Nuclear fusion

probe

An article in Le Monde http://www.lemonde.fr/archives/article/2008/04/04/la-fusion-nucleaire-se-donne-le-siecle-pour-faire-ses-preuves_1030941_0.html on the ITER project at CADARACHE suggests that it will be 2070 or 2080 before we will see the generation of electricity by nuclear fusion.

.probe

http://www-cadarache.cea.fr/fr/activites/fusion/

Map: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Cadarache&ll=43.687391,5.761986&spn=0.046177,0.059052&t=k&hl=en

Grudaire

Ahhhh It's all French!

To be honest there is as of now no indication that fusion is feasibly possible, Unless these articles say otherwise the longest fusion has been controled is mere miliseconds. Governments aren't going to fund a black hole of reseach into fusion without results

bonkey

So one could summarise it by saying that practical fusion is 50 years away, like it has been for the last 50 years.

PeoplesMod

bonkey wrote: »

So one could summarise it by saying that practical fusion is 50 years away, like it has been for the last 50 years.

It is possible to produce very high temperatures from standard low viscosity oil and I don't mean by burning it. Cold fusion is a reality and it is in fact very simple. It is so simple that you will not believe it. By the simple act of rotating a device within a device with a very small tolerance and at a certain RPM cold fusion takes place and heat is generated. If you vary the tolerance and/or the RPM you can get varying degrees of temperature control. Just think of the many applications that this device would be useful for

bonkey

PeoplesMod wrote: »

It is so simple that you will not believe it.

You're right. I don't believe it.

I don't believe it because not one of these experiments has ever been fuly documented and made publically available for independant verification.

When that happens...when specifications etc. are made available to anyone who wishes to scientifically verify the claims being made, and those verifications confirm the original claims....then I'll start thinking about believing.

PeoplesMod

bonkey wrote: »

You're right. I don't believe it.

I don't believe it because not one of these experiments has ever been fuly documented and made publically available for independant verification.

When that happens...when specifications etc. are made available to anyone who wishes to scientifically verify the claims being made, and those verifications confirm the original claims....then I'll start thinking about believing.

You are wrong. Not only have they been documented but they have been patented in the US with some of the patents going back to the early 1900's. As a matter of fact I have got my hands on some of these brilliant inventions with full instructions and although I am here to help people I need to be very careful as helping someone in this field may actually lead to a bad outcome for them for the reasons mentioned. Another thread on this section asks about running a car on water. Do you not remember the TV programme on Tomorrows World about 10-15 years ago where a man in the US was running a car on water by splitting the H2O into Hydrogen and Oxygen and burning the Hydrogen. The programme finished with the man walking down the street and looking back over his shoulder as he had received several threats after turning down an offer of a large sum of money to keep quiet.

bonkey

PeoplesMod wrote: »

I need to be very careful as helping someone in this field may actually lead to a bad outcome for them for the reasons mentioned.

Put differently...

You won't supply the proof that this stuff works, out of fear.
You won't supply the information for someone else to test if the stuff works, out of fear.
You won't even supply entirely accurate information about what you're talking about, out of fear.

But...we should trust you that what you're saying is true, despite your admission that you're not an expert in the necessary fields.

The programme finished with the man walking down the street and looking back over his shoulder as he had received several threats after turning down an offer of a large sum of money to keep quiet.

And yet, despite not keeping quiet, nothing has ever been heard of him or his invention.

Sounds to me like it just didn't work.

PeoplesMod

bonkey wrote: »

Put differently...

You won't supply the proof that this stuff works, out of fear.
You won't supply the information for someone else to test if the stuff works, out of fear.
You won't even supply entirely accurate information about what you're talking about, out of fear.

But...we should trust you that what you're saying is true, despite your admission that you're not an expert in the necessary fields.



And yet, despite not keeping quiet, nothing has ever been heard of him or his invention.

Sounds to me like it just didn't work.

