DOCSLIB.ORG

Today, Our Nation Is Urgently Searching for Solutions to the Power Shortfall in the Pacific Coast Region

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Today, Our Nation Is Urgently Searching for Solutions to the Power Shortfall in the Pacific Coast Region STATEMENT ON FUSION AND ENERGY POLICY FEBRUARY 2001 Today, our nation is urgently searching for solutions to the power shortfall in the Pacific Coast region. While the immediate problem has many contributing causes, energy supply is essentially a long-term issue. We must not only react to recurring crises but also prepare for the future. In addition to acting to ameliorate the immediate problems, we urge you to address the nation’s long-term energy needs through creation and funding of a focused R&D effort to expand our future commercial energy options. We advocate an expanded, sustained energy R&D effort to provide the United States and the world with the energy it will need for the 21st century. The focus of this effort should be to provide new economic and environmentally acceptable energy technologies as soon as practical. The options that present themselves for mid-term application include advanced technologies for improving energy end-use efficiency, cleaner burning of fossil fuels, improvements in nuclear fission technologies, and less costly and more efficient renewable energy options. For the long term, we urge an accelerated effort to develop fusion energy. Fusion power plants, when developed, offer a number of specific advantages, including an abundant fuel supply, no air pollution and much reduced risk from hazardous radioactive materials. At present, the United States has an excellent but underfunded scientific research program on fusion. Other nations, notably Japan and the European Union, pursue both scientific research and also a focused development strategy aimed at eventual commercialization. We urge the United States to strengthen greatly its research into the fundamental science and advanced technology of fusion energy and to prepare a strategic plan for the realization of practical fusion energy as an important element in a long-term, environmentally responsible energy development strategy. On August 9, 1999, the Fusion Energy Task Force of the Secretary of Energy’s Advisory Board (SEAB) completed and delivered its Final Report: “Realizing the Promise of Fusion Energy.” This report concludes: “the threshold scientific question — namely, whether a fusion system producing sufficient net energy gain to be attractive as a commercial power source can be sustained and controlled — can and will be solved.” The report also noted that U.S. funding for fusion energy research is “subcritical” at this time. We very much appreciate your efforts to establish a responsible energy research and development policy for both the near and long term, to prevent recurrence of our present energy supply difficulties. Attachment: List of Signatories Signatories on Statement on Fusion and Energy Policy, February 2001 Page 2 [Institutional affiliations are provided for identification purposes only and do not denote institutional concurrence in this letter.] Dr. Mohamed Abdou, Professor Argonne, IL University of California at Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA S. Locke Bogart, President Energy Analysis and Systems, Inc. Laurence P. Altbaum, Associate Program Leader San Marcos, CA Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Livermore, CA Dr. Mohamed Bourham, Professor of Nuclear Engineering Floyd N. Anderson, President North Carolina State University F.N. Anderson & Associates, Inc. Raleigh, NC Lynchburg, VA Dr. Robert Bourque, Lead, Superconducting Dr. Charles C. Baker, Adjunct Professor Accelerator Design University of California at San Diego General Atomics San Diego, CA Los Alamos, NM Dr. David E. Baldwin, Senior Vice President Dr. Bastiaan J. Braams General Atomics New York University San Diego, CA New York, NY Dr. Roger O. Bangerter, Director Dr. James D. Callen, Kerst Professor of Virtual National Laboratory for Heavy Ion Engineering Physics and Physics and Fusion Director, Center for Plasma Theory and Berkeley, CA Computations University of Wisconsin Dr. William A. Barletta, Director, Accelerator Madison, WI and Fusion Research Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory E. Michael Campbell, Vice President for Berkeley, CA ICF and Lasers General Atomics Dr. Peter Barnard, Chairman and CEO San Diego, CA ITER Canada Toronto, Ontario, Canada Dr. Vincent Chan San Diego, CA Dr. Paul Bellan, Professor California Institute of Technology Dr. Brett E. Chapman, Assistant Scientist Pasadena, CA University of Wisconsin – Madison Madison, WI Dr. Herbert L. Berk, Professor, Department of Physics Dr. Francis F. Chen, Professor University of Texas at Austin University of California at Los Angeles Austin, TX Los Angeles, CA Dr. Lee Berry, Research Scientist Dr. Edward T. Cheng, President Oak Ridge, TN TSI Research, Inc. Rancho Santa Fe, CA Dr. Abraham Bers, Professor Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA Dr. Michael Billone Signatories on Statement on Fusion and Energy Policy, February 2001 Page 3 Dr. John F. Clarke, Chief Scientist, Dr. Thomas Dolan Global Technology Strategy Project Vienna, Austria Battelle Memorial Institute Washington, DC Dr. Bernard J. Eastlund, President Eastlund Scientific Enterprises Dr. Robert W. Conn, Dean and Walter Zable San Diego, CA Professor of Engineering Irwin and Joan Jacobs School of Engineering Dr. Timothy E. Eastman, President University of California at San Diego Plasmas International La Jolla, CA Silver Spring, MD Ms. Joyce Cooper, Treas/Sec Dr. Laila El-Guebaly, Senior Scientist Birchwood Credit Services, Inc. University of Wisconsin-Madison Weston, FL Madison, WI Dr. Donald Correll, Director, Science and Dr. William R. Ellis, Chief Scientist Technology Education Program Raytheon Technical Services, Inc. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Lanham, MD Livermore, CA Dr. Max Fenstermacher, Physicist Benjamin J. Cross, Program Manager, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Strategic Planning and Integration Livermore, CA Westinghouse Savannah River Company Aiken, SC Dr. Raymond J. Fonck, Professor of Engineering Physics Dr. William F. Cummins, Physicist (Retired) University of Wisconsin Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Madison, WI Fort Bragg, CA Dr. Harold K. Forsen, Senior Vice President Dr. Donald P. Dautovich, Managing Director (Retired) ITER Canada Bechtel Corporation Toronto, Ontario, Canada Kirkland, WA Dr. Ronald C. Davidson, Professor Dr. T. Kenneth Fowler, Professor of the Princeton University Graduate School Princeton, NJ University of California Berkeley, CA John Davis Manager, High Temperature Materials Dr. Jeffrey Freidberg, Professor and Head of The Boeing Corporation Nuclear Engineering Department St. Louis, MO Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA Dr. John M. Dawson, Professor of Physics University of California at Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA Dr. Terry Galloway, President Intellergy Corporation Dr. Stephen O Dean, President Berkeley, CA Fusion Power Associates Gaithersburg, MD Dr. Wilhelm B. Gauster Albuquerque, NM Anthony R. DeMeo Plainsboro, NJ Signatories on Statement on Fusion and Energy Policy, February 2001 Page 4 Dr. John R. Gilleland, President and CEO Dr. Richard D. Hazeltine, Professor of Physics Archimedes Technology, Inc. and Director, Institute for Fusion Studies San Diego, CA University of Texas Austin, TX Dr. John Gilligan, Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Programs Dr. Robert F. Heeter, Livermore Fellow North Carolina State University Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Raleigh, NC Livermore, CA Dr. Damon Giovanelli, President Dr. W. B. Herrmannsfeldt, Senior Scientist Sumner Associates Stanford Linear Accelerator Center Santa Fe, NM Stanford University Stanford, CA Dr. Terry F. Godlove, Senior Consultant FM Technologies, Inc. Dr. Alan L. Hoffman, Professor of Aeronautics Fairfax, VA and Astronautics University of Washington Dr. Robert J. Goldston, Director Seattle, WA Princeton University Plasma Physics Laboratory Princeton, NJ Dr. William J. Hogan, Senior NIF Scientist Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Gordon Goodman, Vice President Livermore, CA Oxy Energy Services, Inc. Houston, TX Dr. John P. Holdren, Teresa and John Heinz Professor of Environmental Policy Dr. James D. Gordon & Director, Program in Science, Advanced Systems Manager Technology, & Public Policy, TRW Space and Electronics Group Harvard University Redondo Beach, CA Cambridge, MA Dr. Robert A. Gross, Professor Emeritus Michael Hollins, Inertial Fusion Technology Columbia University Research Engineer New York, NY General Atomics San Diego, CA Dr. David Hammer, Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering Dr. E. Bickford Hooper, Deputy Program Cornell University Leader, Fusion Energy Program Ithaca, NY Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Livermore, CA Dr. Jeffrey Harris, Professor Australian National University Dr. Wayne A. Houlberg, Research Scientist Canberra, Australia Oak Ridge, TN Dr. Robert W. Harvey, Principal Scientist Jeffrey C. Hoy CompX Vienna, VA Del Mar, CA Lawrence R. Ives, President Dr. Richard D. Hawryluk, Deputy Director Calabazas Creek Research, Inc. Princeton University Plasma Physics Laboratory Saratoga, CA Princeton, NJ Signatories on Statement on Fusion and Energy Policy, February 2001 Page 5 Dr. Thomas Jernigan, Research Scientist Dr. Charles Lasnier, Physicist Oak Ridge, TN Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Livermore, CA Dr. Robert Kaita Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Dr. Edward A. Lazarus, Senior Research Staff Princeton, NJ Oak Ridge National Laboratory San Diego, CA Dr. Takaya Kawabe, Professor University of Tsukuba Dr. John Lindl, Fusion Energy Program Leader Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fusion Energy: `Yes We Can' by Laurence Hecht Editor-In-Chief, 21St Century Science & Technology January 11, 2009
    Fusion Energy: `Yes We Can' by Laurence Hecht Editor-in-chief, 21st Century Science & Technology January 11, 2009 John Nuckolls, former director of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, has proposed a 10-year strategy for achieving laser fusion, which he said could be accomplished with 10 percent of President-elect Obama's $150-billion projected energy program. The contents of Dr. Nuckolls' proposal addresses issues of science not well-known to today's general public, but which should be better known. In laser fusion, a tiny target of deuterium, sometimes combined with tritium, is compressed by a shock wave which is produced by focused laser beams. The shock causes the deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen present in seawater, and tritium to combine, forming a nucleus of helium and a neutron. The mass of the resulting helium nucleus is less than the component nuclei, and the mass difference is released as energy, according to the famous equation E = mc2. The energy release per fusion is several times greater than that produced by the fission of a uranium nucleus, which is millions of times greater than the energy released by burning of a molecule of oil or natural gas. The heat of fusion energy can thus drive electrical turbines with far greater efficacy than any known power source, and can also be utilized in a device known as the fusion torch, to break down raw ore and even garbage into its constituent elements. Dr. Nuckolls, who led research on laser fusion at the national laboratory for many years, proposed "four steps to fusion power." (1) build an efficient high-average power laser module, a factory for producing laser targets, and a fusion chamber; (2) build a surged, heat capacity inertial fusion energy system; (3) build a fusion engine; (4) build a fusion power plant.
    [Show full text]
  • To Ignition to Ignition
    ON THE PATH TO IGNITION 10 S&TR March 2013 National Ignition Campaign National Ignition Facility experiments produce new states of matter as scientists close in on creating the conditions required to ignite fusion fuel. MONG the most challenging scientific closer to achieving ignition and fulfilling A quests over the past 50 years has the vision of early fusion pioneers such as been the international effort to create, in former Laboratory Director John Nuckolls. a laboratory setting, a miniature “star on Shortly after the laser’s invention in 1960, Earth.” The goal of this endeavor is to Nuckolls conceived of using the x rays surpass the extreme mix of temperature, generated by a powerful laser pulse to fuse density, and pressure at the center of the hydrogen isotopes, convert matter into Sun and generate conditions in which energy (as in Einstein’s famous equation, hydrogen fusion reactions can start and E = mc2), and thereby liberate more energy sustain themselves, thus creating a fusion than is delivered by the laser pulse. fire in the laboratory. The ongoing fusion “NIF was designed to be the world’s reaction in the Sun’s center provides largest laser,” says NIF chief scientist John all the energy needed for life on Earth. Lindl. “In fact, it now operates as such. Replicating this sustained reaction in a We have known from the outset that the laboratory requires conditions that are even energy it delivers does not give us a large more extreme: temperatures in the tens of margin of performance to achieve ignition. millions of degrees, pressures hundreds Everything that occurs during the implosion of billions of times Earth’s atmosphere, of hydrogen fuel must be nearly perfect.” and a density of burning matter that is Lindl notes that significant progress has more than 100 times the density of lead.
    [Show full text]
  • James Clerk Maxwell Prize for Plasma Physics Salt
    Salt Lake City, Utah A Division of The American Physical Society November 14-18, 2011 James Clerk Maxwell Prize He is the recipient of a number of stationed at CERN full-time since 2001. Fajans has been a Miller Fellow at for Plasma Physics important prizes and awards including He is a founding member of the ATHENA Berkeley, a National Science Foundation the Patten Prize, Bavarian Innovation antihydrogen collaboration and was the Presidential Young Investigator, and "For Pioneering, and seminal contributions Prize, Wissenschaftpreis of the German Physics Coordinator of the experiment that an Office of Naval Research Young to, the field of dusty plasmas, including “Stifterverband”, ERC research grant, produced the first cold antihydrogen atoms Investigator. He is a fellow of the work leading to the discovery of Gagarin Medal, Ziolkowski Medal, NASA at the CERN Antiproton Decelerator in American Physical Society, and served on plasma crystals, to an explanation for achievement awards, URGO Foundation 2002. He is the founder and Spokesperson the Executive Committee of the Division of the complicated structure of Saturn's for Advances in Dermatology Award of the ALPHA collaboration, which Plasma Physics. rings, and to microgravity dusty plasma (plasma treatment of chronic wounds). demonstrated trapping of antihydrogen experiments conducted first on parabolic- atoms in 2010 (the work which is being trajectory flights and then on the honored here). Hangst was elected to Mike Charlton International Space Station." Salt Lake Fun Facts: fellowship of the APS, Division of Plasma Swansea University, United Kingdom Gregor Morfill The people of Salt Lake City consume Physics, in 2005. Max-Planck Institute für more Jell-O per capita than any other city Mike Charlton Extraterrestrische Physik in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Frontiers in Plasma Physics Research: a Fifty-Year Perspective from 1958 to 2008-Ronald C
    • At the Forefront of Plasma Physics Publishing for 50 Years - with the launch of Physics of Fluids in 1958, AlP has been publishing ar In« the finest research in plasma physics. By the early 1980s it had St t 5 become apparent that with the total number of plasma physics­ related articles published in the journal- afigure then approaching 5,000 - asecond editor would be needed to oversee contributions in this field. And indeed in 1982 Fred L. Ribe and Andreas Acrivos were tapped to replace the retiring Fran~ois Frenkiel, Physics of Fluids' founding editor. Dr. Ribe assumed the role of editor for the plasma physics component of the journal and Dr. Acrivos took on the fluid Editor Ronald C. Davidson dynamics papers. This was the beginning of an evolution that would see Physics of Fluids Resident Associate Editor split into Physics of Fluids A and B in 1989, and culminate in the launch of Physics of Stewart J. Zweben Plasmas in 1994. Assistant Editor Sandra L. Schmidt Today, Physics of Plasmas continues to deliver forefront research of the very Assistant to the Editor highest quality, with a breadth of coverage no other international journal can match. Pick Laura F. Wright up any issue and you'll discover authoritative coverage in areas including solar flares, thin Board of Associate Editors, 2008 film growth, magnetically and inertially confined plasmas, and so many more. Roderick W. Boswell, Australian National University Now, to commemorate the publication of some of the most authoritative and Jack W. Connor, Culham Laboratory Michael P. Desjarlais, Sandia National groundbreaking papers in plasma physics over the past 50 years, AlP has put together Laboratory this booklet listing many of these noteworthy articles.
    [Show full text]
  • NIF, an Unexpected Journey
    NIF: An Unexpected Journey and Lessons Learned to Secure “Projects of Scale” LLNL Seminar Mike Campbell July 9, 2020 1 Outline History is important: Look forward but learn from the past • LLNL ICF Program History – “100× Campaign” (compressing DT to ~20 g/cm3 as a focus) • Past research programs with lessons to be learned – X-ray laser program (“Star Wars”) • National Ignition Facility – background – technical approach – “political” approach • Lessons for future large-scale facilities 2 LLNL ICF Program History* Nova laser at LLNL ____________ * Any inaccuracies are mine 3 The 1970s was a decade of laser building at LLNL culminating in the planned construction of Nova • Janus (two beams at ~100 J/beam) first LLNL neutrons! (KMS was first!) • Argus (two beams ~1000 J/beam) ~first modern laser architecture • Shiva (20 beams at 500 J/beam) radiation-driven ablative implosions to high density • Nova (20 beams at 12 kJ/beam) ignition and gain All lasers Nd:Glass with 흀 = 1 흁m with “unconditioned” laser beams on target. 4 The LLNL (NIF) main fusion approach is laser- produced x-ray drive (“indirect drive”) Target design and temporally tailored drive pulse produce an assembled fuel configuration –1/2 • Pign ~(Efuel) What was the motivation? • NIF has achieved ~350 Gbar • Alpha heating of fuel demonstrated (~55 kJ) 5 In the 1970s direct drive faced many scientific challenges Direct-drive target “Unsmoothed laser beam Shell breakup with high (R/횫R) • Direct-drive issues 훾t – hydrodynamic instabilities: A(t) = A0 e – A0: “seeds” for Rayleigh–Taylor
