Presented at 1998 APS Plasma Physics Conference

Fundamental Limitations
On Advanced-Fuel Fusion

Todd H. Rider

November 19, 1998

Abstract
Several fundamental physical limitations which apply to a very broad
range of advanced-fuel fusion approaches will be considered. [1,2] Effects
to be discussed include bremsstrahlung radiation and particle scattering
due to ion-ion, ion-electron, and electron-electron collisions. A variety of
advanced fuels will be considered, including D-3 He, 3 He-3 He, p-1 1B, and
p-6 Li. Results will be given for fusion plasmas which are substantially out
of thermodynamic equilibrium, as well as for plasmas which are close to
equilibrium.

[1] T.H. Rider, Ph.D. thesis, MIT (1995).

[2] T.H. Rider, Phys. Plasmas 4, 1039 (1997).

1
Yet each man kills the thing he loves,
By each let this be heard,
Some do it with a bitter look,
Some with a flattering word,
The coward does it with a kiss,
The brave man with a sword!

--Oscar Wilde,
“The Ballad of Reading Gaol”
Part I, Stanza 7 (1898)

2
 Outline
• Basic approach and assumptions

• Fundamental constraints on all foreseeable reactors

1. Possible fusion fuels

2 . Bremsstrahlung radiation power loss from

plasmas in thermodynamic equilibrium

3 . Minimum power to keep plasmas out of

thermodynamic equilibrium

• Conclusions

- Fusion schemes which cannot work

- Best remaining schemes

3
 Approach
• Focus on design-independent fundamental
physical constraints and make calculations as
broadly applicable as possible.

• Fusion power, bremsstrahlung power, and

collisional energy transfer rate are all µÚd3x
[n(x)]2, so their ratios are independent of density,
density profiles, and plasma volume (apart from
weak density dependence of Coulomb log).

• Assume regions of appreciable Úd 3x [n(x)]2 are

approximately isotropic, to prevent Weibel,
counterstreaming, and other instabilities. (Effects
of anisotropy will be discussed too.)

• Assume fuel ion energy is the only source of

energy for the electrons. (Optimistic assumption.)

• Assume plasma is quasineutral and optically thin

to bremsstrahlung. (It is not helpful to violate
those assumptions--see author’s thesis for details.)

4
 Constraint 1: Possible Reactions
Reactions to be considered in this work:

• D + T Æ 4He (3.5 MeV) + n (14.1 MeV)

• D + D Æ T (1.01 MeV) + p (3.02 MeV) [50%]

Æ 3He (0.82 MeV)+ n (2.45 MeV) [50%]
[Can derive further energy from T and 3He.]

• D + 3He Æ 4He (3.6 MeV) + p (14.7 MeV)

[D+D side reactions.]

• 3He + 3He Æ 4He + 2 p (12.9 MeV total)

• p + 11B Æ 3 4He (8.7 MeV total)

• p + 6Li Æ 4He (1.7 MeV) + 3He (2.3 MeV)

[Can derive further energy from 3He.]

Reactions not considered further here (significant

neutron production and difficulty in burning):
• D + 6Li Æ 2 4He (22.4 MeV total)
[Neutrons from D+D and D+6Li side reactions.]
• p + 7Li Æ 2 4He (17.3 MeV total) [20%]
Æ 7Be + n (-1.6 MeV net) [80%]
• p + 9Be Æ 4He + 6Li (2.1 MeV total)

5
Constraint 2: Bremsstrahlung Power Loss
Input
energy

Ions High-energy ions Fusion

acquire collide and fuse output
energy energy
(Pfus)

Ion-electron energy
transfer (Pie)

Electrons
acquire
energy

High-energy electrons emit soft X-ray

bremsstrahlung radiation (Pbrem)

Energy
loss

• Pbrem/Pfus is essentially independent of fusion

design for plasmas in thermodynamic equilibrium.
• Pbrem cannot be reflected back and reabsorbed.
• Pbrem cannot be converted at high efficiency.

6
 Ion-Electron Energy Transfer (Pie),
Bremsstrahlung (Pbrem), and
Fusion (Pfus) Powers for p+11B

• Pbrem/Pfus=1.74 in equilibrium (Pie=Pbrem).

• Optimum conditions (Ti=300 keV and 5:1 p:11B).
• lnL=15 (optimistic for magnetic confinement).
• Includes relativistic corrections and ion-induced
partial depletion of slow electrons.
• Relatively insensitive to changes in Pie and Pbrem
formulas--would need to reduce Pie by ~50x or
Pbrem by ~5x for feasible power production.

7
 Bremsstrahlung Losses in Equilibrium
Fuel <Ei> <Ee> Pbrem/Pfus
D+T (1:1) 75 keV 63 keV 0.007
3
D+ He (1:1) 150 keV 110 keV 0.19
D+D 750 keV 314 keV 0.35
3
He+3He 1500 keV 411 keV 1.39
11
p+ B (5:1) 450 keV 206 keV 1.74
6
p+ Li (3:1) 1200 keV 384 keV 4.81

• <Ei>=(3/2)Ti and <Ee>=(3/2)Te.

