zbobet2012
zbobet2012 t1_j0599dj wrote
Reply to comment by Robo-Connery in National Ignition Facility (NIF) announces net positive energy fusion experiment by Robo-Connery
Wouldn't the largest proliferation risk simply be the increased knowledge of the high density regime ICF uses making it easier to make a fission-fusion-fission bomb (an "h-bomb")? I believe some of results of research at NIF are classified no?
zbobet2012 t1_j055r4s wrote
Reply to comment by Robo-Connery in National Ignition Facility (NIF) announces net positive energy fusion experiment by Robo-Connery
This is really informative thank you. I've read a few counterpoints (I am not an expert) that ICF has over MCF and am curious as to your take:
- In the presser today and on the Wikipedia article for laser inertial fusion energy it's mentioned the lasers could be "upgraded" from ~0.5% efficiency to ~20% efficiency which certainly helps the case for "LIFE" systems.
In general efficient laser generation is something which receives tens of billions per year in investment due to demands in semiconductor lithography (literally more than the entirety of investment in fusion research worldwide). While not directed at LIFE, much of the possible gains none the less come from it. (see commercial products such as https://www.trumpf.com/en_US/products/laser/euv-drive-laser/ ) - The relative size of the chamber significantly reduces problems with neutron embrittlement and the relative simplicity of the chamber means costs around lifecycle maintenance may be lower. (See https://web.archive.org/web/20160506011449/https://life.llnl.gov/why_life/life_advantages.php )
- ICF requires a lot less tritium for startup. Tritium is a rare resource, largely made from nuclear breeder reactors today. It's also useful for making fission-fusion-fission bombs (the "H-bomb"), so we don't like having a ton of it lying around for proliferation reasons.
- I feel that there is "no clear pathway to the next step (a demonstration power plant)" somewhat contradicted by the work layed out in the laser inertial fusion energy project. What do you feel is missing from this versus a MCF approach?
- I think the most interesting article I've read recently suggested combining the two: https://medium.com/fusion-energy-league/the-fundamental-parameter-space-of-controlled-thermonuclear-fusion-1c1e34206ed8. So in my very uninformed opinion folks shouldn't disregard either approach. It's quite possible a future fusion power-plant could be built on the results of ICF and MCF. Would funding both of them make sense?
zbobet2012 t1_izjc8q8 wrote
Reply to comment by Naith58 in Remember: we don’t control what happens, we control how we respond. -Ryan Holiday[image] by Omega_Neelay
Right until a plane hits your house. You only control what you do, not what happens.
zbobet2012 t1_j078rk0 wrote
Reply to comment by Robo-Connery in National Ignition Facility (NIF) announces net positive energy fusion experiment by Robo-Connery
Incredible reply, and thank you!