Many challenges confront the commercialization of aneutronic fusion.
Temperature The large majority of fusion research has gone toward D–T fusion, which is the easiest to achieve. Fusion experiments typically use
deuterium–deuterium fusion (D–D) because deuterium is cheap and easy to handle, being non-radioactive. Experimenting with D–T fusion is more difficult because tritium is expensive and radioactive, requiring additional environmental protection and safety measures. The combination of lower cross-section and higher loss rates in D–3He fusion is offset to a degree because the reactants are mainly charged particles that deposit their energy in the plasma. This combination of offsetting features demands an operating temperature about four times that of a D–T system. However, due to the high loss rates and consequent rapid cycling of energy, the confinement time of a working reactor needs to be about fifty times higher than D–T, and the energy density about 80 times higher. This requires significant advances in plasma physics. Proton–boron fusion requires ion energies, and thus plasma temperatures, some nine times higher than those for D–T fusion. For any given density of the reacting nuclei, the reaction rate for proton-boron achieves its peak rate at around 600
keV (6.6 billion degrees Celsius or 6.6
gigakelvins) while D–T has a peak at around 66 keV (765 million degrees Celsius, or 0.765 gigakelvin). For pressure-limited confinement concepts, optimum
operating temperatures are about 5 times lower, but the ratio is still roughly ten-to-one.
Power balance The peak reaction rate of p–11B is only one third that for D–T, requiring better plasma confinement. Confinement is usually characterized by the time τ the energy is retained so that the power released exceeds that required to heat the plasma. Various requirements can be derived, most commonly the Lawson criterion, the product of the density,
nτ, and the product with the pressure
nTτ. The
nτ required for p–11B is 45 times higher than that for D–T. The
nTτ required is 500 times higher. Since the confinement properties of conventional fusion approaches, such as the
tokamak and
laser pellet fusion are marginal, most aneutronic proposals use radically different confinement concepts. In most fusion plasmas, bremsstrahlung radiation is a major energy loss channel. (See also
bremsstrahlung losses in quasineutral, isotropic plasmas.) For the p–11B reaction, some calculations indicate that the bremsstrahlung power will be at least 1.74 times larger than the fusion power. The corresponding ratio for the 3He–3He reaction is only slightly more favorable at 1.39. This is not applicable to non-neutral plasmas, and different in anisotropic plasmas. In conventional reactor designs, whether based on
magnetic or
inertial confinement, the bremsstrahlung can easily escape the plasma and is considered a pure energy loss term. The outlook would be more favorable if the plasma could reabsorb the radiation. Absorption occurs primarily via
Thomson scattering on the
electrons, which has a total cross section of σT = . In a 50–50 D–T mixture this corresponds to a range of . This is considerably higher than the Lawson criterion of
ρR > 1 g/cm2, which is already difficult to attain, but might be achievable in inertial confinement systems. In
megatesla magnetic fields a
quantum mechanical effect might suppress energy transfer from the ions to the electrons. According to one calculation, bremsstrahlung losses could be reduced to half the fusion power or less. In a strong magnetic field
cyclotron radiation is even larger than the bremsstrahlung. In a megatesla field, an electron would lose its energy to cyclotron radiation in a few picoseconds if the radiation could escape. However, in a sufficiently dense plasma (
ne > , a density greater than that of a solid), the
cyclotron frequency is less than twice the
plasma frequency. In this well-known case, the cyclotron radiation is trapped inside the plasmoid and cannot escape, except from a very thin surface layer. While megatesla fields have not yet been achieved, fields of 0.3 megatesla have been produced with high intensity lasers, and fields of 0.02–0.04 megatesla have been observed with the
dense plasma focus device. At much higher densities (
ne > ), the electrons will be
Fermi degenerate, which suppresses bremsstrahlung losses, both directly and by reducing energy transfer from the ions to the electrons. If necessary conditions can be attained, net energy production from p–11B or D–3He fuel may be possible. The probability of a feasible reactor based solely on this effect remains low, however, because the
gain is predicted to be less than 20, while more than 200 is usually considered to be necessary.
Power density In every published fusion power plant design, the part of the plant that produces the fusion reactions is much more expensive than the part that converts the nuclear power to electricity. In that case, as indeed in most power systems, power density is an important characteristic. Doubling power density at least halves the cost of electricity. In addition, the confinement time required depends on the power density. It is, however, not trivial to compare the power density produced by different fusion fuel cycles. The case most favorable to p–11B relative to D–T fuel is a (hypothetical) confinement device that only works well at ion temperatures above about 400 keV, in which the reaction rate parameter
σv is equal for the two fuels, and that runs with low electron temperature. p–11B does not require as long a confinement time because the energy of its charged products is two and a half times higher than that for D–T. However, relaxing these assumptions, for example by considering hot electrons, by allowing the D–T reaction to run at a lower temperature or by including the energy of the neutrons in the calculation shifts the power density advantage to D–T. The most common assumption is to compare power densities at the same pressure, choosing the ion temperature for each reaction to maximize power density, and with the electron temperature equal to the ion temperature. Although confinement schemes can be and sometimes are limited by other factors, most well-investigated schemes have some kind of pressure limit. Under these assumptions, the power density for p–11B is about times smaller than that for D–T. Using cold electrons lowers the ratio to about 700. These numbers are another indication that aneutronic fusion power is not possible with mainline confinement concepts. == See also ==