, Bloco H Anexo II, Térreo 70170 ‑900 Brasília–DF Telefones:(61) 2030 ‑6033/6034 Fax:(61) 2030 ‑9125 Site: www.funag.gov.br E ‑mail: [email protected] Equipe Técnica: Eliane Miranda Paiva Fernanda Antunes Siqueira Gabriela Del Rio de Rezende Luiz Antônio Gusmão André Luiz Ventura Ferreira Projeto Gráfico e Capa: Yanderson Rodrigues Programação Visual e Diagramação: Gráfica e Editora Ideal Impresso no Brasil 2015 P476 Pestana, Augusto.
    [Show full text]
  • LANL Fusion Capabilities
    LANL Fusion Capabilities INFUSE workshop Jan 22-23, 2019 1 Managed by Triad National Security, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy’s NNSA Los Alamos has a long history of fusion research James Tuck, Ivy Mike, 1952 Perhapsatron, 1953 • Today magnetic and inertial fusion work resides in the Physics Division, Theory Division, and X Division (Weapons). There are also related capabilities in detectors, radiation damage, and tritium handling. • Dr. John Kline ( [email protected] ) is the present Fusion Energy Sciences (and Inertial Fusion) program manager, and a point-of-contact. 2 Managed by Triad National Security, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy’s NNSA 3 Managed by Triad National Security, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy’s NNSA FRC’s were developed in Russia and Los Alamos FRC’s are high beta plasmas, with many interesting features 4 Managed by Triad National Security, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy’s NNSA Today FRC plasmas are still being explored 5 Managed by Triad National Security, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy’s NNSA Magnetized Plasma Team in P-24 Plasma Physics We do experimental plasma work for FES, APRA-E, and NNSA sponsors, with national and international partners, including small businesses. We use our knowledge of plasma diagnostics, pulsed power expertise, and HED plasmas in the areas of fusion energy, weapons support, and basic plasma science. Team Leader: Glen Wurden ([email protected]) Staff: Hsu, Weber, Langendorf, Dunn, Shimada Postdocs: Tom Byvank, Kevin Yates, John Boguski Student: Chris Roper (Summer) 6 Managed by Triad National Security, LLC for the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • SCIENCE and INNOVATION at Los Alamos
    SCIENCE AND INNOVATION at Los Alamos Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 1 . Fred Reines (left) helps lower Wright Langham into a detector similar to the one used by Reines to detect neutrinos for the first time. The active medium of the detector was a liquid scintillator developed by F. Newton Hayes for assays of large biological sam- ples. The availability of liquid scintillators led to the whole-body counter, a device for monitoring the amount of certain radionu- clides in the bodies of workers exposed to radioactive materials. Wright Langham was one of the world’s experts on the metabo- lism of plutonium. Lattice-gas hydrodynamics, a discrete model for fluid flow, was invented by Brosl Hasslacher at Los Alamos with U. Frisch and Y. Pomeau. This novel formulation provides a fast, efficient, reliable method for simulating the Navier-Stokes equations and two-phase flow. A modification by Ken Eggert and coworkers is now being applied to model flow through porous media, a problem of great interest to oil companies. Norman Doggett and Judy Tesmer examine a gel at the Laboratory’s Center for Human Genome Studies. The Human Genome Project, a joint DOE-NIH effort, was largely conceived at a DOE meeting in Santa Fe in 1986. Researchers at the Los Alamos Center developed a widely used technique for fingerprinting DNA, discovered the human telomere (the se- quence at the ends of every human chromosome), are developing physical maps of several human chromosomes, and are preparing chromosome-specific libraries of clones, which are extremely useful in physical-mapping projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Operational Characteristics of the Stabilized Toroidal Pinch Machine, Perhapsatron S-4
    P/2488 USA Operational Characteristics of the Stabilized Toroidal Pinch Machine, Perhapsatron S-4 By J. P. Conner, D. C. H age r m an, J. L. Honsaker, H. J. Karr, J. P. Mize, J. E. Osher, J. A. Phillips and E. J. Stovall Jr. Several investigators1"6 have reported initial success largely inductance-limited and not resistance-limited in stabilizing a pinched discharge through the utiliza- as observed in PS-3. After gas breakdown about 80% tion of an axial Bz magnetic field and conducting of the condenser voltage appears around the secondary, walls, and theoretical work,7"11 with simplifying in agreement with the ratio of source and load induct- assumptions, predicts stabilization under these con- ances. The rate of increase of gas current is at