Business Plan for the
Focus Fusion
2 MW Electricity Generation
Facility Development
Lawrenceville Plasma Physics
9 Tower Place
Lawrenceville, NJ 08648
609-406-7857
Eric J. Lerner
Project Director
elerner@igc.org
Version 7
Business Plan draft preparation assisted by
Thomas Valone
www.IntegrityResearchInstitute.org
Table of Contents
Executive Summary _____________________________________________________ 3
Advantages of Focus Fusion ______________________________________________ 8
How the Plasma Focus Works ____________________________________________ 9
Energy Conversion in Focus Fusion ______________________________________ 12
Energy Flow Sequence Diagram __________________________________________ 15
Feasibility of Focus Fusion ______________________________________________ 16
Project Objectives ______________________________________________________ 17
Project Tasks _________________________________________________________ 18
Projected Budget ______________________________________________________ 20
Market for Focus Fusion Energy _________________________________________ 21
Project Personnel ______________________________________________________ 27
APPENDIX
A Billion Degrees on Earth ________________________2Error! Bookmark not defined.
History of the Dense Plasma Focus (Focus Fusion) Development _______________ 29
Magnetic Field Effects __________________________________________________ 30
Executive Summary
In August, 2001, a small team of physicists led by Eric J. Lerner of Lawrenceville Plasma
Physics for the first time demonstrated the achievement of temperatures above one billion
degrees in a plasma focus device – high enough for hydrogen-boron fusion reactions.
Hydrogen-boron fusion with the plasma focus (focus fusion) can supply energy without
generating radioactive materials and at far less cost than any existing energy source.
Theory and experiment indicate that commercial energy production is possible with focus
fusion at costs well below 1 cent per kWh which will compete favorably with even the
best wholesale-market, off-peak, bundled electricity rates. This breakthrough,
subsequently reported at two international fusion conferences, took place at Texas A & M
University and was funded by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
Considering the importance of this revolutionary advance in energy technology, LPP
estimates very conservatively that the value of capital invested in LPP will increase at
least 15-fold over a 10-year period, an averaged rate of 31% per annum.
Lawrenceville Plasma Physics (LPP) is seeking funding to build the next stage prototype
fusion reactor, with knowledge gained from the initial successful experiment and the
solid, theoretical predictions. With initial funding of $2 million we will be able to set up
a new facility and start on a series of experiments that can complete the development of
an environmentally safe, cheap and unlimited energy source: hydrogen-boron fusion
using the plasma focus device. This lab work, Phase I of the project, lasting about 20
months, will confirm the predictions that this technology can produce net energy. Phase
II will develop the technology to the point of a commercially viable prototype. A
successful completion of Phase I will essentially assure commercial success, as no new
technology will be needed for Phase II. There is no other technology that can compete
with focus fusion as it will produce energy at costs far under any other process.
Therefore technical success will ensure commercial success. Total funding required by
LPP for Phase I and II of this project is $7 M.
LPP is optimistic that the funding for Phase I can be obtained in 2005 through an
Advanced Technology Project grant from the National Institute of Standards and
Technology(NIST). Our proposal for developing the plasma focus device as a powerful
source of x-rays was accepted by ATP as having "high technical merit", and the
experiments to be funded by that proposal, and the theory justifying them are essentially
identical with those needed to reach fusion break-even. However, our proposal was
rejected at the second "gate" because we gave insufficient detail on our plan for
commercialization of the x-ray technology and our other efforts to raise funds, omissions
that are easily remedied in our next year's application for the same grant. ATP officials
strongly encouraged LPP to re-apply in 2005. ATP does expect LPP to show some
continued technical progress in the intervening year.
Our current business plan is to raise a minimum of $72,000 from investors (some of
which is in hand) to finance our next year's operations, including the revision of the ATP
proposal and limited computer simulations needed to show continued technical progress.
We also intent to apply for other government grants with modifications of the ATP
proposal.
Experiments performed by LPP and collaborators have already demonstrated that the
billion-degree-plus temperature needed for hydrogen-boron fusion has been achieved
with this device. In addition, these experiments and earlier ones performed by LPP and
the University of Illinois have confirmed the theory of the plasma focus developed by
LPP President, Eric J. Lerner.
The new facility, to be located in New Jersey, will allow us to optimize the efficiency of
the focus device, to prove new theoretical predictions, and to demonstrate “break-even”
(energy in = energy out) with hydrogen-boron (decaborane) fuel. The experimental work
will be fully supported by cutting-edge computer simulations developed through a subcontract to leading researchers John Guillory of George Mason University and Robert
Terry of Naval Research Laboratory.
LPP is raising funds for its research program by selling non-voting shares. Because of the
exceptional nature of the technology, and the exceptional potential for economic rewards,
the inventor is maintaining control over the company to prevent any possible suppression
of this technology. LPP is privately offering up to 200,000 shares, as needed. The first
250 shares, were offered at $100 apiece. After the favorable developments with the NIST
grant, we feel the development risks are reduced and are now offering shares at $120. We
are encouraging investors to commit to quarterly investments for at least the period of the
next year to ensure covering our basic expenses. Shares are offered in minimum blocks of
25.
What Peer Reviewers for NIST said about the focus fusion research proposal
In a debriefing provided to LPP August 9, 2004, by Dr. Burabi Mazumdar, a NIST
physicist, LPP was given quotations from the technical review of our proposal, which
was accepted at this stage as "of high technical merit". The technical review was
performed by two NIST physicists and one at Department of Energy. Dr. Mazumdar said
that "there were no negative comments" on the technical review, which is a real vote of
confidence in LPP's scientific plans. Some comments that they quoted included:
"Technically the plan is very strong. The objective is truly revolutionary, yet the plan to
achieve it is feasible. The steps to the objective are clearly defined. The plan is based on
new, highly original theory and analysis. There is a good coordination of simulation and
experimentation. The optimization plan, while ambitious, is feasible."
Of course, the proposal that we have made to NIST is for an x-ray source, not a fusion
reactor. But ALL of the scientific assumptions, theories and techniques that lead us to
calculate that we can achieve net energy production with the focus fusion were included
in this proposal to justify the achievement of the x-ray goals. The physical conditions
that we are promising in order to produce the x-rays will also produce net fusion energy.
The proposal also emphasized that the research would advance fusion energy
development. So it is extremely significant that a US government peer review committee
has so strongly endorsed the scientific basis for our project and our technical plans.
In the experience of the debriefers, applications which pass gate 1 and then make the
changes required in the gate 2 proposal have "much higher chance" of getting the grant in
the second application than the first time around. Since two thirds of those who pass gate
1 the first time do get the grant, this means our chances next year are very high, much
higher than 2-1, if we can make ATP's requested changes in our commercialization plan.
Fusion Primer
Fusion of light nuclei, such as hydrogen, etc., releases the nuclear binding energy in the
form of neutrons and charged particles. The masses of the fused nuclei are always less
than the masses of the individual
nucleons of which they are composed,
where E=mc2 determines the
difference in mass-energy that is
released. D-T fusion of an isotope of
hydrogen (deuterium) with a another
radioactive isotope, (tritium) releases
about 14 MeV (million electron volts,
where 1 eV = 1.6 x 10-19 watt-seconds
(Joules)) in the form of a radiated
neutron , which can only heat water for
a steam generator. This D-T process is the basis of the extremely expensive and
unproductive fusion program pursued by major government programs, including that of
the United States. Hydrogen-boron fusion (p+11B) is clearly the most desirable style of
hot fusion, according to all nuclear experts . One reason for the high level of interest in
this technology is that it releases 8.7 MeV as the kinetic energy of charged alpha particles
(4He). This means that the energy can be directly converted to electricity without heating
water to produce steam, an enormous saving in costs. As well, the lack of high energy
neutrons means that pB11 can not induce radioactivity in the reactor structure. P+11B
fusion can be used for nuclear propulsion as a rocket thruster. Alternatively, the terrestrial
fusion reactor can easily convert the charged-particle energy end products into electricity,
with an estimated 90% efficiency. Therefore, the two major end products from the focus
fusion development are 1) compact electricity generators and 2) rocket thrusters.
Recent Developments
In February, 2004, Lawrenceville Plasma Physics completed a preliminary simulation of
plasmoids that burns proton-boron (pB11) fuel. Overall, the simulation results broadly
confirmed that net energy production is possible with a small focus fusion device. The
simulations were better than expected in that good energy production is projected at a
current of 2 MA (mega-amperes), well below the 3 MA we thought would be needed.
This makes it more certain we can reach very near these conditions with the device we
are planning for the next set of experiments.
Holding the final magnetic (B)
field at 6GG (giga-gauss), the
simulation showed that the
ratio of fusion yield/gross input
energy rose from 0.067% at
0.75MA to 5% at 1M to 24% at
1.5MA. This indicates the
break-even point requires only
a 24% fusion yield.
The net result is that for the
examples studied some
recovery of the x-ray energy, as
well as of the ion beam energy
is desirable for net energy
production. The optimum case
studied is for a current of 2.0 MA, cathode radius 3.3 cm, and final magnetic field 12 GG.
