Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 38 of 38
  1. #26
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Does Lockheed Martin Really Have a Breakthrough Fusion Machine?

    Lockheed joins a number of other companies working on smaller and cheaper types of fusion reactors.

    These include Tri-Alpha, a company based near Irvine, California, that is testing a linear-shaped reactor;

    Helion Energy of Redmond, Washington, which is developing a system that attempts to use a combination of compression and magnetic confinement of plasma;

    and Lawrenceville Plasma Physics in Middlesex, New Jersey, which is working on a reactor design that uses what’s known as a “dense plasma focus.”

    Another startup, General Fusion, based in Vancouver, British Columbia, tries to control plasma using pistons to compress a swirling mass of molten lead and lithium that also acts as a coolant, absorbing heat from fusion reactions and circulating it through conventional steam generators to spin turbines (see “A New Approach to Fusion”).

    http://www.technologyreview.com/news...usion-machine/



  2. #27
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117

  3. #28
    selbstverständlich Agloco's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Post Count
    9,013
    i thought i remembered you sharing this account with someone. is that correct?
    Yes, I was given this account by an acquaintance some time ago. They do log in occasionally but nuclear science is certainly not their forte

    Perhaps I should start an new account?

  4. #29
    The D.R.A. Drachen's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    11,214
    OK, so you are the scientist owner of the account, correct?

  5. #30
    selbstverständlich Agloco's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Post Count
    9,013
    OK, so you are the scientist owner of the account, correct?
    Yes. My acquaintance wouldn't have such knowledge. Looking at the accounts posting history, I think it's immediately obvious when I (the scientist) am posting.

    It is entirely possible that I really did forget that I made this thread given it's age (and mine ).

  6. #31
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Just change the password.

  7. #32
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    No, but a stock like LMT is a good part of a portfolio.
    Shockingly true.

  8. #33
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Yes, it looks like the mainstream media is beginning to take notice of this again:

    http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/innovat...html?hpt=hp_t2

    Unfortunately, it got a bad rap a while ago due to some over zealous scientists.

    Who says nuclear energy has to be a bad thing? What happens if we start mining the moon though?
    Don't forget the most recent link:

    http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/new...ar-fusion.html

    Mining the moon would lead to some vast breakthroughs in many many fields of science. All for it.

  9. #34
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    mining the moon? pie in the sky!

  10. #35
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    "Who says nuclear energy has to be a bad thing?"

    even coal energy doesn't have to be bad thing, but it is.



  11. #36
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    from the Aviation Week exclusive:

    The team acknowledges that the project is in its earliest stages, and many key challenges remain before a viable prototype can be built. However, McGuire expects swift progress. The Skunk Works mind-set and “the pace that people work at here is ridiculously fast,” he says. “We would like to get to a prototype in five generations. If we can meet our plan of doing a design-build-test generation every year, that will put us at about five years, and we’ve already shown we can do that in the lab.” The prototype would demonstrate ignition conditions and the ability to run for upward of 10 sec. in a steady state after the injectors, which will be used to ignite the plasma, are turned off. “So it wouldn’t be at full power, like a working concept reactor, but basically just showing that all the physics works,” McGuire says.


    Rings containing superconducting magnets will confine the plasma inside the reaction chamber. Credit: Eric Schulzinger/Lockheed Martin



    An initial production version could follow five years after that. “That will be a much bigger effort,” he says, suggesting that transition to full-scale manufacturing will necessarily involve materials and heat-transfer specialists as well as gas-turbine makers. The early reactors will be designed to generate around 100 MW and fit into transportable units measuring 23 X 43 ft. “That’s the size we are thinking of now. You could put it on a semi-trailer, similar to a small gas turbine, put it on a pad, hook it up and can be running in a few weeks,” McGuire says. The concept makes use of the existing power infrastructures to enable the CFR to be easily adapted into the current grid. The 100-MW unit would provide sufficient power for up to 80,000 homes in a power-hungry U.S. city and is also “enough to run a ship,” he notes.

    Lockheed estimates that less than 25 kg (55 lb.) of fuel would be required to run an entire year of operations. The fuel itself is also plentiful. Deuterium is produced from sea water and is therefore considered unlimited, while tritium is “bred” from lithium. “We already mine enough lithium to supply a worldwide fleet of reactors, so with tritium you never have too much built up, and that’s what keeps it safe. Tritium would be a health risk if there were enough released, but it is safe enough in small quan ies. You don’t need very much to run a reactor because it is a million times more powerful than a chemical reaction,” McGuire notes.
    http://aviationweek.com/technology/s...eactor-details

  12. #37
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514

  13. #38
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •