No Need for Fusion, Move On to "Neutron Transfer"

[Paul_Schatzkin]

.
A recent dispatch from my Google Alerts:

A Breakthrough Competing With Nuclear Fusion: A Radical Change For Future Energy Production

The 'breakthrough' is something called "Single Neutron Transfer":

n this reaction, a neutron is ejected from a moving nucleus when it collides with another nucleus. It’s a process that, on paper, seems straightforward, but recent experiments suggest it could be a highly promising alternative to the often elusive and challenging nuclear fusion reaction.

I'm hard pressed to grasp how exactly getting the nuclei to "collide" in this scenario is any easier than "fusion," but...

A recent experiment has turned heads in the scientific community by comparing the results of a single neutron transfer reaction to a full nuclear fusion reaction. Using the same isotopes of lithium (Li-6) and bismuth (Bi-209), scientists found that the neutron transfer process produced results that were not only comparable to fusion but, in some cases, even more efficient.

Oh, wait... I get it:

The delicate and nuanced nature of these reactions might be the key to advancing the field, leading to new innovations in both nuclear science and technology.

...and, I surmise, new innovations in funding costly experiments and finding new ways to provide salaries for card-carrying physicists and engineers.

While nuclear fusion has captivated the imagination of scientists and energy advocates for decades, its complexity and cost have kept it out of reach. Neutron transfer, on the other hand, offers a more practical and cost-effective approach to achieving similar, if not better, results in energy production.

Lemme guess... 20 years in the future and.... ???

--PS

[Richard Hull]

Can't rely on info in a news brief. All such efforts are vague and basically worthless.

I am not from Missouri, but "Show me"

Richard Hull

[Dennis P Brown]

Using heavy elements and the sheer cost of including those in a plasma would be energy prohibitive; assuming they are using a plasma. Using solid fuel, of course would also provide a useable media but again, using neutrons from a material that does not easily support fission just to exploit some rare neutrons to do fusion is certainly going to produce a vast energy sink. Gotta hand it to these researchers, they know how to create total BS to create some very irrelevant news.

I won't even open that link - those few minutes reading that total BS are too valuable to waste. Still, glad Paul read it and shared that with the forum. Besides saving me time, just proves again, too many researcher's are no different then wall street stock companies, banks or any silicon valley bro's - they are all focused on exacting funds - especially taxpayers - from everyone to themselves with no return.

But remember, physicist know climate change isn't occurring, ITER will work fine, and dark matter/energy is real. I mean sooner or later they have to hit on something that is correct if they keep throwing stuff at the fan.

[Cinar Kagan]

It is obviously more efficient than the fusion reaction using those particles.

However, isn't Bi-209 fusion in any form (with any other reacting isotope) endothermic? Wouldn't that just ruin the whole "efficiency" shenanigans.

Q>1 using this is practically impossible. (1000 years in the future and will always be)

Cinar Kagan