Alternative fusion devices: Difference between revisions

From FusionWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
Line 14: Line 14:
* [http://www.generalfusion.com/ General Fusion]
* [http://www.generalfusion.com/ General Fusion]
* [http://lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/ LPP Fusion] Dense Plasma Focus
* [http://lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/ LPP Fusion] Dense Plasma Focus
* Compact Fusion (Lockheed Martin, Skunkworks)<ref>[http://news.sciencemag.org/physics/2014/10/updated-are-old-secrets-behind-lockheeds-new-fusion-machine|''Updated: Are old secrets behind Lockheed's new fusion machine?'', Science, 17 October 2014]</ref>
* [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/compact-fusion.html Compact Fusion] (Lockheed Martin, Skunkworks)<ref>[http://news.sciencemag.org/physics/2014/10/updated-are-old-secrets-behind-lockheeds-new-fusion-machine|''Updated: Are old secrets behind Lockheed's new fusion machine?'', Science, 17 October 2014]</ref>


== References ==
== References ==
<references />
<references />

Revision as of 06:24, 18 October 2014

Economically viable energy production based on nuclear fusion in a magnetic confinement device has not been demonstrated yet. The mainstream tokamak, stellarator, spheromak and Reversed Field Pinch designs may achieve energy production by fusion in the future, but it remains to be seen whether these designs will lead to economically viable and attractive power plants, as fusion reactors based on these designs will almost certainly need to be very large.

Given this situation, there is considerable interest in developing alternative designs with the goal of achieving fusion at lower cost by exploiting hypothetical improved confinement properties, which would allow a reduced size of the power plant. [1] Currently, none of the alternative designs have achieved these potential benefits.

Alternative designs and associated companies

References