    [Show full text]
  • Status of the National Research Council Study an Assessment Of
    National Research Council Assessment --ProspectsProspects for Inertial Fusion Energy Status of the Study “An Assessment of the Prospects for Inertial Fusion Energy” Ronald C. Davidson and Gerald L. Kulcinski, Co-Chairs Prepared for the 2012 International Symposium on Heavy Ion Fusion August 13, 2012 A Broad Study – Concepts and Technical Challenges for Inertial Fusion Energy ` Driver ` Chamber ` Lasers, heavy ions, pulsed ` Tritium handling. power, other approaches, --- . ` Capsule injection and ` Requires high repetition rates manufacturing. and heat handling capabilities. ` Significant neutron ` Ignition bombardment. ` Hot spot versus fast ignition. ` WllWall ma teri ilals an ddd des ign. ` Indirect versus direct drive. ` Implementation ` Understand underlying high ` Environment and safety. energy density (HED) physical ` Cost competitiveness. processes. ` Public acceptance. 2 Statement of Task (for the Committee) ` The Committee will prepare a Report that: ` Assesses the prospects for generating power using Inertial Confinement Fusion; ` Identifies the scientific and engineering challenges, cost targets, and R&D objectives associated with developing an Inertial Fusion Energy demonstration plant; and ` Advises the U.S. Department of Energy on the preparation of an R&D roadmap aimed at developing the conceptual design of an Inertial Fusion Energy (IFE) demonstration plant. ` The Committee will also prepare an interim report to inform future year planning by the federal government. 3 Statement of Task (for the Target Panel) ` Target Physics Panel ` Requires access to classified target physics information. ` Will inform the Main Committee on the relevant target physics issues. ` The major task activity for the Target Physics Panel is to: Assess the current performance of various fusion target technologies. Describe the R&D challenges to providing suitable targets on the basis of parameters estblihdtablished and provid iddbthCed by the Committ ee.
    [Show full text]
  • Plasma Physics: an Introduction to Laboratory, Space, and Fusion Plasmas
    Plasma Physics Alexander Piel Plasma Physics An Introduction to Laboratory, Space, and Fusion Plasmas 123 Prof. Dr. Alexander Piel Christian-Albrechts-Universität Kiel Institut für Experimentelle und Angewandte Physik Olshausenstrasse 40 24098 Kiel Germany [email protected] ISBN 978-3-642-10490-9 e-ISBN 978-3-642-10491-6 DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-10491-6 Springer Heidelberg Dordrecht London New York Library of Congress Control Number: 2010926920 c Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilm or in any other way, and storage in data banks. Duplication of this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the German Copyright Law of September 9, 1965, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer. Violations are liable to prosecution under the German Copyright Law. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. Cover design: eStudio Calamar, Girona/Spain Printed on acid-free paper Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com) To Hannemarie, Christoph and Johannes Preface This book is an outgrowth of courses in plasma physics which I have taught at Kiel University for many years. During this time I have tried to convince my students that plasmas as different as gas dicharges, fusion plasmas and space plasmas can be described in a unified way by simple models.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Charged Particle Heating on the Hydrodynamics of Inertially Confined Plasmas
    Effects of Charged Particle Heating on the Hydrodynamics of Inertially Confined Plasmas by Alison Christopherson In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Mechanical Engineering University of Rochester 2020 ii POWER!! UNLIMITED POWER!! Emperor Palpatine iii I dedicate this thesis to the anonymous referees of my Physical Review E paper for their insight in pointing out how harmful and manipulative my work was to the field of inertial confinement fusion. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Biographical Sketch . xi Acknowledgments . xvi Abstract . xxi Contributors and Funding Sources . xxi List of Tables . xxii List of Figures . xxiv Chapter 1: Introduction . 1 Chapter 2: A comprehensive alpha-heating model for the deceleration phase . 8 2.1 Basic physics of alpha heating and ignition . 9 2.2 Implosion simulation database . 17 2.3 One dimensional dynamic hot-spot and shell model . 19 2.3.1 Hot-spot pressure . 25 2.3.2 Shocked-shell velocity . 27 2.3.3 Shock position in shell . 29 v 2.3.4 Hot-spot energy . 30 2.3.5 Hot-spot mass . 35 2.3.6 Shocked-shell mass . 41 2.3.7 Shocked shell momentum balance . 43 2.3.8 Solution of the model . 45 2.4 Conclusions . 48 2.5 Appendix A . 50 Chapter 3: 1D Theory of alpha heating and burning plasmas for inertially con- fined plasmas . 54 3.1 Analysis of measurable alpha-heating metrics . 57 3.1.1 Definition of fα ............................ 57 3.1.2 Inferring fα experimentally . 60 3.1.3 Relation between fα and χα ....................