• <Ee> found by setting Pie=Pbrem.

• Optimized <Ei> and fuel ratio.

• Coulomb logarithm lnL=15.

• Assumes no burnup of D+D and p+6Li products

(3He or T breeders). Burnup improves D+D and
makes p+6Li marginal at best.

• Now we will examine plasmas which are kept

significantly out of thermodynamic equilibrium...

8
Interesting Types of Nonequilibrium Plasmas
I. Isotropic, non-Maxwellian velocity distributions.
f(v)

vts
vtf

0 v0 v

A. Electrons with:
• slow electrons (v<v0~ion thermal speed) depleted
to reduce ion-electron energy transfer.
• nearly Maxwellian shape (v0<<vtf~electron
thermal speed) to be easy to maintain.
B. Beamlike ions or electrons (vt≡vts=vtf>>v0) as in
colliding-beam fusion, inertial-electrostatic
confinement, etc.

II. Plasma with different particle species at

radically different temperatures/mean energies.
A. Lower electron temperature to reduce
bremsstrahlung.
B. Two fuel ion species at different energies to boost
fusion reactivity and minimize side reactions.

9
 Constraint 3: Minimum Recirculating Power
Needed to Maintain Nonequilibrium Plasmas
To maintain a non-Maxwellian distribution despite
collisions, a minimum recirculating power must be
extracted from particles which have become too fast
and given to particles which have become too slow.
f(v,t=0) f(v,t>0) if collisional
f(v) effects are not
counteracted

v
accelerate slow particles decelerate fast particles
Ê∂fˆ
Ë∂t¯col
N slow vd Nfast
v
N slow Nfast
add extract
energy energy

Precirc
•
Precirc ≡ Ú (dv 4pv2) (mv2/2) (∂f/∂t)col Q[J(v)] ,
0
where J(v) is the particle flux in velocity space due
to collisions:
(∂f/∂t)col = -—v⋅J(v) .

10
 Minimum Recirculating Power Needed
To Deplete Slow Electrons
Fuel <Ei> <Ee> Pbrem/Pfus Precirc/Pfus
3
D+ He 150 keV 39 keV 0.093 5.2
D+D 750 keV 170 keV 0.18 2.6
3
He+3He 1500 keV 160 keV 0.50 5.6
11
p+ B 450 keV 35 keV 0.50 52
6
p+ Li 1200 keV 22 keV 0.50 330

• Applies to all recirculation methods--direct

electric converters, resonant heating systems, etc.

• Foreseeable methods may need to recirculate even

more than this power, due to difficulty with fine
manipulation of particles in phase space.

• Foreseeable methods will lose too much power

during recirculation to be feasible.

• It is not very desirable to have to recirculate

Precirc>>Pfus even with an efficient recycling system.

• The power required to maintain beamlike electrons

is even larger.

11
 Minimum Recirculating Power Needed
To Maintain Beamlike Ions

Fuel <Ei>Precirc/Pfus Precirc/Pfus

for v0/vt=2 for v0/vt=10
D+T 75 keV 0.3 3
3
D+ He 150 keV 2 20
D+D 750 keV 1.1 9.6
3
He+3He 1500 keV 4.3 38

• At best ions can only be kept in a modestly non-

Maxwellian state, and then only for D+T and
maybe D+D.

• Collisional effects are much faster than fusion

reactions (tfus~100-1000tion collisions), so anisotropic
systems will have this same problem (as well as
instabilities).

• For ion species with isotropic velocity

distributions and the same mean energy, beamlike
distributions would have approximately the same
fusion reactivity as Maxwellian distributions--no
advantage. (See author’s thesis for details.)

12
 Minimum Recirculating Power Needed
To Actively Cool Electrons

Fuel ions (high energy)

Pie Precirc=Pie-Pbrem

Electrons (low energy)

Pbrem

Fuel <Ei> <Ee> Pbrem/Pfus Precirc/Pfus

3
D+ He 150 keV 39 keV 0.093 1.9
D+D 750 keV 170 keV 0.18 0.9
3
He+3He 1500 keV 160 keV 0.50 6.2
11
p+ B 450 keV 35 keV 0.50 33
6
p+ Li 1200 keV 22 keV 0.50 320

• Prohibitive to actively cool electrons below

equilibrium temperature to reduce bremsstrahlung.
• Isotropy assumption not needed--Pie remains same
if ion or electron velocity distributions anisotropic
but symmetrical. (See author’s thesis for details.)
• All other approaches to reduce Pbrem -- applied
electromagnetic fields, operation without electrons,
etc. -- also fail. (See thesis for details.)

13
 Minimum Recirculating Power To Keep
Two Ion Species at Different Energies
• Two fuel ion species i1 and i2 equilibrate in mean
energy long before they fuse (tfus~100-1000ti1-i2).

• Maintaining significant energy difference requires

active power recirculation by some mechanism.