This simulation case produced a beam that carried 97% of input energy and x-rays that
carry 57% of input energy. In practical terms this means that if the beam energy recovery
efficiency is 90%, which is reasonable, net energy production occurs with x-ray energy
recovery rates above 22%, which is easily achievable. A 54% thermonuclear fusion
yield ratio to gross input energy is expected to be the threshold for net energy
production. Another practical energy-producing combination simulated used a 80%
beam recovery and 80% x-ray recovery for an overall efficiency of 43%. In this example,
the net electric energy production is 3.1 kJ per pulse or 3.1 MW for a 1kHz pulse rate,
exceeding the planned 2 MW prototype generator.
"The experimental program that LPP plans to carry out has great potential to show how
the plasma focus can be used to generate fusion energy and to demonstrate the feasibility
of hydrogen-boron fusion" Says Dr. Julio Herrera, physicist and professor at the National
Autonomous University of Mexico. "In addition, the experiments will investigate the
magnetic effect, which will be very exciting. Achieving giga-gauss magnetic fields with
the plasma focus, getting gyro-radii of the order of the electron Compton wavelength,
will certainly be new physics and will open up large new possibilities for energy
production."
Advantages of Focus Fusion
Fusion reactors using hydrogen-boron fuel and the plasma focus device, have several
great advantages over existing energy sources:
1. Focus fusion reactors are safe and environmentally sound. No long-term
radioactive by-products or pollutants are produced. The end-product is harmless
helium gas. Focus fusion reactors would be free of radioactivity and the small number
of low-energy neutrons emitted (less than 1/500th of total energy) could be easily
absorbed in several inches of shielding.
2. Focus fusion reactors are cheap. Almost all of the energy (98%) is released in the
motion of charged particles that can be converted to electricity directly, thereby
eliminating the need for generating steam to drive turbines, which account for most of
the cost of electricity today. Focus fusion-generated electricity costs are projected to
be as much as one hundred times less than present energy costs. Decaborane presently
costs $10 per gram which translates to 0.06 cents/kWh or about 1% of today’s
wholesale electricity. Mass production would reduce this price even further. In
comparison, the realized future tokamak design of fusion reactor, due to the
requirement for a steam generator, cannot reduce electricity costs at all.
3. Focus fusion reactors are small and decentralized. Focus fusion reactors can fit into
a residential garage and can be made as small as 2 MW, sufficient for a small
community.
4. Focus fusion energy is essentially unlimited. The raw materials for hydrogen-boron
fuel are exceedingly common and plentiful. Hydrogen comes from ordinary water and
boron from either abundant deposits or from sea-salt. Supplies of terrestrial boron are
sufficient to maintain overall power consumption ten times the present global level
for a billion years. The present industrial control of boron, which is restricted to only
a few companies, is not projected to offer a price fluctuation supply problem.
Comparison of Focus Fusion to the Tokamak
Reactor Type
Fuel
Fuel availability
Long-lived radioactivity
Radioactivity of structure
Power output per unit
Unit size
Capital Cost per kW
Electricity conversion
Plasma Focus Fusion
Hydrogen-boron
Abundantly available
None
None
2 MW and up
3x3x9 feet
$100 - $200
Direct induction
Tokamak
Deuterium-tritium
Tritium must be bred
Considerable
Considerable
500 MW and up
70x70x80 feet
$2000 – 3000
Steam cycle
How the Plasma Focus Works
Operation
In operation, a pulse of electricity from the input capacitor bank (an energy storage
device) is discharged into the plasma focus, which is inside a small vacuum chamber (see
Figure 1 and 5). The chamber is filled with a dilute gas, decaborane, fed from the fuel
chamber. (A kilogram of fuel will be sufficient for a year's operation.) The plasma focus
consist of two copper electrodes nested inside each other with the outer one consisting of
a circular array of rods and inner one is a single hollow copper rod (see Figure 4).
For a few millionths of a second, an intense current flows from the outer to the inner
electrode through the gas. Guided by the current's own magnetic field, the current forms
itself into a thin sheath of tiny filaments—little whirlwinds of hot, electrically-conducting
gas or plasma. The sheath travels to the end of the inner electrode, where the magnetic
fields produced by the currents, without external magnets, pinch and twist the plasma into
a tiny, dense ball or plasmoid only a few thousandths of an inch across (see figure
below). Within this plasmoid intense electrical fields are generated, causing it to emit a
beam of electrons in one direction and a beam of ions, or positively charged nuclei, in the
other. In the process the plasmoid heats itself to very high temperatures (over a billion
degrees K) and fusion reactions take place, before it decays in a few hundred-millionths
of a second.
Electric energy from the pulsed ion beam is
coupled through coils into an electrical circuit.
Fast switches direct the energy into the output
capacitor bank. Part of the energy is then be
recycled back to drive the next pulse, while the
excess, the net energy, is fed into a power grid.
A 2 MW prototype would pulse about 500 times
a second.
Fig. 1
Pinhole x-ray of plasmoid
Helium from the spent ion beam is exhausted to a
storage vessel. Excess heat is carried away by a
cooling system surrounding the vacuum
chamber.
The plasma focus process often refers to temperatures but plasma scientists more
accurately refer to the average energies of the electrons and ions in a plasma, which are
measured in electron volts (eV). An average energy of 100 keV (100,000 electron volts)
is equivalent to a temperature of 1.1 billion degrees.

K is the symbol for “Kelvin” in the absolute temperature scale. Room temperature is about 300 K.
Specifically, the plasma focus generates high energy x-rays, which indicate high energy
electrons colliding with ions. But until the recent Texas experiments, most scientists
thought that these x-rays were generated when the electron beam produced in the focus
smashes into the electrode, and thus did not indicate a truly "hot" plasmas. Based on
theoretical work by Mr. Lerner and others, the research team believed that the x-rays
would in fact be shown to come from the plasmoid and that the plasmoid could be
extremely hot. This theoretical work also indicated that higher gas fill densities would
help in getting to these high energies.
To find out where the x-rays came from, the Texas research team blocked the x-rays from
the electrode with a lead brick, so they could not reach a set of x-ray detectors. Only xrays from the tiny plasmoid could get to the detectors.
Measuring a Billion Degrees
Measuring the energy of the x-rays is done by seeing how much they were absorbed by
copper filters of various thickness—the less they were absorbed, the higher their energy.
By measuring the ratios of the signals from detectors with different filters, the energy of
the x-rays could be calculated. From the energy of the x-rays, the team can calculate the
energy of the electrons in the plasmoid.
They found that, indeed the plasma was truly “hot” and generating typical energies
ranging from 80 keV to 210 keV (equivalent to 900 million to 2.4 billion degrees),
depending on the filling gas used.
The researchers employed another technique to measure the energy of the ions. They
used deuterium gas in some shots, which produces neutrons through fusion reactions. By
measuring the spread in energy of the neutrons coming from the plasmoid, they could
calculate the energy of the ions that produced the neutrons. These energies ranged from
45 to 210 keV (500 million degrees to 2.4 billion degrees).
The team was able to measure the confinement time by observing the duration of the xray and neutron pulses, which were around 50 billionths of a second.
Plasma Density Measurement
Finally the researchers were able to calculate the density of the plasmoid. When a
deuterium nuclei fuses with another deuterium nuclei, half of the time they produce
tritium nuclei. These tritium nuclei are trapped by the powerful magnetic field of the
plasmoid and can then fuse again with the deuterium nuclei, producing a very energetic
neutron. The more dense the plasmoid, the faster this reaction goes. So by measuring the
number of high energy neutrons from the Deuterium-Tritium “D-T” reaction (about 70
million in the best shot) and comparing them with the number of low energy neutrons
from the Deuterium-Deuterium “D-D” reaction (about 10 billion in the same shot), the

Deuterium is “heavy hydrogen” with a neutron added to the nuclear proton of normal hydrogen, while
tritium has two neutrons and a proton in the nucleus.
team found that the density of the plasmoid was as high as 1.7x1021 ions/cm3, some 250
times more dense than the initial gas that filled the chamber.
The density-confinement time product was thus 9x1013 ions-sec/cm3, compared with
1.25x1013 ions-sec/cm3 for the best tokamak results to date.
8.00E+02
7.00E+02
x-ray power
electron energy #1
6.00E+02
electron energy #2
5.00E+02
Power
4.00E+02
3.00E+02
2.00E+02
1.00E+02
45
43
41
39
37
35
33
31
29
27
25
23
21
19
17
15
13
11
9
7
5
3
1
0.00E+00
Time
Fig. 2 X-ray power output (solid line), average electron energy (Te ) calculated (#1 above) from the
ratio of 6mm/300 micron-filtered output (dashed), T e calculated (#2 above) from the ratio of 3mm/330
micron-filtered output (dotted) for a single deuterium shot (shot 81705, 35 kV, 15 torr, 9x10 9 neutrons).
The two ratios show good agreement. T e is in keV (equivalent to units of 11 million degrees), while x-ray
output, measured by 300 micron-filtered detector, is in units of 350 W total emitted power. Time unit is
2ns on horizontal axis. Average T e for this pulse is 200keV (over 2 billion degrees), and T I , derived from
neutron time of flight measurement, is 300keV.

Note: This is the type of comparison with the tokamak that has been suppressed by Los Alamos and DOE.