I am here to help some people who want to help themselves. I am not an expert at anything nor do I have to be. However I am a brilliant researcher and have an ability to seek and find important information that can help people no matter what they are doing. I have seen the programme in Tomorrows World myself many years ago and if some wants more information on this then I suggest they contact the BBC or whoever now owns the rights to the programme in question. If you can't understand what I am talking about that does not mean that someone else can't as well. Readers can judge for themselves and make their own decision as to what is factual and what is not. I have also replied to you recently in another thread that there is a well know father of the inventions that I speak about but you have still failed to mention his name. I will check now in case you have replied with his name and if not then you must go and seek out this information as I am not going to tell you for it would be an injustice to do that.

oscarBravo

PeoplesMod, this is a discussion forum. If you have something to share, share it. If you're going to obfuscate through riddles or vagueness, I'll respectfully ask you to refrain from posting here.

PeoplesMod

oscarBravo wrote: »

PeoplesMod, this is a discussion forum. If you have something to share, share it. If you're going to obfuscate through riddles or vagueness, I'll respectfully ask you to refrain from posting here.

I have moved the discussion to the Science forum as that is where it should really be.

probe

Moving back to the original thread, in the context in which I posted it, there is a positive side. If nuclear fusion was five years down the road, and promised electricity at 2c per kWh, there wouldn’t be much point in investing large amounts in conventional green energy infrastructure. At least the thought that it is 50 years or more away brings clarity and a higher level of relative certainty to investors!

.probe

Annatar

Bussard's (RIP) Polywell Fusion looks promising.

Version WB-7 had first plasma earlier this year (funded by US Navy), all things going well by mid summer proof of concept results should prompt more investment into a fully fledged reactor capable of net output. Only 200 million dollars and less than 5 yrs away.



Sonofusion - a different approach, looks interesting but.... if its possible, its still years away. I guess

Capt'n Midnight

We won't have to wait 50 years. Cern will be chucking out mini black holes which should hold the atoms together long enough to fuse.

Seriously there are several ways to achieve fusion, it's a matter of getting one of them past the break even point.

some people would like you to believe this stuff is hidden but you can build your own neutron source quite easily, the only problem is that it's not efficient enough to be self sustaining
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor
you need high voltages,
line output transformer from a TV /CRT will give 30-40 KV at tens of watts
or a microwave oven will give you 4-5KV at hundreds of watts

Certainly be more fun than an fan heater

bonkey

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Seriously there are several ways to achieve fusion, it's a matter of getting one of them past the break even point.

And once we do, then the real problems can be solved!

The biggest known problem at the moment is the issue of what materials to use in a fusion reactor. The IFMIF - still only in planning - is designed to tackle exactly this problem. All going to schedule, they can start testing materials in about 10 years time. After that, its "just" a question of finding a material which can work with a design, which can result in something useable.

Right now...the reality is that we have no solution to this problem and until we do, we cannot produce a workable energy-positive fusion reactor capable of sustained operation.

Tomk1

Some very uninformed posts in this forum, why don't you do what most people do if they do not understand something is WIKI it, unless the object is not to understand it and denonce it.

here is some links showing
a) fusion works : http://www.jet.efda.org/index.html
b) governments are backing it: http://www.iter.org/

The only problem is for the expertise and intermendiate time new fision will and must be used, but Ireland is in the dark ages, instead of more foccil fual plants Ireland should be building (new generaton) fision generators.

bonkey

Tomk1 wrote: »

Some very uninformed posts in this forum, why don't you do what most people do if they do not understand something is WIKI it, unless the object is not to understand it and denonce it.

here is some links showing
a) fusion works : http://www.jet.efda.org/index.html
b) governments are backing it: http://www.iter.org/

Rather than being condescending, maybe you should verify that your own links support what you say. The JET labs, as they say on their own front page, are there to investigate fusion's potential as a safe, clean, and virtually limitless energy source for future generations

They don't say that its a given, and all they have to do it get there...they say it has potential which needs investigating.

ITER, similairly, is a research project to help show that certain issues can be practically resolved.

IFMIF - when it comes - will tackle more as-yet-unsolved problems.

No-one (sane) questions whether or not fusion occurs as a nuclear process. However, thats a completely different issue to whether and when fusion can be implemented as a source of power (other than that massive fusion generator sitting approx. 93 million miles away).
The only problem is for the expertise and intermendiate time new fision will and must be used, but Ireland is in the dark ages, instead of more foccil fual plants Ireland should be building (new generaton) fision generators.[/QUOTE]