• No assumptions about isotropy--collisions only

depend on speed of fast ions relative to slow ions.

i1 fuel ions (high energy)

Pi1-i2 Precirc=Pi1-i2

i2 fuel ions (low energy)

p+11B at reaction resonance peak:

• Eprotons = 620 keV >> Eboron (optimum conditions)
• Monoenergetic ions and lnL=15 (optimistic)
• Pi1-i2/Pfus=1.4

D+3He with cold D to suppress D+D side reactions:

• Ehelium = 675 keV >> Edeuterium (optimum conditions)
• Monoenergetic ions and lnL=15 (optimistic)
• Pi1-i2/Pfus=2

14
 Approaches That Cannot Work At All*:
• Any highly nonequilibrium system without means of
recirculating power to stay out of equilibrium (e.g.
colliding-beam fusion reactor1, migma2, inertial-
electrostatic confinement3, and Polywell4).
• Any highly nonequilibrium system with means of
recirculating power to stay out of equilibrium (e.g.
multipolar traps that remove thermalized particles5).
• Any (equilibrium or nonequilibrium) system using
3
He+3He, p+11B, or p+6Li as fuel (e.g. Plasmak6 and
p+11B inertial-confinement fusion7).
• Any D+3He system which attempts to be cleaner
than those which will be described next.

*
Loopholes for future research:
• Very efficient, “hands-off” methods of recirculating
power to keep plasmas out of equilibrium.
• New reactions or new catalytic methods.
1
N. Rostoker, M. Binderbauer, & H. Monkhorst, Science 278, 1419-1422 (1997).
2
B.C. Maglich, Nuclear Instruments and Methods A271, 13-36 (1988).
3
R.L. Hirsch, Journal of Applied Physics 38, 4522-4534 (1967).
4
R.W. Bussard and N.A. Krall, Fusion Technology 26, 1326-1336 (1994).
5
D.C. Barnes, R.A. Nebel, and L. Turner, Phys. Fluids B 5, 3651-3660 (1993).
6
P.M. Koloc, Fusion Technology 15, 1136-1141 (1989).
7
G.H. Miley et al, Fusion Technology 19, 43-51 (1991).

15
Best D+3He Performance in Equilibrium:
Neutron Power Fraction (a) and
Bremsstrahlung Power Loss Fraction (b)
• Ti = 100 keV (optimum)
• Te determined by Pie = Pbrem
• Optional burnup of bred tritium (T)

16
 Summary

It has been shown that:

• Essentially any plasma fusion system operating

substantially out of thermodynamic equilibrium is
intrinsically incapable of producing net power.

• Essentially any plasma fusion system employing

advanced aneutronic fuels is intrinsically
incapable of producing net power.

• The only feasible fusion fuels are D+T, D+D, and

D+3He, which must be burned in or near
equilibrium.

Directions for future research:

• Attractive novel reactions.

• Efficient new methods of catalyzing reactions.

• Highly efficient methods of recirculating power in

nonequilibrium plasmas.

17
 Recommended Reading
1 . T. H. Rider, Fundamental Limitations on Plasma
Fusion Systems Not in Thermodynamic Equilibrium
(Ph.D. thesis, 306 pp., MIT, 1995).

2. T. H. Rider, Fundamental Limitations on Plasma Fusion

Systems Not in Thermodynamic Equilibrium. Physics
of Plasmas 4, 1039-1046 (1997).

3. T. H. Rider, A General Critique of Inertial-Electrostatic

Confinement Fusion Systems, Physics of Plasmas 2,
1853-1872 (1995).

4. T. H. Rider and P. J. Catto, Modification of Classical

Spitzer Ion-Electron Energy Transfer Rate for Large
Ratios of Ion to Electron Temperatures, Physics of
Plasmas 2, 1873-1885 (1995).

Contact Information
Questions, comments, suggestions, funding, or general
outrage may be directed to:

Dr. Todd H. Rider

MIT Lincoln Laboratory
E-118E
244 Wood Street
Lexington, MA 02420
(781) 981-0559
thor@LL.MIT.EDU

18
 Cleanest Foreseeable Fusion Reactors
3 GWtotal (<1 GWelectric) equilibrium D+3He reactor
with complete tritium burnup:
• 150 MW of mainly 14-MeV neutrons (5% of total
power); they activate and degrade reactor structure.
• 500 MW of X-rays (17% of total power).
• High-flux, high-energy neutron output is a serious
nuclear weapons proliferation hazard.

3 GWtotal (<1 GWelectric) equilibrium D+3He reactor

with no tritium burnup (let T decay in “wine cellar”):
• 30 MW of 2.45-MeV neutrons (1% of total power).
• 500 MW of X-rays (17% of total power).
• 2 billion Curies of tritium in steady state; additional
radioactive inventory from neutron activation.
• Tritium and neutrons are proliferation hazards.

Breeding 3He fuel also requires radioactive facilities.

3 GWtotal (1 GWelectric) fission reactor for comparison:

• 70 MW of 2-MeV-ish neutrons (2% of total
power), but they mostly stay in the fuel.
• 2 billion Curies of total radioactive inventory.
• Much less of a proliferation hazard.

19