Energy Conversion in Focus Fusion
Energy generated by the focus fusion device emerges in the form of a tightly collimated
ion beam with an energy of about 6 MeV, a pulse duration of a few nanoseconds, and a
current of about 300 kA (300,000 Amps). Average power delivered will initially be in the
area of 2MW. The technology to convert the energy of particle beams into electrical
energy in a circuit was developed during World War II to generate radar pulses. The
technology today is very mature, and can easily be modified for our purposes. The main
shift is to replace the electron beams used in radar technology with the ion beams, which
travel at about the same velocity, but have much higher energy due to the ions' much
greater mass. Devices that can produce several MW of output power at GHz frequencies
have been commercially available for many years.
The simplest way to capture the beam energy is with a traveling wave tube. In this
device the ion beam pulse travels down the center of a helical coil of wire. The electrons
in the coil, traveling near the speed of light, have to go much further around the coil than
do the ions traveling much more slowly in a straight line. With proper design, the
electrons form a "traveling wave" of electromagnetic energy that stays just behind the
pulse of the ions (which is a few centimeters long). In the process energy is transferred
from the ions to the electrons—the pull between them slows the ions down and
accelerates the electrons.
A typical traveling wave tube is about 30 cm long. For high efficiency, two traveling
wave tubes can be used in series. In this case, efficiency can be close to 80%. Another
device used for this purpose is the gyrotron, which is somewhat more complex, but
similar in principle. During development work on the focus fusion device, we would be
able to use the large body of knowledge about such devices to design an optimized one
for use with ion beams.
The wave of electrons in the helical coil can be used to produce a pulse of radio
frequency radiation. But in the case of a power plant, the current will be sent directly to
the next stage to be rectified. Without this rectification step, energy that flowed out of the
coil would turn around and flow back into it. In rectification, a fast switch closes after
the electric pulse passes, preventing the reverse flow. Diamond switches capable of
switching this much power this fast have recently been commercialized. These switches
use a thin film of diamond that is routinely manufactured. Diamond is an excellent
insulator, but when exposed to a brief pulse of ultraviolet laser light, it becomes a good
conductor. When the laser is turned off, the diamond reverts to being an insulator.
After flowing thorough the switch, the current flows into a set of extremely fast
capacitors, which charge up in a few nanoseconds. Then energy in the capacitors will
then be fed partly back to the input capacitors for the next cycle and partly to the output
grid as a DC current. Further routine conditioning can convert this DC current to a
normal 60 Hz AC current with commercial inverters. Total efficiency of combined
processing stages is projected to be above 60%, about double of existing commercial
electricity generation technology.
2 MW FOCUS FUSION PROTOTYPE GENERATOR
(Support structures and some cabling omitted for clarity)
Fuel Chamber
Input capacitors
and switches
Power input
Plasma Focus
Vacuum chamber and
coolant sleeve
Coolant in and out
Inductive energy
collector coil
Helium exhaust
Power conditioning
Unit
Output capacitors
And switches
Power output
Approximate dimensions: 3’ x 3’ x 9’ feet
Plasma Focus Generator #1
Eric Lerner
Figure 3
Feb., 2003
FOCUS FUSION CORE
Insulator
Plasma Sheath
and plasmoid
Anode (+)
Cathode (-)
(ring of thin rods)
Figure 4
Ion beam
Energy Flow Sequence Diagram
Electric pulse to electrodes
from input capacitors
High voltage
switching
relay control
panel
Filaments of strong electric current
and magnetic fields created in
plasma sheath between electrodes
Bulk motion of micron-sized
plasmoid increases magnetic field
Electron beam and ions (nuclei)
generated from plasmoid
Fusion kinetic energy created
from colliding ions
Ion beams exiting from plasmoid carry away
most of fusion-generated energy
Input
capacitors
store high
voltage
electricity
DC electricity
generated inductively
in adjacent coils,
drawing off 98% of
ion beam energy
Output electricity
conversion
through AC
inverter to power
company into $$$
Feasibility of Focus Fusion
Previous experiments at the University of Illinois has confirmed many of the detailed
predictions of the focus fusion theory (see Appendix). The new Texas experiments also
showed excellent agreement with the theoretical predictions of such important quantities
as the density, temperature and magnetic field within the plasma.
In addition, new theoretical work by LPP has demonstrated that extremely high magnetic
fields within the plasmoids of the plasma focus will drastically reduce x-ray cooling of
the plasmas. Such fields decrease the flow of energy from the reacting nuclei or ions to
the electrons. This reduces the electrons’ temperature and therefore the x-ray power they
emit. Cooler electrons radiate less x-ray energy, so the fusion power my be much larger
than x-ray losses, rather than just somewhat larger, as previous calculations had
indicated.