first ditions. At Los Alamos this approach has been large, ~1.3xlOn amp/sec, until the gas current examined in linear (Columbus) and toroidal (Per- contracts to cause an increase in inductance, at which hapsatron) geometries. time the gas current is a good approximation to a sine Perhapsatron S-3 (PS-3), described elsewhere,4 was curve. The gas current maximum is found to rise found to be resistance-limited in that the discharge linearly with primary voltage (Fig. 3), deviating as current did not increase significantly for primary expected at the higher voltages because of saturation vçltages over 12 kv (120 volts/cm). The minor inside of the iron core. diameter of this machine was small, 5.3 cm, and the At the discharge current maximum, the secondary onset of impurity light from wall material in the voltage is not zero, and if one assumes that there is discharge occurred early in the gas current cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • With a Future
    FLASHBACK_Plasma Physics Perhapsatron with a Future Nuclear fusion could safeguard the energy supply of the future. The shining example is our Sun, which obtains its energy from the fusion of light atomic nuclei. Fundamental findings for the development of this new energy source originate from the Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (IPP) in Garching, which celebrates its 50th anniversary this year. TEXT ELKE MAIER Everything started with the mythical figure of Prometheus: Zeus, The enthusiasm was father of the gods, had taken fire away from mankind. In order to great at first – espe- return it to them, Prometheus held the stalk of a plant into the cially since the supply sky and ignited it with the sparks flying off of the carriage of the of the components sun god, Helios. The thought of capturing solar fire has fascinat- for the fuel was al- ed mankind ever since. Researchers worldwide, including the staff most limitless. Deu- of the Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (IPP) in Garching terium is present in and Greifswald, are now working on igniting the solar fire on the oceans, and tri- Earth itself, and making it available for energy generation. The tium can be produced challenges of this undertaking are much greater than the pioneers from lithium, which of fusion research anticipated a few decades ago. is found in rocks. In In the late 1940s, scientists began investigating how energy 1955, experts thought could be obtained from nuclear fusion. Back in 1929, physicists that mankind’s ener- Fritz G. Houtermans and Robert d’ Escourt Atkinson suggested gy problems would that solar fire originated from the fusion of light atomic nuclei.
    [Show full text]
  • R:\TEMP\Bobbi\RDD-8 3-16-04 Reprint.Wpd
    OFFICIAL USE ONLY RESTRICTED DATA DECLASSIFICATION DECISIONS 1946 TO THE PRESENT (RDD-8) January 1, 2002 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Health, Safety and Security Office of Classification Contains information which may be exempt from public release under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), exemption number(s) 2. Approval by the Department of Energy prior to public release is required. Reviewed by: Richard J. Lyons Date: 3/20/2002 NOTICE This document provides historical perspective on the sequence of declassification actions performed by the Department of Energy and its predecessor agencies. It is meant to convey the amount and types of information declassified over the years. Although the language of the original declassification authorities is cited verbatim as much as possible to preserve the historical intent of the declassification, THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT TO BE USED AS THE BASIS FOR DECLASSIFYING DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS without specific authorization from the Director, Information Classification and Control Policy. Classification guides designed for that specific purpose must be used. OFFICIAL USE ONLY OFFICIAL USE ONLY This page intentionally left blank OFFICIAL USE ONLY OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOREWORD This document supersedes Restricted Data Declassification Decisions - 1946 To The Present (RDD-7), January 1, 2001. This is the eighth edition of a document first published in June 1994. This latest edition includes editorial corrections to RDD-7, all declassification actions that have been made since the January 1, 2001, publication date of RDD-7 and any additional declassification actions which were subsequently discovered or confirmed. Note that the terms “declassification” or “declassification action,” as used in this document, refer to changes in classification policy which result in a specific fact or concept that was classified in the past being now unclassified.
