Talk:Inertial electrostatic confinement

message: 80% of the fusion energy produced in a DT cycle comes out in the form of energetic (14 MeV) neutrons.  Fusion power reactors stop these neutrons in a "blanket" where they both heat the blanket and are used to breed tritium (through the reaction n + Li6 -> T + alpha). Breeding tritium is necessary to close the fuel cycle because there are no other sources of tritium available to fuel your DT fusion power reactor.  The thermal energy deposited in the blanket is converted to electrical energy through a conventional thermal cycle, which can be expected to have an efficiency of  about 35%.  It is possible in principle to "directly convert" the remaining 20% of fusion power (which emerges as 3.5 MeV alpha particles).  While this technology has yet to be developed, initial exploration suggest that a conversion efficiency as high as 90% may be possible. We will also assume that any recirculated power can be converted back to electrical power through a thermal cycle at a 35% efficiency.  With these assumptions you reach break-even (that is, your "power plant" produces exactly as much electrical power as it requires to maintain operation) at a fusion gain -- that is, (fusion power produced)/(recirculated power) -- of 1.41. Of course, the goal of a fusion power plant is to produce excess power which can be sold to pay for the whole enterprise.  People will only willingly purchase fusion power if it can be priced competitively with alternate source of electrical power.  Electrical generating equipment is expensive (this is the bulk of the capital cost for coal and gas-fired plants, while it is about 1/2 of the capital cost for nuclear plants). A competitive fusion power plant has to be able to sell most of the electrical power which it produces.  At a fusion gain of 10 (and the assumptions about power conversion presented above) about 80% of the electrical power generated will be available for sale, while the remaining 20% must be recirculated in order to keep the fusion power plant operating.  Nevins [W.M. Nevins, Phys. Plasmas <2> (10), 3804 (October, 1995)] showed that the IEC systems described by Bussard and others cannot achieve a fusion gain greater than 0.1 [disclaimer: I am the Nevins in question].   One concludes that IEC systems cannot form the basis for a commerial electrical power plant. I would further point out that this conclusion is not controversial within the DoE-funded fusion community. 
Wmnevins 19:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  On recirculating power 

message: The external link in the critique section is not to free content.  Is this OK?
"According to Todd Rider in A general critique of inertial-electrostatic confinement fusion systems, net energy production is not viab"
125.238.50.90 22:13, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why wouldn't that be ok? — Omegatron 14:08, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External link not to free content 

message: "... a small amount of fusion fuel is introduced" -- Could we please link-to or otherwise define what fuel is used in this, as this is an important characteristic of fusion systems. (vs. fission, for example). See for example Nuclear fuel. Thanks. -- 201.19.15.178 15:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it's hard to say what fuel would be used, though I agree elucidation would be helpful.  Perhaps a link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fuel#Fusion_fuels.76.16.44.246 (talk) 23:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fuel?

message: Hello, I noticed that someone deleted the examples of Amateur fusor work.  I very strongly disagree with this.  In many ways, the amateurs are ahead of the professionals on this subject.  A quick trip to fusor.net shows that a vast, growing and interconnected network of people are building fusors, testing fusors, designing fusors and know more about fusors than the academics.  They are making news in the public space and are the most visible manifestation of IEC.  They need to be part of this article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.0.90.170 (talk) 23:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just to underscore that point, the latest youngest fusioneer, Jamie Edwards has made plenty of news.  His experiment was reposted on more than 50 websites and he received a letter from his royal highness the Duke of York.  Amateur IEC work is very much a part of this subject and needs to be included.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.92.243.50 (talk) 22:15, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleting Amateur section  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Inertial electrostatic confinement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130928002837/http://www.princeton.edu/bcf/phd/students/link/Tianhui%20Michael%20Li.pdf to http://www.princeton.edu/bcf/phd/students/link/Tianhui%20Michael%20Li.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:14, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Inertial electrostatic confinement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080613130449/http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/06/12/1136887.aspx to http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/06/12/1136887.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:34, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Inertial electrostatic confinement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130413235647/http://link.aip.org/link/doi/10.1063/1.1888822 to http://link.aip.org/link/doi/10.1063/1.1888822
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070715113146/http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/iec/IEC_Overview.pdf to http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/iec/IEC_Overview.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:26, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: There are no references to the section that talks about the work on IEC undertaken by The University of Sydney.
We could probably include references such as: https://iec.neep.wisc.edu/usjapan/16th_US-Japan/Wed_AM/Khachan_IEC_2014.pdf
I am sure that with a little effort we could also dig out a bundle of papers...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrDeconstructo (talk • contribs) 10:16, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  No references to The University of Sydney work in IEC 

message: Hi, I came up with a design for an IEC variant using a pyrolytic graphite inner core. The main problems with IEC as others have discovered is electron density, which can be overcome by using a hybrid confinement method using "stacked" superconducting outer grids similar to Bussards design. It appears that using positrons may be a short term fix as these can be generated using 22Na originating from 25Mg and potentially the reaction could be closed loop if 25Mg is intercalated into the PG.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.3.100.7 (talk) 07:25, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antimatter catalyzed reaction?