The Oil Drum: Canada

Wow what a great reply, I'm impressed.

You write "Actually fusion is not all that hard to create.", I concede not only are you correct, but this is an important point. The Dec 17 2003 fusion was the first fusion by a Polywell system, that's all.

You also write "I'd say leave fusion for space rockets we don't actually need it on earth if we design our societies correctly... We are better off living as peers with the rest of the ecology making use of our alloted photons like every other living organism in a sense as energy equals to other dumber forms of life. If we live this way we can be pretty certain we won't overstep our ecological niche and destroy the environment.... Coming up with a good small high energy source just means we will hit peak something else in the future. Given our population growth I'd guess it would be peak food."

I agree we don't need advanced technology to become happy, I suspect it doesn't even help. Also I agree 'good small high energy sources' could result in unparalleled environmental destruction, loss of life and suffering. Nevertheless, if such devices are built and work they will be used. Those who adapt most quickly will have an advantage over those who are slower to adapt. The genie can't be put back in the bottle.

Regarding the physics, unfortunately I'm no expert but I thank you for the links you have provided and will attempt to respond intelligently to the points your have raised.

You wrote: 'With most fusion routs you have to deal with a build up of radioactivity so long term fusion or fission is not as big a gap as most people think. Fusion is not "clean" cleaner than traditional reactors yes but not clean.'

Bussard designed Polywell devices to run on Boron11 fuel. According to Bussard reactions using this fuel produce only harmless Helium, that's it. The reactions are completely aneutronic, the reactions are radiation free. There can be no 3 mile islands or Chernobyls. This is covered in minutes 5-6 of the long video I linked to above. Or you can read page 3 of this paper http://askmar.com/ConferenceNotes/Should%20Google%20Go%20Nuclear.pdf

Memmel wrote "You probably could generate fission using methods not all that different from a fusor but I can [not] see you reaching break even. Its a cross-section thing and probability thing... I went through my own Farnsworth fusor phase myself I think its something everyone goes through that looks at the problem. But if you step back and think a bit about cross-section collision probabilities and energy densities you become a advocate for electric rail and renewable sources of electricity."

As I understand it cross-section probabilities are mainly a problem for Maxwellian systems like the Tokamak. The Fusor and Polywell systems solve this problem by mimicking fusion in stars. In a star gravitational forces cause particles to combine. In Fusor/Polywell systems a spherical electric field is used to combine fuel particles. Both gravity and electric fields have 1/(r^2) convergence. So rather than a Maxwellian distribution fuel particles are concentrated at the core. See page 5 of the above document.

The main problem with Fusor/Polywell systems is electron containment. In a Polywell magnets are used to contain electrons to create the spherical electric field. I believe that's the problem Bussard spent most time working on.

Memmel wrote: 'The only problem thats solved by desktop fusion is the potential for a "car" power plant.'

Unfortunately currently designed Boron11 fueled Polywell machines are too large to fit in cars. They are about 2.5 meters in diameter, hence the need to produce ethanol from sugar. Given the extreme cost it would seem desirable to avoid migrating the worlds transportation fleet from hydrocarbon based engines to something else (like liquid hydrogen) if we can avoid it.

The current Polywell machines are small in size because they are cheaper to build than full scale (net power gain) machines. Because they were large enough to solve the known physics problems. And I think because even small machines can be used to confirm that power gain scales with the fifth power of the radius of the device.

"backing up a little bit coal fired plants could be constructed even faster if we really needed the electricity...

Both Farnsworth and Bussard suffered from underestimating the work required to build commercially viable machines. Maybe 5-8 years and 250 million will not be enough. Possibly coal fired plants can be used in the interim.

Memmel wrote: "Energy equality with the ecosystem forces us to solve our population problem which is the real problem we face peak oil is a symptom. So treat the real disease and start living within our means."

I'm not willing to agree with you on this point. I'm not convinced that we have reach the carrying capacity of planet earth let alone the universe.

Thanks again for your great comments, and all your time.