    [Show full text]
  • Spitzer S 100Th: Founding PPPL & Pioneering Work in Fusion Energy
    (1) Spitzer’s 100th: Founding PPPL & Pioneering Work in Fusion Energy Greg Hammett (2) Some Stories From Working with Spitzer In the Early Years Russell Kulsrud Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Colloquium Dec. 4, 2013 These are shorter versions of talks we gave at the 100th Birthday Celebration for Lyman Spitzer, October 19-20, 2013, Peyton Hall, Princeton University, http://www.princeton.edu/astro/news-events/public-events/spitzer-100/ https://www.princeton.edu/research/news/features/a/?id=11377 Video of a longer talk by Kulsrud, “My Early Years Spent Working with Lyman Spitzer“: https://mediacentral.princeton.edu/id/1_1kil7s0p Thanks for slides: Dale Meade, Rob Goldston, Eleanor Starkman and PPPL photo archives, ... PPPL Historical Photos: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/tjv8lbx2844fxoa/FtubOdFWU2 June 19, 2014: added historical info. Jul 9, 2015: pointer to updated figure Lyman Spitzer Jr.’s 100th: Founding PPPL & Pioneering Work in Fusion Energy Outline: • Pictorial tour: from Spitzer’s early days, the Model-C stellarator (1960’s), to TFTR’s 10 megawatts of fusion & the Hubble Space Telescope (Dec. 9-10, 1993) • Russell Kulsrud: A few personal reflections on early days working with Lyman Spitzer. • The road ahead for fusion: – Interesting ideas being pursued in fusion, to improve confinement & reduce the cost of power plants I never officially met Prof. Spitzer, though I saw him at a few seminars. Heard many stories from Tom Stix, Russell Kulsrud, & others, learned from the insights in his book and his ideas in other books. 2 2 Lyman Spitzer, Jr. 1914-1997 Photo by Orren Jack Turner, from Biographical Memoirs V.
    [Show full text]
  • Signature Redacted %
    EXAMINATION OF THE UNITED STATES DOMESTIC FUSION PROGRAM ARCHW.$ By MASS ACHUSETTS INSTITUTE Lauren A. Merriman I OF IECHNOLOLGY MAY U6 2015 SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING I LIBR ARIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING AT THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY FEBRUARY 2015 Lauren A. Merriman. All Rights Reserved. - The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly Paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part. Signature of Author:_ Signature redacted %. Lauren A. Merriman Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering May 22, 2014 Signature redacted Certified by:. Dennis Whyte Professor of Nuclear Science and Engineering I'l f 'A Thesis Supervisor Signature redacted Accepted by: Richard K. Lester Professor and Head of the Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering 1 EXAMINATION OF THE UNITED STATES DOMESTIC FUSION PROGRAM By Lauren A. Merriman Submitted to the Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering on May 22, 2014 In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in Nuclear Science and Engineering ABSTRACT Fusion has been "forty years away", that is, forty years to implementation, ever since the idea of harnessing energy from a fusion reactor was conceived in the 1950s. In reality, however, it has yet to become a viable energy source. Fusion's promise and failure are both investigated by reviewing the history of the United States domestic fusion program and comparing technological forecasting by fusion scientists, fusion program budget plans, and fusion program budget history.
    [Show full text]
  • Scientific Raison D'etre For
    Scientific Raison d’Etre for JET Prof. François Waelbroeck former Director IPP-Jülich Ex member of JET Supervisory Board and JET Scientific Council Prof. F.Waelbroeck “Scientific Raison d’Etre for JET” 25th JET Anniversary 20 May 2004 25th JET Anniversary, Culham 20th May 2004 Fusion Research end of 1950’s • Larger devices built, assuming : It sufficed to have a good idea to build a sufficiently large device. It would do the job for you • Detailed measurements within the devices seemed superfluous. We could calculate the behaviour. • However, dissappointing results from first devices Prof. F.Waelbroeck “Scientific Raison d’Etre for JET” 25th JET Anniversary 20 May 2004 Configurations under study in the early years of fusion research (1950-1965) • Toroidal pinches, e.g.: Zeta (Culham), Perhapsatron S-3/S-4/S-5 (Los Alamos),… Confinement properties and reactor prospects disappointing Perhapsatron device Los Alamos Prof. F.Waelbroeck “Scientific Raison d’Etre for JET” 25th JET Anniversary 20 May 2004 Configurations under study in the early years of fusion research (1950-1965) • Stellarators, e.g.: Initial results very disappointing C-Stellarator (Spitzer, Princeton, USA - later converted into the ST tokamak), Sirius (USSR), Initial Wendelsteins (IPP- Garching),…. The Model B-3 stellarator Princeton University Prof. F.Waelbroeck “Scientific Raison d’Etre for JET” 25th JET Anniversary 20 May 2004 Configurations under study in the early years of fusion research (1950-1965) • Mirror machines, e.g.: USSR : Ioffe, OGRA France : DECA I, II, III (later withdrawn) and MMII (CEA) USA (Livermore): Table Top and Toy Top, MFTF-B (abandoned) …… The OGRA Device Kurchatov Institute, Moscow Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pinch Effect Revisited
    Click here for Full Issue of EIR Volume 18, Number 6, February 8, 1991 The pinch effect revisited The late WinstonH. Bostick's 1977 groundbreaking examination qfthis aspect qfcontrolled thermonuclearfusion. Part 1 qf a series. We present here an historic scientificessay by Prof. Winston plasma pinch have been found to be essential in understand­ H. Bostick on the development of the plasma pinch from ing the tokamak itself. Furthermore, this deeper scientific its inception in early fusion energy research experiments comprehension has opened up prospects for realizing even through to 1977, which was first published in the Fusion more advanced typesof fusion reactors. But neither the toka­ Energy Foundation's International Journal of Fusion Ener­ mak nor these more advanced possibilities are being pursued gy, Vol. 1, No. 1, March 1977. Given his own role in the today, given the budget cuts now being implemented. development of this approach to magnetic fusion, the essay is necessarily semi-autobiographical. The pinch effect is the self-constriction of a column of de­ The following information will help the reader to put the formable conductor which is carrying an electric current.The essay in the context of developments since 1977. constricting effect on the column is produced by the magnetic In 1977, the United States had the world's largest and field pressure resulting from this current, or equivalently, by most advanced fusion energy research program. But during the Lorentz force produced by the currentflowing in its own the Carter administration, the program was essentially put magnetic field. Thus, in a controlled thermonuclear fusion on hold.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Magnetic Confinement
    Introduction to Fusion Fusion ~ 17.6 MeV Fission ~ 202 MeV Lise Meitner Mass-energy (mc2) of natural nuclei minus total mc2 of protons and neutrons from which they are formed (~ 940 MeV each), divided by the number of nucleons 1 Fission Runs on a Chain Reaction 1 generation is about 50 µsec in a light water reactor. NDoubling ≈ 70 / % increase per generation 2 Safety - Prompt Criticality: Chernobyl The controllability of fission systems depends on “delayed neutrons” ≈ 15 second delay; 0.65% of total for uranium, 0.21% for plutonium β is delayed fraction U-LWR Shutdown ρ ≈ (Gen N+1 / Gen N) - 1, including all of the neutrons Power Excursion ρ/β is measured in $ (!) You really want to stay far below $1.00 The Chernobyl reactor went “prompt critical” and reached at least 10x its normal operating power. Fusion systems have no equivalent of prompt criticality. 3 Safety - Meltdown: TMI & Fukushima The fission reaction turns off when the chain reaction is extinguished, but radioactive decay continues to produce heat. Full Power Days of Energy Light Water Reactors have about 5 hours to meltdown with no 4 min flow of cooling water. Fraction of Full Power Fraction 15 min. 5 hrs. 1 mth. It was the failure to remove this decay heat that resulted in the core meltdowns at Three Mile Island and Fukushima There isn’t major decay heat in a fusion system. 4 Waste The U.S. and most other countries exclusively use a “once-through” fuel cycle: Mine, enrich, burn, store, (bury). Waste carries risk of dirty bombs, Pu usable in weapons Stored spent fuel is self-protecting for ≈ 100 years Leave fuel rods in cooling ponds for ≈ 5 yrs Transfer to dry casks 2 casks hold 1 year of fuel What about the long run? Radiotoxicity is very long-lived.
    [Show full text]
  • A Star in a Bottle an Audacious Plan to Create a New Energy Source Could Save the Planet from Catastrophe
    Go Back Print this page A Reporter at Large A Star in a Bottle An audacious plan to create a new energy source could save the planet from catastrophe. But time is running out. by Raffi Khatchadourian March 3, 2014 Print More Share Close o o Reddit o Linked In o Email o o StumbleUpon Commercial reactors modelled on ITER could generate power with no carbon, virtually no pollution, and scant radioactive waste. Illustration by Jacob Escobedo. Years from now—maybe in a decade, maybe sooner—if all goes according to plan, the most complex machine ever built will be switched on in an Alpine forest in the South of France. The machine, called the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, or ITER, will stand a hundred feet tall, and it will weigh twenty-three thousand tons—more than twice the weight of the Eiffel Tower. At its core, densely packed high-precision equipment will encase a cavernous vacuum chamber, in which a super-hot cloud of heavy hydrogen will rotate faster than the speed of sound, twisting like a strand of DNA as it circulates. The cloud will be scorched by electric current (a surge so forceful that it will make lightning seem like a tiny arc of static electricity), and bombarded by concentrated waves of radiation. Beams of uncharged particles—the energy in them so great it could vaporize a car in seconds—will pour into the chamber, adding tremendous heat. In this way, the circulating hydrogen will become ionized, and achieve temperatures exceeding two hundred million degrees Celsius—more than ten times as hot as the sun at its blazing core.
    [Show full text]