backtop


Print 48 comment(s) - last by gagetman.. on Jul 24 at 8:53 AM


  (Source: nydailynews.com)

  (Source: infrastructurists.com)
New York man builds nuclear reactor in warehouse, hoping to make the "holy grail" of energy production.

Mark Suppes, a web designer for Gucci, has a unique night job. Suppes is working to harness the power of the sun in a way that can help fuel the world. As the U.S. contemplates its nuclear future and other countries around the world look to harness nuclear power, the 32-year-old works to build a sustainable nuclear reactor in his Brooklyn neighborhood.  

Suppes tinkers around on his pet project in a warehouse across from residential apartments on a tree-lined street.  It is perfectly safe, say experts, and as long as the parts are purchased legitimately, it is all perfectly legal in the U.S.

Nuclear fusion doesn't rely on radioactive material and would be a clean power source.  It does not require uranium or plutonium fuel, which are required for nuclear fission reactions. 

Suppes has used $35,000 of his own funds and $4,000 that he received from investors to purchase parts that he bought on eBay for the project. 

According to
BBC News, Suppes goal is to build a device that produces more energy than it takes to power it; a goal that scientists have been trying to achieve for more than 50 years.

"I was inspired because I believed I was looking at a technology that could actually work to solve our energy problems, and I believed it was something that I could at least begin to build," Suppes told the
BBC.

"I really started from scratch.  I was a web developer. I've always been interested in this. It's exciting. I've learned so much and mastered so many skills that I didn't know about before."

Suppes uses a bubble detector to pinpoint the energy, which has been hard to detect.   The bubble detector is gel-filled.  A leftover neutron travels through the gel when fusion occurs and a bubble is created.   Suppes recorded an emergence of four bubbles in less than three hours in early June.  He believes that he achieved fusion at this time.

Bill Gates has made plans to collaborate with Toshiba to create a nuclear reactor that wouldn't need to be refueled for 100 years.

Suppes is the 38th independent amateur physicist in the world recognized as creating a working fusion reactor.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

wont happen
By shin0bi272 on 6/29/2010 3:16:57 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
According to BBC News, Suppes goal is to build a device that produces more energy than it takes to power it; a goal that scientists have been trying to achieve for more than 50 years.


I did some research into this and to produce an actual fusion reaction at the temp of our sun only at stp here on earth... the plasma in the chamber would have to be on the order of 15 trillion degrees. That's because of the ratio of temperature and pressure. The sun is 1.3 million times the size of earth so the pressure at the center of the sun is way higher than we can create here on earth (hence why its been 50 years and no nuclear fusion). So in order to compensate for the lack of pressure we are using increased temperatures. The highest temp plasma weve been able to create is just under a billion degrees (like 900 million) and only for a fraction of a second at that. So if you put the standard temperature and pressure into the equation (I forget its name off the top of my head) and solve for temperature you get a very large 15 trillion some odd degrees.

Granted the break even point will be much lower than that but in order to create enough electricity from the mini sun (what we'll call created break even) you will have to have the reaction sustained for a long time. I say CBE will require a long time because the mini sun will be used to heat water and possibly be surrounded by solar panels (though I dont know if thats really possible since the plasma has to be held away from the walls by huge magnets I dont know where they'd put the solar panels in the thing). So the amount of electricity that has to be created via steam turbines is much greater than the measurable amount given off at that break even point. Meaning they will have to sustain the reaction for months uninterrupted (or aided) to make it viable as an energy source. Right now they can only sustain the reaction for a few seconds and the governments of the world have spent billions of dollars doing it.. this web designer wont do jack squat in his garage.




RE: wont happen
By sprockkets on 6/29/10, Rating: 0
RE: wont happen
By BZDTemp on 6/30/2010 3:51:19 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
this web designer wont do jack squat in his garage


Could be but I'm sure he has fun doing so :-)

I see no harm in people thinkering with this even if their chances are like 0% some ideas could still come of it.

Besides if he ever gets close he will right on the hit list of big oil.