    [Show full text]
  • A Bibliography of Publications By, and About, Edward Teller
    A Bibliography of Publications by, and about, Edward Teller Nelson H. F. Beebe University of Utah Department of Mathematics, 110 LCB 155 S 1400 E RM 233 Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0090 USA Tel: +1 801 581 5254 FAX: +1 801 581 4148 E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] (Internet) WWW URL: http://www.math.utah.edu/~beebe/ 17 March 2021 Version 1.177 Title word cross-reference + [KT48, TT35a]. $100 [Smi85b]. $12.95 [Edg91]. $19.50 [Oli69]. $24.95 [Car91]. $3.50 [Dys58]. $30.00 [Kev03]. $32.50 [Edg91]. $35 [Cas01b, Cas01a]. $35.00 [Dys02a, Wat03]. $39.50 [Edg91]. $50 [Ano62]. − 7 $8.95 [Edg91]. = [TT35a]. [BJT69]. [CT41]. 2 [SST71, ST39b, TT35a]. 3 [HT39a]. 4 [TT35a]. 6 [TT35a]. β [GT36, GT37, HS19]. λ2000 [MT42]. SU(3) [GT85]. -Disintegration [GT36]. -Mesons [BJT69]. -Transformation [GT37]. 0 [Cas01b, Cas01a, Dys02a]. 0-7382-0532-X [Cas01b, Cas01a, Dys02a]. 0-8047-1713-3 [Edg91]. 0-8047-1714-1 [Edg91]. 0-8047-1721-4 [Edg91]. 0-8047-1722-2 [Edg91]. 1 [Har05]. 1-86094-419-1 [Har05]. 1-903985-12-9 [Tho03]. 100th 1 2 [KRW05, Tel93d]. 17.25 [Pei87]. 1930 [BW05]. 1930/41 [Fer68]. 1939 [Sei90]. 1939-1945 [Sei90]. 1940 [TT40]. 1941 [TGF41]. 1942 [KW93]. 1945 [Sei90]. 1947 [Sei90]. 1947-1977 [Sei90]. 1948 [Tel49a]. 1950s [Sei90]. 1957 [Tel57b]. 1960s [Mla98]. 1963 [Szi87]. 1973 [Kur73]. 1977 [Sei90]. 1979 [WT79]. 1990s [AB88, CT90a, Tel96b]. 1991 [MB92]. 1992 [GER+92]. 1995 [Tel95a]. 20 [Goe88]. 2003 [Dys09, LBB+03]. 2008 [LV10]. 20th [Mar10, New03d]. 28 [Tel57b]. 3 [Dic79]. 40th [MKR87]. 411-415 [Ber03b].
    [Show full text]
  • Feasibility of Inertial-Confinement Fusion
    On October 15, 1981, John H. Nuckolls this article has occurred because of the received the American Physical Society's dedication and inspiration of John Maxwell Prize for outstanding contribu­ Nuckolls and his colleagues at LLNL, as tions to plasma physics. The citation read well as of hundreds of researchers else­ "For his contributions to the genesis and where in the United States and other na­ progress of inertial confinement fusion. tions. In addition to their work, consistent His insight into the fundamental physics support for the U.S. Inertial Fusion Pro­ issues has served to guide and inspire the gram has been provided by the Depart­ technical evolution of the field." An article ment of Energy and its predecessors and based on his Maxwell lecture to the Soci­ by the Congress of the United States. This ety was published in Physics Today (Sep­ support has led, in 10 years time, to an ef­ tember 1982). Because of the interest that fort with the accomplishments and scope readers of the En ergy and Technol ogy described in this article. It should be fur­ Review could have in John's views on ther noted that, although the thrust of this John's views on inertial confinement fusion, the editors article is directed toward the long-range power-potential of the En ergy and Technology Review have agreed to re­ of the Inertial Fusion Program, current support and print the article in this issue. The work described in nearer-term goals are defense related. Feasibility of Inertial­ Confinement Fusion "We can see no insurmountable roadblocks to th e practi­ temperatures sufficient to cause the hy­ cal achievement of electrical power generated by in ertial­ drogen nuclei to fuse, releasing an confinement fusion ..