LPP’s Lerner presented these new theoretical and experimental results at the annual
meeting of the American Physical Society in April, 2003 (Philadelphia) and at the Fifth
Symposium on Current Trends in International Fusion Research in March, 2003
(Washington, DC). The Symposium in DC brought together the leading researchers in the
fusion field and was sponsored by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and
the Global Foundation, Inc. The new results of the Texas experiments were received with
great interest by the Symposium participants and will be published in the Proceedings of
the Fifth Symposium on Current Trends in International Fusion Research. The details of
the magnetic effect are presented in the Appendix.
Hydrogen-boron fusion is considered technically challenging because of the high
temperatures required. But that has changed as a result of the new experimental and
theoretical breakthroughs by LPP. The detailed theory developed by Eric Lerner shows
how design parameters can be achieved and the theory has received substantial
experimental confirmation. Furthermore, new calculations indicate that more compact
focus fusion devices with higher magnetic fields are possible. Therefore, the overall
feasibility is good.
As stated in the Executive Summary, the theory, calculations and projections that form
the basis of the focus fusion approach were reviewed by a peer review committee of the
Advanced Technology Program of the National Institute of Standards and Technology
and found to be "of high technical merit".
Project Objectives
Lawrenceville Plasma Physics’ objective is to achieve break-even (100% net efficiency)
with focus fusion (as much energy out as fed into the plasma). The next experiment will
take place at a new facility in New Jersey.
These experiments, which will take about a year and a half once the equipment is ready,
are aimed at achieving a number of goals essential to moving toward a focus fusion
reactor.
 First, they are aimed at optimizing the efficiency of energy transfer into the tiny
plasmoids. These are magnetically self-confined knots of dense, extremely hot plasma
where the fusion reactions take place.
 Second, the experiments will test the ability of the plasma focus to generate magnetic
fields in excess of a billion gauss (over a billion times the magnetic field of the earth.)
Such giga-gauss fields (megatesla) will reduce the amount of energy lost when hot
electrons emit x-rays. This in turn will allow the plasma to stay hotter and produce
more fusion energy.
 Third, the experiments will produce significant amounts of fusion energy from
hydrogen-boron fuel, which will directly pave the way for a future set aimed at
achieving break-even energy production.
The new plasma focus device that will be used for these experiments is physically small,
and will, together with its power supply, fit in a small room. However it will be capable
of producing 2 million amps of current in a short pulse, which will make it one of the
most powerful plasma focus devices in the world, comparable with the other two large
DPF in North America. In addition, it will be designed for small electrode size and high
magnetic fields beyond those that can be achieved at other facilities. The facility will be
designed to produce data that can be used for a variety of purposes in addition to the
priory one of fusion power. It will also be capable of simulating astrophysical
phenomena, such as quasars and neutron stars, and of investigations aimed at near-term
industrial applications of the plasma focus, such as the production of intense microwave
radiation.
The facility will be equipped with the most sophisticated set of diagnostic instruments in
the focus community. Data from the instruments will enable researchers to fully
characterize the plasma's size, temperature, and density and to test the theory of plasma
focus operation.
Project Tasks
Task 1. Purchase of equipment.
This task involves the purchase of the capacitor bank and the purchase of the switching
circuits and necessary diagnostic instruments.
Task 2. Theoretical calculations and design of electrodes and experiment.
Simultaneously with Task 1, Lawrenceville Plasma Physics will carry out extensive
theoretical calculations, especially on the new magnetic field effect, which will determine
the range of operating conditions for the experiments and the design of the electrodes.
Task 3. Assembly of Facility.
Once all equipment is one hand, the facility will be assembled, including fabrication of
the electrodes, assembly of the capacitors into the bank, integration of the switching
circuits, and assembly and positioning of the diagnostic instruments.
Task 4. Planning and Preparation for future experimental development stage
Simultaneously with Task 3, while the facility is being assembled, LPP will be planning
and making preparations for the Phase II development experiments, so that there will be
no break in work following completion of the first experimental tests. These plans will of
course be refined on the basis of the initial experimental results.
Task 5. Testing of facility and calibration of instruments
Once the facility is fully assembled, LPP will carry out a series of preliminary tests using
deuterium and helium fill gases to shake down the facility and to calibrate all the
instruments.
Task 6. First experimental set
The first set of confirmations will demonstrate the theory that higher efficiency of energy
transfer into the plasmoid or hot spot, can be achieved with higher run-down velocities
and a larger ratio of cathode/anode diameter, up to 5. Testing of tapered electrodes to
minimize inductance. Test with D, He or He-D mixtures, using 5 cm diameter cathodes.
As many as 10 anodes of different lengths, diameters, tapers and insulator lengths will be
tested, with the same cathode.