RE: wont happen
By Regected on 6/30/2010 10:28:06 AM , Rating: 5
The laws of thermodynamics are based on Newtonian physics, which does no always hold up to quantum physics. Pressure is nothing more than the number of instances in which two subatomic particles collide in a nondestructive manner. By thinking outside the box, an inventive and novel way to overcome this temperature requirement will be achieved.

As a side note, I hate nay sayers to people trying something outside the norm. If we stayed with what the scientific community said was certain, we would still believe the world is flat, that the earth is still the center of the universe and that the sound barrier could never be broken. By looking outside of the box, human kind has found these things to be false; who knows what discoveries lay just beyond the horizon.


RE: wont happen
By Suntan on 6/30/2010 1:55:56 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Pressure is nothing more than the number of instances in which two subatomic particles collide in a nondestructive manner.


Actually pressure is the interaction at the molecular level. Which is substantially larger than the sub-atomic level. But otherwise, your rant was headed in the right direction.

-Suntan


RE: wont happen
By icanhascpu on 7/3/2010 1:04:48 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
If we stayed with what the scientific community said was certain


Wrong. The scientific method directly contradicts what you implied to its very core.

quote:
Scientific method refers to a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.


RE: wont happen
By Dewey115 on 6/30/2010 8:22:49 PM , Rating: 2
Actually earlier this year the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider produced a plasma that had a temperature recorded over 7 trillion degrees fahrenheit.


Cherenkov Radiation
By Klinky1984 on 6/29/2010 8:11:06 PM , Rating: 2
It's a little concerning that the stock photo below his pic looks to have Cherenkov radiation emanating from it...




RE: Cherenkov Radiation
By QuantumPion on 6/30/2010 8:45:39 AM , Rating: 3
That picture is ridiculously unrelated to the story in any way.

It is a picture of a core barrel, which is basically the inside lining of a nuclear fission reactor pressure vessel. It is the structure which holds the fuel in place, and it tends to become fairly hot (radioactive wise) after decades of high neutron exposure. That is why it is glowing with Cerenkov light.


RE: Cherenkov Radiation
By Suntan on 6/30/2010 1:58:02 PM , Rating: 4
hmmm.... Ice cold bottle of Cerenkov light...

-Suntan


RE: Cherenkov Radiation
By Alexvrb on 7/4/2010 2:13:30 PM , Rating: 1
I prefer Nuka-Cola Quantum, myself.


This isn't news
By cochy on 6/29/2010 3:46:05 PM , Rating: 5
People try this all the time. When someone actually figures out how to build a proper fusion reactor let us know because that will be news.

Probably won't be this guy.




RE: This isn't news
By Ammohunt on 6/30/2010 2:45:24 PM , Rating: 2
Nope it will be Kim Jong il


RE: This isn't news
By erple2 on 7/1/2010 8:15:08 PM , Rating: 2
Meh. Emma Russell has already done it.


Don't worry...
By PeaJay on 6/29/2010 9:19:42 PM , Rating: 2
Apple already has a patent on it and will be suing the guy as soon as he is successful.

Then the iNuke will be born! And it will be magical!!




RE: Don't worry...
By lamerz4391 on 7/2/2010 12:38:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Then the iNuke will be born! And it will be magical!!


... and revolutionary. Don't forget that part.


Fission or Fusion?!
By ksherman on 6/29/2010 2:53:18 PM , Rating: 3
Article doesn't mention either until a passing reference in the fourth graf!!




By gotincon on 6/29/2010 8:00:51 PM , Rating: 3
I guess it is just his location. Anyone with enough money and a desire to do it can. I applaud his effort however and can only hope the story gets a few more minds hooked on physics.

Anyone who wants to do this just visit fusor.net. I know someone halfway down on the list of 34.




Anything is possible...
By sleepeeg3 on 6/30/2010 2:54:14 AM , Rating: 2
...if North Korea can do it!




Dr Octupus?
By vapore0n on 6/30/2010 8:01:37 AM , Rating: 2
I hope SpiderMan is ready to tackle this guy the moment he goes crazy.




fusion reaction
By gagetman on 7/24/2010 8:45:26 AM , Rating: 2
Hey Guys, All you educated people with all the letters after your name,think about this.
Fusion reaction/energy is working fine right now! {THE SUN} Somehow this got started. It can be duplicated!!
Think outside the box!




