Xref: utzoo sci.physics:6288 sci.space:10037 rec.arts.sf-lovers:22802
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!apple!vsi1!v7fs1!mvp
From: mvp@v7fs1.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.space,rec.arts.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: Fusion ---  a Second Look
Keywords: fusion, aneutronic, plasma, power, propulsion
Message-ID: <269@v7fs1.UUCP>
Date: 14 Mar 89 02:55:25 GMT
References: <35164@vax1.tcd.ie> <1140@wpi.wpi.edu> <15453@cup.portal.com> <1114@prometheus.UUCP>
Reply-To: mvp@v7fs1.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt)
Organization: Video7, Cupertino, CA
Lines: 50

In article <1114@prometheus.UUCP> pmk@promethe.UUCP (Paul M Koloc) writes:
>We have proposed an advanced form of the Spheromak, the PLASMAK 
>plasmoid, ...
> ... consequently pressures great enough to burn deuterium +
>helium-3 or hydrogen + boron-11 appear feasible.  ... That means that 
>operating "aneutronically" (no radiation), efficiently, and with 
>both compact size and mass each of many other very useful 
>applications would avail themselves to a commercial solution.   
 ...
>IF PLASMAK(tm) 
>technology proves out, aneutronic fusion can happen in as soon as ten
>years, and it would then open space to an extension of the biosphere,
>with a much cleaner earth resulting from economical replacement of
>today's more polluting energy forms.  

Fascinating... Do you have any more information?  I'd like to take
a look at it.

Fusion power has been "Real Soon Now" ((TM) Jerry Pournelle) for as
long as I can remember.  Lots of tantalizing hints of breakthroughs
come and go (whatever happened to Migma?) but nothing ever seems to
come of it.  I'd really like to see fusion work!

I think, though, that pushing "no radiation" in an attempt to placate
those who run screaming in horror at the word "radiation" is futile.
The core group of these people is implacable.  Even though radiation is
going to be less of a problem with fusion than with fission, the
"problem" is not going to go away.  (If you're doing D-T fusion, you're
going to have a hard time avoiding some T-T fusion, too.) That's not to
say it isn't a problem that can be dealt with.  But then, the
radioactivity of fission plants can be dealt with, too, as the French
are so ably demonstrating.

Besides, I'm convinced that what's really behind a lot of the "No
Nooks" crowd is an agenda which does not include any sources of
electricity.  As Amory Lovins said, "It would be nothing short of
disastrous if we were to discover a source of cheap, clean, abundant
energy."  These people are going to be chaining themselves to the gates
of your construction sites no matter how safe and clean your plant is,
as soon as they perceive a risk that you might be sucessful.

As the whole fission flap shows, facts don't matter.  Public perception
does.  If we don't figure out some way to ignore the technophobes, in 
the same way that the Flat Earth Society is ignored, we're on a fast
track back to the 12'th century no matter how sucessful PLASMAK is.
-- 
Mike Van Pelt                          Here lies a Technophobe,
Video 7                                   No whimper, no blast.
...ames!vsi1!v7fs1!mvp                 His life's goal accomplished,
                                          Zero risk at last.