Posted on 02/18/2005 11:29:31 AM PST by Arkie2
An article re. fusion appearing today on the other side of the world:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/Sciences-suninabubble-debate-heats-up/2005/02/19/1108709482776.html
You are right about fossil fuels being 'unsuitable' from a pollution standpoint as a source for 'alternative energy' hydrogen fuel cells but this is not an insurmountable problem.
Produce the hydrogen and oxygen for fuel cells from electrolysis of water with the electrical current provided by solarvoltaic arrays...but NOT the 'weather-degraded' inefficiency of 'solar power' we find HERE on Terra firma; instead use the practically-unlimited terawatts of power that could be generated by SOLAR POWER SATELLITES/STATIONS [the sun shines 24/7/365 in SPACE] and microwaved [or masered] down to rectenna 'farms' [possibly oceanic if the neo-Luddite NIMBYs complain too much] to provide the current necessary to split water for fueled engines as well as power the electrical grids.
If I recall correctly shortly after Pons and Fleischmann's original 'cold fusion' claims either Larry Niven or Jerry Pournelle pointed out that IF 'cold fusion' really WAS fusion and could produce significant amounts of energy then because of that same effect of neutron flux you mention 'cold fusion' equipment would enable just about anyone to build a breeder reactor and any attempts at nuclear non proliferation would be mooted.
The prospect of the Al Qaidas or McVeigh's of the World producing bomb material in a bathtub is a good reason to be GLAD that the purported effect of such experiments as these is only producing so little [if any] neutron flux that it is indistinguishable from background eh ;-)?
Humorous observations aside, your point is well taken.
--Boot Hill
Perhaps but it is NOT my intent to encourage any 'conspiracy theory' by mentioning that...I have no idea of course whether "the government hushed up cold fusion" but it seems unlikely to me that IF Pons and Fleischmann were correct that it would be possible for such a simple and therefore presumably easily-reproducible approach to achieving fusion to be hushed up for long before someone somewhere let the Djinn out the bottle...and if it was NOT so easily reproducible thus accounting for why 'the secret' hasn't 'leaked out' then it seems to me that there would also be less 'danger' of such 'unintended consequence' side-effects of such a discovery and ergo LESS NEED for 'the government' to TRY to suppress 'cold fusion' [Conspiracy theorists can't have it both ways].
I will opine though that IF 'cold fusion' [or this sonoluminescent variation on the theme] WAS as easy to acheive as claimed then the Government WOULD, for the reason Niven and Pournelle suggest, be entirely JUSTIFIED imo in suppressing it...if they could...which I doubt.
I kinda HOPE 'cold fusion' IS discovered [or 'rediscovered' ;-) for all you conspiracists out there]...but WHEN we have a few hundred million or more people safely OFF Terra in colonies @ Lunar South Pole, Lagrange 5, Mars, Europa, the Oort Cloud...
An alternative less pleasant prospect for the specie is that IF any form of EASY 'fusion' [cold, sonoluminescent or otherwise] is discovered anytime SOON we just might have an answer to 'Fermi's BIG Question' eh? ;-).
If you get Helium 4 out of it, you don't need shielding. If you get Helium 3 out of it, then you do.
Helium 3 is needed so that you get a self sustaining chain reaction. Helium 4 is an energy sink, probably taking more energy (to make the neutron spray, and make the bubbles) than it gets out.
Shielding would be necessary for a power source. With the power source you could synthetically generate Hydrogen gas for a nice fuel cell. The Fuel cell gets you away from Euler efficiency limits because it is a kind of battery, instead of a heat engine. That doubles your time or range (60% rather than 30% efficiency) for a fixed amount of fuel.
Huh? We're talking about Fusion, not fision. That He4 is generated is a absolutely wonderful. THis reaction is clean and more energy is produced than the He3 route.
The real problem is that mainstream research has only generated He3. That the money is going into a weaker, dirtier method is a thorn in the side of those that are currently gobbling up the funding like graphite rods in a pile.
There's your answer. The luminescence is a chemical effect, definitely not nuclear.
It was announced in Chemical Engineering Magazine that there is a consortium of universities who will be joining to commercialize this technology.
Oak Ridge was not one of them because Oak Ridge has blown it's wad on way more questionable technology for way longer. KISS.
The question is does it generate more energy than it takes to make it happen? If so I'm ready for either the sonoluminescentmobile or the fusioncar, whatever they want to call it.
Why does this whole article have such a strong bias towards the scientist's results being correct? If so many other scientists are sceptical, couldn't the BBC at least give them a voice in the article?
"It seems that the pioneers are always crucified."
No one has been crucified. This is the way scientific research is supposed to work. Skepticism is the only appropriate posture until replicable results can be produced reliably and all other plausible explanations ruled out.
Ad hoc explanations for failure ("Something wrong with the measuring apparatus") are usually uninteresting and unpersuasive unless they can be specified and corrected and the test re-run.
Skeptics rule of thumb:
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Also, DT fusion has the lowest activation E. It produces 4He, not 3He.
Yes DT fusion is the easiest. DD isn't to difficult either. None of the current research we hear about is very promising. It's the stuff we don't hear about. Trust me, it's hot.
Yup. I consulted for this movie.
Cool.
How about he calls it "Bob" instead of "fusion". That way science won't get it's panties in a wad and we can see if there's a commercially viable use for this discovery.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.