> Of course, that means that if (hopefully when) the GDW
> folks decide to make the plant output realistic, they should
> subtract the energy needed to create the neutrons from the
> energy output of the power plant.
....
> Also, a
> plant fusing only heavy hydrogen would have a higher energy
> yield than one fusing normal hydrogen (I don't know what the
> overall difference is -- I don't have the numbers handy).
Although I admittedly don't have the numbers in front of me
either, as I recall the energy required to create a neutron is
pretty negligible compared to the energy gained in 4P + 4e ->
He4 . Be careful not to confuse the mass defect, which
represents the total energy gain of a nuclear reaction, with
the barrier potential, which represents how difficult it is to
start a fusion reaction (sort of). The latter number really has
little to do with the former, and the former number is the
interesting one for power output.
> Also, fusion power plants when first introduced would likely
> not have this ability, and would have to use heavy hydrogen as
> I suggested.
My guess based on current results is that heavy hydrogen fusion
for power production is TL9. I would guess at least TL10 and
probably TL11 for light hydrogen fusion.
> By the way, where does the electron come from? I was under the
> impression that the Sun, at least the part that is fusing, is
> very positively ionic. If this is so, then where are the
> electrons coming from?
Practically can't be! Remember the huge difference between the
universal electric constant C (per particle charge) and the
universal gravitational constant G (per particle mass)... What
this means is that any object which is even slightly charge
unbalanced is blown apart by the repulsive force of its own
electric charge!
Bart Massey
[email removed]