Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet
Dave--To answer your question about reactor control I offer the following: Light water fission reactors using U-235, U-233, and Pu-239 fissionable isotopes depend on thermal or relatively slow neutrons to react with those isotopes. The slower the neutron the more likely it will be absorbed by one of these isotopes and cause it to fission. Each fission produces more neutrons at high energies that are slowed down by collisions with water and other material in the reactor until they are thermalized--at an average energy determined by the temperature of the reactor. At criticality the population of neutrons is steady with as many being produced as are leaking out of the reactor (not to enter the fuel region again) or being absorbed by materials such as control rods.More power is produced as the temperature is decreased because the average energy of the population of neutrons is reduced and the interaction rate with the fissile isotopes in the reactor is increased. If the power generated is not extracted from the circulating coolant the temperature goes up and the reaction rate (fission rate) goes down on average because the energy spectrum of the neutrons is higher. This is a negative feed back called a negative temperature coeff. and is an inherent control feature of the power in the reactor. However if the water is cooled again the power increases and holds the reactor at a selected average operating temperature. Heat extracted from the primary coolant of the reactor by a steam generator is such a cooling mechanism for the primary coolant. The fissile isotopes also react with faster neutrons at various energies, however at lower probability than they do with the thermal neutrons. Thus, they there are many fewer fissions caused by fast neutrons before they are thermalized in the reactor during normal reactor critical operation. However, with a rapid addition of neutron population, power can drastically increase at a high rate and cause a large increase of fast neutron compared to the thermal neutron population. If this happens a condition of prompt criticality can occur and the reactor can explode because of a high energy production rate. Reactors are designed to add a poison--a control rod--to absorb neutrons if the rate of production--the rate of population increase--is too high. Such control rod action avoids prompt criticality. An accident called a cold water accident can occur in reactors which adds a slug of cold water to the reactor and causes prompt criticality before the control rod system has a chance to add poison. This must be avoided to keep the reactor in tact. The various assemblies in a core produce differing amounts of power with the colder regions near the entering coolant producing more power than the hotter regions. Thus at higher powers the differential temperature across the core is greater given a constant coolant flow rate. To keep the temperatures in a core closer to an average temperature the flow is increased as more power is generated. Fuel assemblies are loaded with differing amounts of fissile material depending upon the location of the fuel assembly in the core with higher loading in radial positions that may have a lower neutron population on average. The fuel design objective is generally to create a system with even power generation throughout the core. Such a condition can only be approached in practice and changes as fuel is depleted with operation. Most modern reactors include burnable poisons--for example boron--that are depleted as the same time the fuel is depleted. This reduction of the poison in the fuel allows an increasing thermal neutron population inside the fuel element and thus maintains an more constant fission rate with time as the local fissile isotopes decrease. Bob - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 2:41 PM Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet You make a good point Robin. My concept is to make one pebble first that has the characteristic that you wish and then to work on the complete system of them to end up with a good overall plan. For instance, if a coolant is flowing through a large number of them, it will extract heat from the group. I suspect that the geometry of the complete system can be played with so that all of them contribute to the net heat being extracted. This may require that coolant be injected along the container sides or other structures so that none of the pellets is over stressed. I would not think that a big random pile of these devices would work properly due to problems with heat generation and extraction, but a good engineering plan should be able to solve the problems. I would assume that a nuclear reactor would face similar issues with their multiple fuel rod assemblies yet they seem to be able to operate properly. Perhaps one
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet
Thanks Bob, You have offered an educated description of some of the more intricate inner behavior of a light water fission reactor. I had been previously introduced to some of the processes at work but your input is much more of the type that engineers understand. It is always refreshing to be exposed to the real life secondary considerations that result in modifications to the original less sophisticated designs. I find your information concerning the cooling factors quite interesting and demonstrates that where a problem exists a solution can be found. Perhaps a pile of Axil pellets would not work due to the very same issues that you discuss as applying to nuclear reactors, whereas a well engineered geometry should lead to a successful design. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 16, 2015 4:40 am Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet Dave--To answer your question about reactor control I offer the following: Light water fission reactors using U-235, U-233, and Pu-239 fissionable isotopes depend on thermal or relatively slow neutrons to react with those isotopes. The slower the neutron the more likely it will be absorbed by one of these isotopes and cause it to fission. Each fission produces more neutrons at high energies that are slowed down by collisions with water and other material in the reactor until they are thermalized--at an average energy determined by the temperature of the reactor. At criticality the population of neutrons is steady with as many being produced as are leaking out of the reactor (not to enter the fuel region again) or being absorbed by materials such as control rods.More power is produced as the temperature is decreased because the average energy of the population of neutrons is reduced and the interaction rate with the fissile isotopes in the reactor is increased. If the power generated is not extracted from the circulating coolant the temperature goes up and the reaction rate (fission rate) goes down on average because the energy spectrum of the neutrons is higher. This is a negative feed back called a negative temperature coeff. and is an inherent control feature of the power in the reactor. However if the water is cooled again the power increases and holds the reactor at a selected average operating temperature. Heat extracted from the primary coolant of the reactor by a steam generator is such a cooling mechanism for the primary coolant. The fissile isotopes also react with faster neutrons at various energies, however at lower probability than they do with the thermal neutrons. Thus, they there are many fewer fissions caused by fast neutrons before they are thermalized in the reactor during normal reactor critical operation. However, with a rapid addition of neutron population, power can drastically increase at a high rate and cause a large increase of fast neutron compared to the thermal neutron population. If this happens a condition of prompt criticality can occur and the reactor can explode because of a high energy production rate. Reactors are designed to add a poison--a control rod--to absorb neutrons if the rate of production--the rate of population increase--is too high. Such control rod action avoids prompt criticality. An accident called a cold water accident can occur in reactors which adds a slug of cold water to the reactor and causes prompt criticality before the control rod system has a chance to add poison. This must be avoided to keep the reactor in tact. The various assemblies in a core produce differing amounts of power with the colder regions near the entering coolant producing more power than the hotter regions. Thus at higher powers the differential temperature across the core is greater given a constant coolant flow rate. To keep the temperatures in a core closer to an average temperature the flow is increased as more power is generated. Fuel assemblies are loaded with differing amounts of fissile material depending upon the location of the fuel assembly in the core with higher loading in radial positions that may have a lower neutron population on average. The fuel design objective is generally to create a system with even power generation throughout the core. Such a condition can only be approached in practice and changes as fuel is depleted with operation. Most modern reactors include burnable poisons--for example boron--that are depleted as the same time the fuel is depleted. This reduction of the poison in the fuel allows an increasing thermal neutron population inside the fuel element and thus maintains an more constant fission rate with time as the local fissile isotopes decrease. Bob - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 2:41 PM Subject: Re
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet
In a TRISO pellet nuclear reactor, the pellets are passively safe. There thermal expansion when heated to high temperatures reduces there reactivity to such a high degree that the reactor stops of its own accord. A pellet reactor is intrinsically safe and cannot meltdown. However, such a reactor has other drawbacks. These drawbacks can be mitigated if a molten salt is used as a coolant to replace helium. In my concept of a LENR based TRISO pellet reactor, a two way thermal diode control layer build from thermally insolating material must be developed to transfer heat into the pellet core only when the temperature is below 1400C. When the core reaches 1400C and above, the control layer reverses heat flow so that heat can only flow out of the core and not into it. This control layer is the control mechanism that stabilizes the temperature in the reactor. As a systems engineering requirement of the LENR TRISO pellet, this control layer is in direct contact with the core of the pebble. It may be built using one direction micro heat pipes(two way simplex interface) using lithium as the heat transfer medium imbedded in the isolating layer material where the set of heat pipes function until the temperature gets to 1400C, then the heat input set shuts down at 1400C and above. The other set of heat micro lithium based heat pipes function in an opposite fashion where heat above 1400C is sent to the surface of the pellet but they shut down at temperatures lower than 1400C. Such a LENR pellet design will be passively safe. On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 10:23 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Thanks Bob, You have offered an educated description of some of the more intricate inner behavior of a light water fission reactor. I had been previously introduced to some of the processes at work but your input is much more of the type that engineers understand. It is always refreshing to be exposed to the real life secondary considerations that result in modifications to the original less sophisticated designs. I find your information concerning the cooling factors quite interesting and demonstrates that where a problem exists a solution can be found. Perhaps a pile of Axil pellets would not work due to the very same issues that you discuss as applying to nuclear reactors, whereas a well engineered geometry should lead to a successful design. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 16, 2015 4:40 am Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet Dave--To answer your question about reactor control I offer the following: Light water fission reactors using U-235, U-233, and Pu-239 fissionable isotopes depend on thermal or relatively slow neutrons to react with those isotopes. The slower the neutron the more likely it will be absorbed by one of these isotopes and cause it to fission. Each fission produces more neutrons at high energies that are slowed down by collisions with water and other material in the reactor until they are thermalized--at an average energy determined by the temperature of the reactor. At criticality the population of neutrons is steady with as many being produced as are leaking out of the reactor (not to enter the fuel region again) or being absorbed by materials such as control rods.More power is produced as the temperature is decreased because the average energy of the population of neutrons is reduced and the interaction rate with the fissile isotopes in the reactor is increased. If the power generated is not extracted from the circulating coolant the temperature goes up and the reaction rate (fission rate) goes down on average because the energy spectrum of the neutrons is higher. This is a negative feed back called a negative temperature coeff. and is an inherent control feature of the power in the reactor. However if the water is cooled again the power increases and holds the reactor at a selected average operating temperature. Heat extracted from the primary coolant of the reactor by a steam generator is such a cooling mechanism for the primary coolant. The fissile isotopes also react with faster neutrons at various energies, however at lower probability than they do with the thermal neutrons. Thus, they there are many fewer fissions caused by fast neutrons before they are thermalized in the reactor during normal reactor critical operation. However, with a rapid addition of neutron population, power can drastically increase at a high rate and cause a large increase of fast neutron compared to the thermal neutron population. If this happens a condition of prompt criticality can occur and the reactor can explode because of a high energy production rate. Reactors are designed to add a poison--a control rod--to absorb neutrons if the rate of production--the rate of population increase--is too high. Such control rod action avoids
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet
Dave- The parameter that controls the LENR should extend throughout the reacting material and affect the reaction in a similar manner to be effective. My guess is that it is temperature that changes the reaction rate as the temperatures rises and, then, reduces the rate, if the temperature gets to high by allowing the configuration of the active nano structure to change. There may be a magnetic field that aligns active nano particles or atoms to promote the LENR also. And/or there may be various resonant conditions caused by electric or magnetic field manipulation that promote or poison the LENR. Any of these parameters may affect the formation of the SPP population which I believe is involved in the LENR intensity. I also believe there is a good heat transfer mechanism operating in the Ni-Li-H-Al reactor that promotes fairly uniform temperature profiles and hence resonant lattice vibrations and LENR. I think spin energy manipulation of the nano system of atoms and transmutations to lower energy states is the ultimate source of energy in these reactors. This feature is what keeps the hard gamma radiation down with small changes in the nano system energy states and no hot kinetic particles. Who knows? These are merely guesses. Temperature seems to be the main controlling parameter--at least one that the people who understand the LENR mechanism talk about and reveal. The recent Russian experiment also seems to point to the controlling nature of the temperature. However, resonant RF signals may also be important in the Russian experiment and are used to control it. A separate RF noise generator could be used to shut down a reaction by interfering with the resonant conditions. The heater coil windings may act as a source of non-resonant or resonant RF, for example. As Bob Higgins pointed out, the Russian experiment uses a ribbon type wire wound around the reactor with a gap in the middle where the windings appear to be further apart. This design seems strange and must have a purpose. The apparent non-univorm heating of the reactor along its length may reflect this winding configuration. It may also promote a RF pattern within the reactor that is necessary for resonances to occur. Again, who knows. Bob - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 7:23 AM Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet Thanks Bob, You have offered an educated description of some of the more intricate inner behavior of a light water fission reactor. I had been previously introduced to some of the processes at work but your input is much more of the type that engineers understand. It is always refreshing to be exposed to the real life secondary considerations that result in modifications to the original less sophisticated designs. I find your information concerning the cooling factors quite interesting and demonstrates that where a problem exists a solution can be found. Perhaps a pile of Axil pellets would not work due to the very same issues that you discuss as applying to nuclear reactors, whereas a well engineered geometry should lead to a successful design. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 16, 2015 4:40 am Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet Dave--To answer your question about reactor control I offer the following: Light water fission reactors using U-235, U-233, and Pu-239 fissionable isotopes depend on thermal or relatively slow neutrons to react with those isotopes. The slower the neutron the more likely it will be absorbed by one of these isotopes and cause it to fission. Each fission produces more neutrons at high energies that are slowed down by collisions with water and other material in the reactor until they are thermalized--at an average energy determined by the temperature of the reactor. At criticality the population of neutrons is steady with as many being produced as are leaking out of the reactor (not to enter the fuel region again) or being absorbed by materials such as control rods.More power is produced as the temperature is decreased because the average energy of the population of neutrons is reduced and the interaction rate with the fissile isotopes in the reactor is increased. If the power generated is not extracted from the circulating coolant the temperature goes up and the reaction rate (fission rate) goes down on average because the energy spectrum of the neutrons is higher. This is a negative feed back called a negative temperature coeff. and is an inherent control feature of the power in the reactor. However if the water is cooled again the power increases and holds the reactor at a selected average operating temperature. Heat extracted from the primary coolant of the reactor by a steam generator
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet
Axil- Anything like that will cause a big utility lots of money and they will not want to change their existing set up. With so much hydrogen contained, normal chemical explosion will become a safety concern. Large new plants of the old design will cost too much compared to new simple designs which will make electricity from the heat directly. The grid will eventually decay and be replaced by distributed small reactors to produce electricity with much more reliability. There will not be a good market for replacement parts for the old turbines and pumps and maintenance costs will go up for the big plants you describe. Lastly most nuclear plants are not designed for the high temperatures that make the Hot Cat desirable from an electricity production standpoint. Thermal electric designs are quite nice when it comes to simplicity and reliability. That's why NASA likes them for electricity in space. Their major problem with existing powered supplies is keeping the Pu-238 out of the atmosphere. What you describe as a multilayer sphere would take lots of RD to come up with a working design. Rossi will have a lead in the production of cheap reactors and likely stay ahead in terms of cost for some time. For example, heating these spheres as you describe with a wave of your hand by doping to make an electrical conducting layer is not an off the shelf feature that I know of. The focus of a Rossi competitor should be in the area of making electricity directly from the heat source. Reliability and cost for this aspect of the development is where the promise lies for others trying to get into the business. (The conventional nuclear power industry lost track of this objective and that is the main reason they are now going out of sight, becoming a thing of the past, much like hand cranked autos did, IMHO.) When I have more time I will list more problems with your TRISO cute queue balls. Bob - Original Message - From: Roarty, Francis X To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 4:31 AM Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet Axil, That is an elegant idea that makes all the construction difficulties worthwhile if we could actually use present reactors and technology to fast track adoption. I hope someone pursues this idea. Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 11:59 PM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet In the long run, Brillouin’s low energy nuclear reaction technology will beat out Rossi's Hot cat reactor design. But there needs to be some design upgrades to the Brilouin's current approach. A LENR TRISO fuel pellet design should be invented. Like the Hot-Cat tube design, this pellet should be a completely self contained unit including nickel or tunstun micro powder and the fuel AlLiH4 just like Rossi's alumina reactor core tube. The multi layered TRISO spherical pellet is a layered design featuring an inner core of fuel consisting of nickel micro-powder and AlLiH4 surrounded by a covering of alumina. Next, a thin coating of yttrium stabilized zirconium oxide covers this core, then follows a thin layer of pyrolytic carbon (PyC) to confine hydrogen, followed by a ceramic layer of SiC whose function is to further confine hydrogen at elevated temperatures and to give the TRISO particle a high degree of structural integrity, This LENR spherical pellet is about the size of a queue ball where each layer of the composite is doped to be electrically conductive to provide electrical heating of the alumina core. As in the current Brillouin design, a very short but powerful electric pulse heat the pellet pile in their bed where some hundreds of thousands of particles take advantage of economies of scale the the utilities love so much. This pellet can operate at 1400C and is used to retrofit existing nuclear and fossil fuel generating stations using existing pumps and generators to feed the existing grid using the existing grid interconnect power line network. Now which design is more cost effective, 600,000 hot cats and there associated micro processor controls or a nuclear station like 20 gigawatt centralized LENR power station with a 600,000 pebble bed of dumb high temperature TRISO pellets.
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet
Axil, What you are describing would be a form of Super Cravens Sphere. He has shown that the internal temperature of one of his devices becomes elevated when it is embedded within a hot bath and that is pretty much what I understand as your thought below. If the fuel mix were to be enhanced, in a manner such as seen in the Hotcat, enough positive feedback could be designed into the pellet system for it to snap upwards in power production once a threshold is reached. The amount of positive feedback can be adjusted by establishing the proper ratio of sphere surface area to volume. As the pellet becomes larger the surface area varies as the square of the radius. At the same time the volume varies with the cube of the radius. In an ideal case that suggests that the feedback ratio would vary directly with radius. If some form of insulating material is coated upon the outer surface the fuel volume can be reduced considerably. One of the main problems that needs addressing is how to produce these pebbles so that they will recover to room temperature once the bath heating is eliminated. A type 1 system of the type I have been simulating is restricted in COP to a maximum of perhaps 4. A type 2 or 3 design would be much more useful with an essentially unlimited COP possible with the type 3 device. So far the Hotcat as well as the Russian replication have been demonstrated to be of type 1. I suspect that when they toyed with the amount of fuel and its activity they found out that it is extremely difficult to control or build a reactor that is type 2 or 3. In either of these cases the magnitude of the positive thermal feedback is great enough to produce a negative resistance region within the operating temperature range. Whether or not anyone can figure out how to prevent one of these devices from heading into thermal runaway is a question left open so far. Both of the recent examples that we have seen avoid that danger at the expense of COP. Perhaps the ideal pebble would contain a fuel mixture that automatically enters a mode of reduced generated power as the temperature reaches a designed value. This would be a form of built in negative feedback. If anyone knows of a method of achieving this in a manner that can be reversed as temperature is reduced then they will have a true winner. For reference: A type 1 system has limited or no positive thermal feedback. It will operate in a controlled manner at all temperature ranges and not exhibit any form of latch up. This is what has been demonstrated by Rossi in the third party tests and the Russian replication to date. A type 2 system has a level of thermal positive feedback that results in the existence of a negative resistance region somewhere within the operating temperature range. One of these devices will demonstrate a snap in temperature once a threshold of either input power or applied external temperature is reached. Some method of reduction of positive feedback must exist to prevent thermal destruction or damage and at the same time allow recovery once the drive signal is discontinued. The geometry of the structure or perhaps a boiling water like heat sink could be used to this end. A type 3 system is just a type 2 system with a beefed up amount of positive feedback. The difference from a type 2 is that once the negative resistance region is reached by drive level or temperature input the device goes into thermal latch up. If the drive is eliminated, the device will continue to generate internal power and some form of strong cooling must be applied in order to force the device to cool off. I suppose a pebble system could be brought back to room temperature by spraying it with water or some other coolant that extracts plenty of additional heat. From what I recall the earlier versions of the ECAT tended to operate in this mode since the input water flow rate had to be increased before the device would cool down. A truly infinite COP is achieved by a device of this type and that is an important consideration. The above description of system types is according to the categories that are demonstrated by my computer simulation models. I have a couple of different simulation environments that exhibit these types of behaviors. I am excited to see that both the Rossi Hotcat and the Russian replication device match my expectations. Dave -Original Message- From: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Jan 15, 2015 7:31 am Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet Axil, That is an elegant idea that makes all the construction difficulties worthwhile if we could actually use present reactors and technology to fast track adoption. I hope someone pursues this idea. Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 11:59 PM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet
