LPPFusion wrt LENR

  • Since these guys https://lppfusion.com/fusion-power/dpf-device/ have been recently in the news http://www.digitaljournal.com/…fuse-atoms/article/503354

    is there a commonality between their device and quarkx? Also what the call 'reverse accelerator' to harvest electricity from plasma, is it MHD generator Mills is talking for his SunCell?


    LPP fusion has no connection with Rossi, Mills, etc.


    they are doing ultrahot fusion using a clever idea that could just work although the technical problems are formidable. They have a lot of detailed tech reports and papers.


    They have data that shows fusion rates scaling as they expect - but only if they have a very pure and symmetrical initial plasma to collapse. Getting this is challenging due to electrode wear.


    The good news is that this could in theory give fusion with real power pay-back in a smallish system, and possibly run (almost) aneutronic fusion with H-B


    You will notice that their claims are realistic.

  • LPP fusion has no connection with Rossi, Mills, etc.

    true. But their process might have more in common with them than with mainstream hot fusion devices it i.e. various sizes tokamacs.

    There is no complicated magnetic confinement. They don't inject plasma from a separate source and so on. The process is 'aneutronic'. They also scrub excess energy through 'reverse accelerator' which sounds a lot as what Mills planning to do.

  • true. But their process might have more in common with them than with mainstream hot fusion devices it i.e. various sizes tokamacs.

    There is no complicated magnetic confinement. They don't inject plasma from a separate source and so on. The process is 'aneutronic'. They also scrub excess energy through 'reverse accelerator' which sounds a lot as what Mills planning to do.


    Well, not really.


    The aneutonicity comes from a known hydrogen boron hot nuclear reaction - this happens to be preferentially selected in this specific confinement method, which is nice.


    The confinement is in fact complex and magnetic - but it is a dynamic collapsing plasmoid. A few other people are trying with vaguely similar ideas (e.g the FRC stuff but this uses much lower temperatures and pressures, and a longer confinement time.


    The charged particle direct-conversion idea has been around a long time (before mills or LPP). It is something you can maybe do with fusion that gives high energy alphas as products (as hydrogen-boron fusion does). It is highly speculative because there are issue due to the fact that you never get mono-energetic product but it is attractive because potentially it offers 80%+ conversion efficiency and therefore much reduced cooling requirements.


    In both this case and Mills this is jam tomorrow of PR value and nothing else till they get workable fusion - and if they had this it would be valuable whatever conversion method if used. (High efficiency maybe means you can get payback with a Q that is perhaps 2X lower, and a lower capital plant cost. But such a novel conversion method has its own set of practical issues).


    The difference is the LPP proposal for aneutronic fusion is sound, backed by multiple experiments with scaling results and consistent simulations, though highly challenging. Mills' proposal is backed neither by experiment nor simulation.


    It is not fair to the LPP guys and their transparent and complex work (very well documented) to compare it with Mills' opaque and incoherent PR, or Rossi's showmanship and technical errors.