Task 7. Second experimental set
The second confirmation will demonstrate that DPF can achieve gigagauss magnetic field
in hot spots and that these fields can inhibit heating of electrons by ions. Some data
relevant to this test should be obtained in the first set of experiments. A second set would
aim at achieving the highest possible magnetic fields by reducing the diameters of the
cathode and anode, down to a 2.5 cm cathode diameter, maintaining the aspect ratio
optimized in task 5.
Task 8. Third experimental set
The third confirmation will show that using mixtures of He or H and p11B (decaborane)
can achieve pinches with this mixture and measure secondary neutrons indicating p11B
fusion. The goal will be to add p11B to an optimally function He or H gas, and the
gradually increase the p11B while seeking new optimal conditions.
Task 9. Fourth experimental set
The fourth confirmation will be runs with pure decaborane, based on optimized
conditions derived with mixtures, for comparison.
Task 10. Preparation of papers for publication.
Phase I Project Schedule – Gantt Chart
Task
Duration 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
1
6 Months
2
6 Months
3
3 Months
4
3 Months
5
2 Months
6
1 Month
7
1 Month
8
2 Months
9
3 Months
10
2 Months
Total 20 Months
LPP Projected Budget
Budget($1,000s)
Y1
Y2
Y3
1000
1000
1000
Y4
Y5
3000
3000
Y6
Y7
10000
10000
2500
18000
12500
28000
INCOME
Gov't
Grants
Licences
Royalties
TOTAL
1000
1000
1000
3000
3000
Salaries
320
320
440
1800
1800
2000
2000
Benefits
80
80
80
360
360
400
400
Travel
10
10
10
25
25
25
25
Rent
65
65
65
160
160
160
160
Utilities
30
30
30
60
60
60
60
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
20
10
10
20
20
20
20
Shipping
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Maint./supplies
9
11
26
26
26
26
26
Lab equip.
260
10
10
50
50
50
50
Simulation
contract
210
210
210
300
300
300
300
Parts and
fabrication
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
Contingency
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
1081
833
963
2878
2878
3118
3118
166
37
132
132
9382
24882
COSTS
Documen.
Off.Equip
TOTAL
Profit/loss
(pre-tax)
Phase II
-81
In Phase II, extending through years 3, 4 and 5, LPP will develop the technology
demonstrated in Phase I into a working prototype fusion generator with approximately
2MW output. This will involve optimizing fusion yield, adapting energy collection,
switching and conditioning technology, testing the technology at the high repetition rates
needed for efficient functioning. The budget for this period is approximately $7 million.
However, LPP anticipates that there is a good chance that not all of this money needs to
be raised from additional investors. There is a good possibility that once break-even is
achieved, funding from government sources either in the US or in Europe will be
forthcoming for the rest. Such government contracts would enable LPP to operate at a
profit even before development is completed.
Phase III
In Phase III, LPP would market the focus fusion devices. We believe that the fastest and
lowest-risk method of doing this is through selling non-exclusive licenses on the
technology. LPP will be protecting its intellectual property rights with a series of patents.
Likely initial licenses will be governmental agencies of oil-importing countries, such as,
for example Japan, France and Italy. The sale of such licenses will generate a relatively
large income stream initially that will be supplemented when royalties being to flow after
actual production is begun. In the longer term, LPP may, with some of the accumulated
revenue, proceed to establish its own manufacturing facilities either independently or in
joint ventures.
Market for Focus Fusion Energy
Distributed Generators
LPP engineering analysis indicates that 2 MW focus fusion reactors could be produced
for about $200,000 apiece. This is about one-tenth of the cost of conventional electricity
generation units of any style or fuel design. This means that once the prototype is
successfully developed within five years, focus fusion generators will be the preferred
technology for new electrical distributed generation
More powerful units can be designed by accelerating the pulse repetition rate, although
there are limitations due to the amount of waste heat that can be removed from such a
small device. It is likely that units larger than 20MW will be formed by simply stacking
smaller units together, with approximately the same cost per kW of generated power.
We can project the eventual market for new electric fusion generators. Current global
new electric generation capacity today amounts to about 100 GW per year, averaging
over the last decade. We estimate that the introduction of a much cheaper energy source
will in fact increase growth of electric consumption considerably. There will also be a
significant market for the replacement of existing sources as well.
The conservative estimate of eventual market size can be used to estimate income stream
for LPP. Assuming a price of $100 per new kilowatt of installed focus fusion power
generators, a royalty of 5% we have an eventual revenue stream of $500 M per year. By
the same reasoning, a 10% market penetration of the new electricity generation market
yields an income stream of $50 M per year.
