ChipotleMayoFusion t1_iywaugd wrote
The DT reaction that most groups believe is the economical choice for fusion given our current technology level. It is not the easiest fusion reaction to do, I believe that would be muon catalyzed fusion. It is not the cleanest fusion reaction, that would probably be proton-boron which just makes three alpha particles and rarely makes a neutron. It's not the fusion reaction with the most available fuel, that would be pure hydrogen fusion like the sun does. DT seems to be the sweet spot when you combine all the relevant factors together.
The reactivity curve of DT is favorable compared to other similar options like DD and DHe3. It occurs at lower temperatures, which means it is easier to build a fusion reactor to reach those conditions. For most power plant schemes you want to reach ignition of the fuel, meaning the energy coming out of the fuel also heats the fuel more than the external heat source, like lighting a match. It is a lot easier to build a power plant with a fuel that is more like gasoline, where a little spark sets it ablaze, rather than a block of rubber, which requires significant heating to get it to burn.
The other big advantage of DT is that half the fuel is very abundant. Deuterium is relatively easy to find, you can buy it at Praxair in T-cylinders. You need to breed tritium in the fusion reactor itself, but the consumable is lithium, which is also pretty easy to find. Because it's a nuclear reactor each power plant is only burning maybe hundreds or thousands of kilos of lithium a year, which is nothing on the world scale. If we can design a plant that has a viable tritium breeding cycle, and there are many proposals that seem promising, this should be solvable. This is likely a lot easier than making a fusion reactor that achieves 10x higher temperatures, which is what you need to do a straight DD reaction.
Source: I work at one of those private fusion companies. Engineer, not a physicist.
financial2k t1_izsz9rh wrote
Thanks.
wait. So the better the isolation i.e. energy confinement the lower the ignition temperature?
And you will never get any fusion reaction below a certain temperature, because Temperature is really the Bolzman distribution of particle mv2 and particles faster than X at temperature Y just don't exist due to quantum stuff Z?
ChipotleMayoFusion t1_izt0f54 wrote
Yes, that's the Lawson Criterion. The product of density, temperature, and confinement time has to be above a threshold to reach ignition.
The second thing I don't know, thats outside my expertise.
ProneMasturbationMan t1_iyweuvw wrote
Please define "cleanest" fusion reaction?
joalheagney t1_iyyy54d wrote
Free neutrons penetrate shielding materials like crazy (because they are uncharged) and cause secondary nuclear reactions (because they pack a lot of mass and energy) when they are captured by something. Those reactions leave radioactive decay products. So your entire reactor becomes radioactive.
financial2k t1_izszje8 wrote
I always wondered how the breeding works then. Don't the free neutrons go anywhere in a Tokamak and are most likely to be captured by the surrounding atoms with the highest coloumb surface?
[deleted] t1_iztezzy wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iyx37yr wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iyykwet wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments