In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sat, 14 Feb 2009 08:19:03 -0800 (PST): Hi Jones,
My intention was primarily to show that if a viable method of achieving Li fusion were available, then it would be worth mining the Li from ordinary soil (rock), and hence the reserves are essentially "limitless". This would still be so, even if we had to reply on the Li6 reaction only. >Yes these are clean reactions which produce fewer radioisotopes, lots of >energy and "look good on paper". In practice, it has been another story >entirely. Yes, I know that the Li7 reaction has a low cross section (strangely, even lower than that of the Li6 reaction), however as you suggest, I'm looking at a Hydrino pathway, and my calculations (such as they are), indicate that for well shrunken Hydrinos this is quite doable. Furthermore, I suspect that some of the past CF experiments may be evidence of this. e.g. Li6 + D -> 2 He4. [snip] >If aneutronic fusion is the only goal using accelerated protons - then > >p + 11B --> 3 4He I know that P-B11 is easier, but the problem here is the B10 reaction:- H + B10 -> Be7 + He4 + 1 MeV Be7 is radioactive with a half-life of 53 days, not to mention being highly toxic (chemically). That means that isotopic separation of the Boron is mandatory (though not nearly as difficult as separating U isotopes). This problem doesn't even arise with Lithium, which may be used in its natural state. [snip] >Of course we all hope that another approach to lithium fusion is feasible, and >methinks you are ultimately focused on a hydrino pathway, but until that >pathway is shown to have a decent cross-section (or other method of >implementation), then it probably remains too speculative for high level >funding in the USA, due also to the stigma given to Mills/BLP by the likes of >Park & company. I'm not expecting the gentleman in question to make a contribution. ;) BTW since the device I have in mind is small, simple, and essentially made of "off the shelf" parts, it is not likely to be expensive, and hence no "high level funding" is required. In fact, the Physics/Engineering department of just about any University could probably build one from spare parts for zip (assuming it is done by an enthusiast in his/her spare time). In fact some of the members of this list could probably build one. However the initial experimental device would likely use the D-D reaction, and hence could be expected to produce neutrons. It would serve primarily to prove the theory, though could also be pressed into service as a power source in the short term if necessary. In the long term I would prefer a modification of the device which, if it works, would make the Li reaction possible. > >I hope you can get enough funding to show that a reaction of 7Li + Hy works in >some form, or else another promising hydrino fission reaction, which ever is >better. Due to power density consideration, this may end up being the only way >that the hydrino is feasible for large amounts of grid power. > >If I win Lotto - you will be on my list for immediate funding ;-) I'll hold you to that. :) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
