Difference between revisions of "Talk:Helium"
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
We should note, however, that the reactor they have does not achieve break-even, that is it consumes more energy than it creates. They acknowledge that it will be at least 20 years before break-even of He3 can be demonstrated. | We should note, however, that the reactor they have does not achieve break-even, that is it consumes more energy than it creates. They acknowledge that it will be at least 20 years before break-even of He3 can be demonstrated. | ||
:The fact also remains that De-Tr and De-De fusion are easier to achieve than He3 fusion, and we are nowhere near break even on the other fusion methods. For the past 40 year scientists have claimed that we are 10 to 20 years away from fusion break even. In other words, no measurable progress has been achieved, and there are no credible predictions of how long it will take. When Schmitt and his team claim that He3 is 20 years away, I would says that we could multiply that number by 5 or more. | :The fact also remains that De-Tr and De-De fusion are easier to achieve than He3 fusion, and we are nowhere near break even on the other fusion methods. For the past 40 year scientists have claimed that we are 10 to 20 years away from fusion break even. In other words, no measurable progress has been achieved, and there are no credible predictions of how long it will take. When Schmitt and his team claim that He3 is 20 years away, I would says that we could multiply that number by 5 or more. | ||
| + | |||
:Therefore, for all practical purposes, commercial fusion (of any kind, He3 or other) is vaporware. I discount it at a basis for lunar development in my lifetime. My focus is on more near term goals. | :Therefore, for all practical purposes, commercial fusion (of any kind, He3 or other) is vaporware. I discount it at a basis for lunar development in my lifetime. My focus is on more near term goals. | ||
Well, yes, of course. But break-even was not the point in suggesting the above correction (for which thanks for the alteration). To have achieved He3 fusion at all was remarkable, given that Kulcinski's operating budget is from two private sources amounting to less than 6 figures, while on the other hand billions of government monies have been poured into the international tokamak reactor (ITER). A larger research budget and more personnel for Kulcinski's group would alter the projected time to break-even considerably. As for the De-Tr cycle, problems with that were also discussed in the Kulcinski interview cited above which make those processes less favorable. [[User:75.41.119.150|75.41.119.150]] 15:01, 31 December 2006 (PST) | Well, yes, of course. But break-even was not the point in suggesting the above correction (for which thanks for the alteration). To have achieved He3 fusion at all was remarkable, given that Kulcinski's operating budget is from two private sources amounting to less than 6 figures, while on the other hand billions of government monies have been poured into the international tokamak reactor (ITER). A larger research budget and more personnel for Kulcinski's group would alter the projected time to break-even considerably. As for the De-Tr cycle, problems with that were also discussed in the Kulcinski interview cited above which make those processes less favorable. [[User:75.41.119.150|75.41.119.150]] 15:01, 31 December 2006 (PST) | ||
Revision as of 23:27, 31 December 2006
What are the current uses for He3, other than fussion power research? What potential markets open up if the price begins to fall?
Davew 11:48, 24 December 2006 (PST)
Application - Medical lung imaging
According to Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium_3
Medical lung imaging is an interesting new experimental application of He3.
Details:
http://cerncourier.com/main/article/41/8/14
He3 Fusion Works!
The opening statement is incorrect: "even though He3 fusion is not yet demonstrated". Gerald Kulcinski's group at the Fusion Technology Institute of the University of Wisconsin-Madison has had a working He3 fusion reactor operational for some time now on a non-governmental research budget. See the article: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/536/1 which describes his research program. Answers to many questions regarding He3 and mining it on the Moon can be found in Jack Schmitt's book: "Return to the Moon: Exploration, Enterprise, and Energy in the Human Settlement of Space", Harrison H. Schmitt, Praxis Publishing (Springer, New York, 2006), a very detailed analysis of the problems, costs, and benefits of setting up a lunar He3 mining colony. This work should form the core of the discussion of this article since there is no other major work on the topic available.75.41.119.150 12:33, 31 December 2006 (PST)
Greetings thanks for the link. I will correct the Lunarpedia article accordingly.
Yes I am well aware of the work of Schmitt and his colleagues at Wisconsin-Madison, although I had missed the part about the experimental reactor. We should note, however, that the reactor they have does not achieve break-even, that is it consumes more energy than it creates. They acknowledge that it will be at least 20 years before break-even of He3 can be demonstrated.
- The fact also remains that De-Tr and De-De fusion are easier to achieve than He3 fusion, and we are nowhere near break even on the other fusion methods. For the past 40 year scientists have claimed that we are 10 to 20 years away from fusion break even. In other words, no measurable progress has been achieved, and there are no credible predictions of how long it will take. When Schmitt and his team claim that He3 is 20 years away, I would says that we could multiply that number by 5 or more.
- Therefore, for all practical purposes, commercial fusion (of any kind, He3 or other) is vaporware. I discount it at a basis for lunar development in my lifetime. My focus is on more near term goals.
Well, yes, of course. But break-even was not the point in suggesting the above correction (for which thanks for the alteration). To have achieved He3 fusion at all was remarkable, given that Kulcinski's operating budget is from two private sources amounting to less than 6 figures, while on the other hand billions of government monies have been poured into the international tokamak reactor (ITER). A larger research budget and more personnel for Kulcinski's group would alter the projected time to break-even considerably. As for the De-Tr cycle, problems with that were also discussed in the Kulcinski interview cited above which make those processes less favorable. 75.41.119.150 15:01, 31 December 2006 (PST)