In reply to David Roberson's message of Thu, 15 Jan 2015 10:18:27 -0500: Hi, [snip] The amount of positive feedback can be adjusted by establishing the proper ratio of sphere surface area to volume. As the pellet becomes larger the surface area varies as the square of the radius. At the same time the volume varies with the cube of the radius. In an ideal case that suggests that the feedback ratio would vary directly with radius. If some form of insulating material is coated upon the outer surface the fuel volume can be reduced considerably. Take into account that this is only valid for a single separate sphere. Once they are all bundled together, heat leaving one will enter another, so in the limit, the surface area is reduced to the external surface area of the conglomeration. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet
You make a good point Robin. My concept is to make one pebble first that has the characteristic that you wish and then to work on the complete system of them to end up with a good overall plan. For instance, if a coolant is flowing through a large number of them, it will extract heat from the group. I suspect that the geometry of the complete system can be played with so that all of them contribute to the net heat being extracted. This may require that coolant be injected along the container sides or other structures so that none of the pellets is over stressed. I would not think that a big random pile of these devices would work properly due to problems with heat generation and extraction, but a good engineering plan should be able to solve the problems. I would assume that a nuclear reactor would face similar issues with their multiple fuel rod assemblies yet they seem to be able to operate properly. Perhaps one of our reactor experts can help with this issue. I am discussing a design of this type in response to the pebble concept mentioned by Axil. I am not biased either for or against that idea. Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Jan 15, 2015 4:15 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet In reply to David Roberson's message of Thu, 15 Jan 2015 10:18:27 -0500: Hi, [snip] The amount of positive feedback can be adjusted by establishing the proper ratio of sphere surface area to volume. As the pellet becomes larger the surface area varies as the square of the radius. At the same time the volume varies with the cube of the radius. In an ideal case that suggests that the feedback ratio would vary directly with radius. If some form of insulating material is coated upon the outer surface the fuel volume can be reduced considerably. Take into account that this is only valid for a single separate sphere. Once they are all bundled together, heat leaving one will enter another, so in the limit, the surface area is reduced to the external surface area of the conglomeration. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet
Axil, That is an elegant idea that makes all the construction difficulties worthwhile if we could actually use present reactors and technology to fast track adoption. I hope someone pursues this idea. Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 11:59 PM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:TRISO LENR pellet In the long run, Brillouin’s low energy nuclear reaction technology will beat out Rossi's Hot cat reactor design. But there needs to be some design upgrades to the Brilouin's current approach. A LENR TRISO fuel pellet design should be invented. Like the Hot-Cat tube design, this pellet should be a completely self contained unit including nickel or tunstun micro powder and the fuel AlLiH4 just like Rossi's alumina reactor core tube. The multi layered TRISO spherical pellet is a layered design featuring an inner core of fuel consisting of nickel micro-powder and AlLiH4 surrounded by a covering of alumina. Next, a thin coating of yttrium stabilized zirconium oxide covers this core, then follows a thin layer of pyrolytic carbon (PyC) to confine hydrogen, followed by a ceramic layer of SiC whose function is to further confine hydrogen at elevated temperatures and to give the TRISO particle a high degree of structural integrity, This LENR spherical pellet is about the size of a queue ball where each layer of the composite is doped to be electrically conductive to provide electrical heating of the alumina core. As in the current Brillouin design, a very short but powerful electric pulse heat the pellet pile in their bed where some hundreds of thousands of particles take advantage of economies of scale the the utilities love so much. This pellet can operate at 1400C and is used to retrofit existing nuclear and fossil fuel generating stations using existing pumps and generators to feed the existing grid using the existing grid interconnect power line network. Now which design is more cost effective, 600,000 hot cats and there associated micro processor controls or a nuclear station like 20 gigawatt centralized LENR power station with a 600,000 pebble bed of dumb high temperature TRISO pellets.