This isn't news
By cochy on 6/29/2010 3:46:11 PM , Rating: 1
People try this all the time. When someone actually figures out how to build a proper fusion reactor let us know because that will be news.

Probably won't be this guy.




By rvd2008 on 6/29/2010 5:32:00 PM , Rating: 1
reminds me of crappy childish LED "enhanced" PC fans.
So much of nuclear. On the other hand, if somebody wants to waste his (and other suckers) money and time - good luck!
But why should we read about such suckers on DT? On a daily basis? Site renaming should be in order. I suggest DTS - DailyTech for Suckers .




Wait...
By FaceMaster on 6/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: Wait...
By FaceMaster on 6/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: Wait...
By MozeeToby on 6/29/2010 2:24:48 PM , Rating: 4
Because this sort of reactor doesn't produce usable amounts of energy. Getting atoms to fuse isn't that hard (well, it's not easy but not out of the reach of an amateur physicist/engineer). It's getting a nuclear reaction that emits more energy than you put into it in the first place. This particular kind of reactor has been scientifically proven to be energy negative, regardless of how much you improve the basic design.

They're handy to use as a neutron source for various other experiments, but they'll never produce a watt of energy.


RE: Wait...
By amanojaku on 6/29/2010 2:42:20 PM , Rating: 4
Just for that you don't get a Mr. Fusion for Christmas. :-P


RE: Wait...
By Obujuwami on 6/29/2010 3:38:38 PM , Rating: 1
BUT BUT BUT HOW WILL I POWER MY FLUX CAPACITOR?!?!?

Interesting lab experiment but otherwise I vote we wait till we can steal fusion tech from aliens....or Russia, who ever develops it first.


RE: Wait...
By gagetman on 7/24/2010 8:53:01 AM , Rating: 2
When you fuse the hydrogen atoms you must do this protected in a magnetic environment that can hold the extreme temp.This is done with the sun by extreme gravity. Figure this problem out and you have your reactor.Good luck.


RE: Wait...
By ChrisHF on 6/29/2010 2:24:20 PM , Rating: 2
The radioactive stuff actually works for producing more energy than it takes in.


RE: Wait...
By tastyratz on 6/29/2010 4:08:57 PM , Rating: 2
ish,
I suppose you might consider costed spent energy different from total energy consumed. It emits more energy than WE put into it to create the process, but the uranium itself is consumed. We are releasing and reforming existing energy in the atom. Just like a hydro electric power plant changes water movement energy into electricity, nuclear fission releases existing energy translating it to another form (our end goal of electricity). We have yet to find the free lunch.


RE: Wait...
By surt on 6/29/2010 4:27:39 PM , Rating: 2
In terms of making a power plant, it's net energy yield that matters. In a water plant, water moves down, in a wind plant, wind slows down, in a fission plant, matter is lost. Since energy conservation is a rule of the universe to the best of our knowledge, it's useless to talk about what are, to our civilization, the essentially 'free' inputs.

The specific problem with fusion reactors today is that they all have a substantial, non-free to our civilization input: massive amounts of energy in the form of electrical current. There is only one fusion experiment that has even broken even on the electrical input <= electrical output equation.


RE: Wait...
By Spivonious on 6/29/2010 2:29:21 PM , Rating: 2
I believe the reason that these aren't appearing as power plants is because they currently require more power to start the reaction than they produce.


RE: Wait...
By Pjotr on 6/30/2010 8:30:59 AM , Rating: 2
No, fusion reactors still requires more energy to *run* than it produces. It takes energy to run it still, not just to start it. If it would run forever after starting, we'd be setting pretty.


RE: Wait...
By Aenslead on 6/29/2010 2:32:48 PM , Rating: 1
I love the combination - Gucci web designer and possible world-ecology-energy savior.

I hope his project sees the light and anxiously wait for the day we no longer need fossil fuel.


RE: Wait...
By MozeeToby on 6/29/2010 2:41:24 PM , Rating: 3
The article doesn't mention what kind of reactor he has built but given the low price point, very slow rate of fusion, and the fact that internet research was sufficient to design and build it the reactor is almost defiantly a Farnsworth Fusor (and before you ask: no, not that Farnsworth but rather the scientist he is named after).

In other words there is no theoretical model that will allow this reactor to break even. Because of the way it works, even assuming the best conditions and the best fuel, it will always produce less energy than you put into it. Sadly, this Gucci web designer isn't going to be revolutionizing world energy production any time soon.


RE: Wait...
By kmmatney on 6/29/2010 2:47:31 PM , Rating: 2
There was this statement: "Suppes is working to harness the power of the sun in a way that can help fuel the world."

Maybe the use of solar power is the key here.


RE: Wait...
By Leper Messiah on 6/29/2010 2:55:43 PM , Rating: 2
I think the article is referencing the fact that stars operate on nuclear fusion.


RE: Wait...
By supermitsuba on 6/29/2010 3:11:36 PM , Rating: 3
"Some people even call me crazy! And why? Because I dared to dream ... of my own race of atmic monsters! Atomic supermen with octagonal shaped bodies!!" - Prof. Farnsworth


RE: Wait...
By HoundRogerson on 6/29/2010 4:15:20 PM , Rating: 2
I do believe it is a Farnsworth, from what I remember reading in a NY-based news thread on this.

And those of us that have posted about this thing being harmless are correct. The "reactor" doesn't use nuclear fuel, just deuterium, and doesn't generate enough power to even light a single bulb from a string of Christmas lights.

However, I'll say right now, that this sounds like a really fun DIY project, and I wish I had enough money to start building one myself. Not to try and make something that actually works, but to enjoy a challenge of seeing how far I get.


RE: Wait...
By surt on 6/29/2010 3:51:31 PM , Rating: 3
It's not dangerous, at all, yet, because basically what he has doesn't do anything useful. He has a supply of water, and some way of encouraging fusion that has resulted in 4 fusion events. His invention will be useful (and quite dangerous) when he gets to somewhere in the neighborhood of 10^30 fusion events. It wont even pass the background radiation from the solar wind for another few orders of magnitude.


'New Age' Science
By MikeBurtner on 6/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: 'New Age' Science
By MozeeToby on 6/29/2010 3:21:20 PM , Rating: 5
This isn't called cold fusion because it isn't cold fusion. Words in science have specific meanings. In this case, though the fusion is taking place at essentially room temperature, they individual atoms that are being fused have a lot of energy injected into them and are therefor 'hot'. In actual cold fusion experiments the atoms don't have a large amount of energy and are therefore 'cold'.

The probability of two cold atoms fusing is close enough to zero that the whole idea of cold fusion is laughed at (though recent research is showing that something is going on that we don't quite understand yet, it almost definitely isn't fusion). The probability of two 'hot' atoms confined by an electric field will fuse is low (too low for net power generation), but not impossibly so. Devices very similar to what this guy built are used as neutron sources for a lot of experiments, there are even companies that specialize in making them for scientific purposes.


RE: 'New Age' Science
By JonnyDough on 6/30/2010 5:33:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Words in science have specific meanings.


That made me LOL.


RE: 'New Age' Science
By sviola on 6/29/2010 3:37:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Perhaps someone will discover a great use for this phenomenon through so much 'research',


But there is a great use you are not seeing:

Provide the "inventor" with his 15 minutes of "success"...


RE: 'New Age' Science
By iceonfire1 on 6/29/2010 4:18:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
cold fusion will never generate any more energy than a glass-filled 'dunking bird' novelty toy.


Lol, neither will a nuclear reactor, technically. I think fusion as a power source may actually be viable pretty soon, but from the efforts of people working on magnetic/inertial confinement techniques rather than commendable enthusiasts like this guy.


RE: 'New Age' Science
By Kyanzes on 7/3/2010 6:59:08 AM , Rating: 2
New hardware detected: USB mounted fusion reactor. Installing drivers.


RE: 'New Age' Science
By MadMan007 on 7/5/10, Rating: -1
"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive














botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki