Comments on: ITER: Throwing Good Money after Bad

By: Keeda

Keeda — Fri, 08 Jul 2011 22:57:31 +0000

I agree that building such a big reactor is not a very good idea. Even if ITER crosses breakeven, it is already very expensive. And this is not even a reactor, for that you will have to build DEMO. I do not mind putting money in ITER but other alternatives also deserve equal/more attention. I don’t know much about alternative ways to achieve fusion, but we should be paying more attention into renewable energy sources like solar/wind and thermal. The best part is that solar/wind and thermal power plants already exist. They only need to be tweaked and made more efficient so that they can compete with conventional sources. That is anytime easier than building a fusion reactor which still hasn’t even achieved breakeven.

By: Brian H

Brian H — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 20:24:13 +0000

Focus Fusion is not “tabletop” (about 2 tons, housed in a home-garage-sized service building, and does fusion in micron-sized bursts. About 5MW (limited by electrode cooling tech). No waste. Costs about 1/20 – 1/10 best conventional, both capital and operating.

If the small private funding stream holds up, licenses for manufacture will be available world-wide in about 5 yrs., give or take 1 or 2.

Finesses the “steady state” containment problems all other approaches have, including Polywell.

And MUCH cheaper.

By: Helian

Helian — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 00:25:17 +0000

There are a lot of bright people thinking about the problem. Maybe one of them will eventually figure out a way to burn D-D or H-B11 in a tabletop machine. It would solve a lot of problems, assuming it can’t be used to build a pure fusion weapon.

By: M. Simon

M. Simon — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 03:23:56 +0000

Look into Polywell Fusion which could burn D-D or H-B11. There is also Tri-Alpha Energy and Focus Fusion.

I like Polywell.