>From an Arocket post
>> So far we haven't got He3 contained fusion, or indeed any
>> form of contained sustained fusion, and He3 is several
>> steps
>> up the hardness ladder from what we will see initially
>> with
>> contained controlled fusion.
> Why? Specifically, why is fusing He-3 with H-2 any harder
> than fusing H-3
> with H-2?
Far from my specialist topic. But ...
Coz that's what the experts say.
Higher energy levels.
Hotter.
More ..
Artemis project. Excellent You'll be sorry ...
http://www.asi.org/adb/02/09/_____________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium-3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium_fusion <- not
much use
Almost useful at low technical level
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/helium3_000630.html http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/gallery/pdf/space_com063000.pdfSlideshow.
You'll be sorry again ...
http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/neep533/FALL2001/lecture25.pdfThis team has one running.
Efficiency is 'a bit low" [tm]
http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2006/01/227-helium-3-fusion.htmlY don't buy no ugly slideshow (with many "images removed for
copyright reasons" )
FWIW Says reason Chinese want to do lunar access if for He3
mining.
http://ocw.mit.edu/NR/rdonlyres/Nuclear-Engineering/22-012Spring-2006/C3E48256-762A-49FF-9B18-1E5A5D39F89B/0/helium3_fusion.pdf--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist