Organizing for America | ThE OpEn DoOr: IEC Polywell Fusion (WB-7)

IEC Polywell Fusion (WB-7)

By CJM - Aug 30th, 2008 at 9:02 pm EDT

Also listed in: 10 groups

Comments | Mail to a Friend | Report Objectionable Content

I sure hope Senator Obama knows about this potential new source of low cost energy. If it works then it would be very disruptive as a technology to other energy alternatives but would speed up the independence away from fossil fuel, and would speed up our space travel also!

Reader Comments	Comments RSS
Comments are closed for this post.

Interesting science, but... | Report to Admin

By Mike Serfas Aug 31st 2008 at 11:58 am EDT (Updated Aug 31st 2008 at 11:58 am EDT)

While these results are exciting, they need further confirmation. I'd love to see a prototype fusion plant built, but bear in mind that this plant is predicted to cost $150 to $200 million for 40 MW of power ($4 or $5 per watt). By comparison, Pickens' 2 to 4 gigawatt Texas wind farm is planned to cost $6 billion ($2 to $3 per watt). Typical rooftop solar systems cost $10 per watt overall usage before subsidies, and future panels can beat the $1 per watt mark production while the sun is shining (see Link ) but they require no transmission infrastructure. Solar thermal energy plants can beat that mark day and night, using molten salt for energy storage, but are centralized. Of course, future fusion plants might be cheaper, but due to the very high energies involved, I suspect that they might end up having higher maintenance costs than these other options.

Pickens' basic plan is not to invent anything new and to rely on whatever technologies we have now for stopgap power production. This technology goes to the opposite extreme and asks us to wait years for something of uncertain economic viability. Obama's strategy can and should be somewhere in the middle: to rely on a certain amount of forseeable technical progress to achieve a working solution in the near future.

Re: Interesting science, but... | Report to Admin

By CJM Aug 31st 2008 at 1:54 pm EDT (Updated Aug 31st 2008 at 1:54 pm EDT)

I am of the opinion that we need to do all of the above responsibly. We cannot put a definite number on the maintenance cost of a technology that has not yet been developed. Can Pickens plan replace dangerous nuclear power on ships? No. Can Pickens plan power space travel in a way unimaginable? NO. So while I like the Pickens plan, it to me is also a bit of a stop-gap measure like drilling (part of a bigger plan) and half of it still has us depending on fossil fuel in the form of natural gas.

So I say Do it!!! Do Pickens plan and drill where there are current leases as well, then look at other potential leases and develop practical fusion energy, solar, thermal and anything else that can protect the environment and get the world off of it's addiction to fossil fuel. It is not just about America, it is the world that needs to get off of fossil fuel. Does Pickens plan do that? Not completely. Does it provide alternatives to countries other than the US that depends heavily on fossil fuel? NO. We need to do all of it, all of it responsibly. But to me no 1 energy source is the answer.

Here is a basic framwork for my energy plan!

Link

Fusors are not new | Report to Admin

By John Messerly Sep 1st 2008 at 5:19 pm EDT (Updated Sep 1st 2008 at 5:19 pm EDT)

The spin of the article linked to suggests this is some sort of new breakthrough work. Actually, the technology ( Link ) has been messed around with for 40 years now. It would be nice if the claims were true that it can be used as a commercially practical power source.

Sure the research should be funded if they can reproduce their results and their research passes peer review. Lots of this stuff shows promise and should be funded, including thorium reactors. Whereever you look, from thin film multi layer photovoltaic to higher energy density longer life Li-Ion Battery chemistries, to bioengineered enzyme production in plants that make them more attractive for use as cellulosic fuels- there are large numbers of innovations that will significantly impact energy production.

Al Gore's point is that while these laboratory innovations deserve our attention and may be game changers, we have all the technology we need today to become energy independent and CO2 free.

We just need the political will to mount a WWII scale mobilization. Will Barack challenge America to do this? My bet is that he will do exactly that. Our energy policy is like a black hole around which all other issues orbit or become consumed by. It's stranglehold on America must be broken, or all we are doing is trimming around the edges, treating symptoms rather than the disease.

Re: Fusors are not new, WB-7 is! | Report to Admin

By CJM Sep 1st 2008 at 10:55 pm EDT (Updated Sep 1st 2008 at 10:55 pm EDT)

Dr. Bussard's Polywell IEC reactors are a new/improving design concept in that the negative charges are confined to the inner region of the reactor by magnetic fields. Unlike the old Farnsworth, in the fusor, the negative charges are all over a solid-state grid. The potential for this and all alternative energy sources WILL be pursued, whether by America or someone else. There is way to much to loose to not get to the bottom of it before someone else does, like the Russians or the Chinese. The potential for a serious space travel energy source alone is reason enough, and actually that is what the late great Dr. Bussard intended but also realized all the other possibilities, ships, nuclear, coal, oil plant replacements, water desalination, ethanol refinery, etc! The Obama Energy Policy Team, Governor Richardson and a number of Senators are aware of the work Dr. Nebel has done for DOD concerning WB-7

Link

Content on blogs in My.BarackObama represents the opinions of community members and in no way should be interpreted as endorsed or approved by the campaign.