    [Show full text]
  • UCRL-LR-107454: Assessment of the Safety of US Nuclear Weapons And
    Fvl+- UCRL-LR-I07454I Report to Congress: Assessment of the Safety of u.S. Nuclear Weapons and Related .c\ Nuclear Test Requirements ,.., R. E. Kidder July 26, 199'::1 '1 Contents Abstract 1 Introduction 1 Principal Meansof Providing NuclearWarhead Safety 2 One-PointSafety : 3 NuclearPlutonium SafetyDispersal Safety 3 SafetyStandards for NuclearWeapons 3 ComparativeSafety of U.S. NuclearWeapons 3 The Minuteman Missiles 5 The Trident Missiles 5 Fire-ResistantPits 5 SeparableComponents 6 Responseto Congressmens'Questions 6 Summaryand Conclusions 10 Recommendations 12 References 12 AbbreviationsUsed 13 Appendix A. Letter from Edward M. Kennedyto JohnNuckolls A-l Appendix B. Letter from Les Aspin to the HonorableJames D. Watkins B-l Appendix C. Nuclear SafetyCriteria C-l Appendix D. SafetyStandards for NuclearWeapons D-l Appendix E. A Summaryof AccidentsInvolving U.S. NuclearWeapons and Nuclear WeaponsSystems E-l AppendixF. Biography F-l iii Report to Congress: Assessment of the Safety of U.S. ~ Nuclear Weapons and Related Nuclear Test Requirements Abstract.The principal safety features included in the design of modern nuclear weapons are described briefly, and each nuclear weapon currently in the stockpile or under development is given a comparative safetyI rating from "A" through "D," indicating the extent to which these safety features are included in its design. The list is then narrowed by deleting weapons currently scheduled for retirement and short-range, surface-to-surface tactical nuclear weapons that will likely be returned to the U.S. and placed in storage. With the exception of the Minuteman and Trident ballistic missile warheads, all warheads in this projected future stockpile will have both of the most important design features that contribute to nuclear weapon safety: enhanced electrical isolation (EEl) and insensitive high explosive (IHE).
    [Show full text]
  • 2008-06 Annual Meeting
    June 8-12, 2008 • Anaheim, California • Disneyland Hotel AMERICAN NUCLEAR SOCIETY: 2008 ANNUAL MEETING “Nuclear Science and Technology: Now Arriving on Main Street” EMBEDDED TOPICAL MEETINGS: •2008 International Congress on Advances in Nuclear Power Plants (ICAPP’08) •Isotopes for Medicine and Industry •Nuclear Fuels and Structural Materials for the Next Generation Nuclear Reactors (NFSM) PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOPS: • Preparing for the Nuclear Engineering Professional Engineering Exam” • Digital Instrumentation and Control and Human Machine Interface (ICHMI) OFFICIAL PROGRAM our most sincere thanks to the following contributors for their support of the 2008 ANS Annual Meeting “Nuclear Science and Technology: Now Arriving on Main Street” Embedded Topical Meeting: 2008 International Congress on Advances in Nuclear Power Plants (ICAPP’08) Embedded Topical Meeting: Isotopes for Medicine and Industry Embedded Topical Meeting: Nuclear Fuels and Structural Materials for the Next Generation Nuclear Reactors (NFSM) PLATINUM Bechtel Power Corporation Entergy Nuclear Southern California Edison GOLD Constellation Energy Fluor Corporation Pacific Gas & Electric Westinghouse Electric Company SILVER AREVA Duke Energy EXCEL Services Corporation Exelon Nuclear FirstEnergy Foundation STP Nuclear Operating Company Washington Group International BRONZE AEP/Indiana Michigan PWR Company – NUC Lockheed Martin Progress Energy Southern Nuclear Operating Company The Babcock & Wilcox Company SPONSOR PPL Corporation Thank You! 2 2008 ANS ANNUAL MEETING:
    [Show full text]