An additional important source of income is from the initial sale of the licenses
themselves, even before royalties are forthcoming. We expect that, given the size of the
market and the importance of the technology, initial payments on five or six nonexclusive licenses will be in excess of $10 million apiece. This is very conservative, since
a license that leads to 10% market penetration will generate $100 million/ year in profit,
assuming a modest 10% net profit on sales.
Space Propulsion
Another market that is available to this product is the space propulsion market. Nuclear
propulsion is a hot subject, recently reviewed in New Scientist magazine (Jan. 20 & 23,
2003) with NASA’s Nuclear Systems Initiative being renamed “Project Prometheus” and
an increased budget recently approved by the White House. NASA explains that 600
million degrees was a prerequisite for this modality but that 6-8 weeks may be possible
for a trip to Mars with a tripling of the space travel speed. As a result, NASA’s JPL
recently funded Eric Lerner’s LPP dense plasma focus fusion project for that purpose.
The development of thermonuclear fusion for space propulsion has been, for many years,
a long term goal of the space program. However, the difficulty of achieving fusion power
generally, the very low thrust-to-weight rations of most fusion propulsion designs and the
difficulties of dealing with neutrons, induced radioactivity and radioactive materials like
tritium in space has made this goal appear impracticable.
But in the past few years, there has been a growth of interest in the dense plasma focus
(DPF) device, used with aneutronic fuels, as a possible space propulsion system. This
approach was proposed by the present PI, among others, in 1987 and has more recently
been the subject of extensive analytical studies funded by the Air Force Systems
Command, Phillips Laboratory (Edwards AFB). These more recent studies concluded, as
did the earlier ones, that DPF used with advanced fuels, such as dHe3 and pB11, had the
potential to be the basis of very attractive space propulsion systems, with high thrust to
weight ratios, extremely high specific impulse, and negligible neutron production.
In the DPF, energy is released in the form of directed kinetic energy, suitable for
producing thrust. No nozzle or magnetic focusing is needed to form a directed beam for
thrust, since the ion beam is formed by the device itself. An advantage of using the DPF
for propulsion as compared with energy applications, is that for propulsion, only a
portion of beam energy need be converted to electricity to sustain the process, with the
rest directly generating thrust.
Potentially focus fusion thrusters will have very high specific impulse, compared to
chemical rockets which have very low exhaust velocities of below 5 km/sec (specific
impulse of less than 500 seconds) that are obtainable in this manner. To achieve minimal
space velocities above 25 km/sec need for interplanetary travel, far more fuel than
payload is required. In contrast, the beam from a focus fusion device exits at over 7,000
km/sec (specific impulse of 714,000 seconds). This means that very little fuel, less than
the mass of the payload, is required to achieve very high velocities.
For example, for a p-B11 thruster made up of 100 individual electrodes each producing 3
kJ of net energy per pulse with a repetition rate of 4x104Hz, a thrust of 200 kg is possible
with 12 GW total power. The thrust would be supplied exclusively by the ion beam of 3
Mev alpha particles (4 kA beam). Energy storage weight would be at most about 1 ton
per thruster. For a 30-ton payload with ten thrusters a thrust to weight ratio of 0.04
would be attained. This would allow a reduced trip time to Mars (200 million km) of
about 16 days, with a round trip fuel consumption of only 7 tons.
Such fusion-propelled ships would be far smaller and less expensive than existing
chemical rockets and would greatly reduce the cost of interplanetary travel. By mixing in
additional propellant with the beam, higher thrusts can be obtained, making possible
fusion rockets that could take off directly from the Earth's surface.
Over time, fusion rockets could make possible robotic interstellar probes. While fusion
rockets would be limited to about one third the speed of light, even if they were large
with many stages, a space effort willing to sustain projects of over several decades (the
cathedrals took far longer) could undertake 60-70 year missions to nearby earth-like
planets, once they had been identified by astronomers. Such identification could happen
in the next 10-15 years using instruments already being developed by NASA.
This new propulsion generation market may yield an additional income stream of $25 M
per year, depending on the thruster price that the market may bear. This excludes income
that may be generated from the initial sale of the licenses themselves and the distributed
generator income cited above.
Income Projections and ROI
Based on the above market considerations, LPP has developed two income projections,
one assuming that substantial government funding will be available for Phase II and the
other assuming that none will be available. In the Projection One, with government
funding, we assume that only $1.6 million is raised from investors, while in Projection
Two, we assume the full $6.7 million is raised. (Profit on government funding is assumed
at 15%, a standard rate.) In both cases we assume all shares are sold at $100 initially,
although we expect that after Phase I is completed, that newly issued shares will be sold
for a higher price. The return on investment (ROI) is calculated as an average annual rate
for an investor buying shares at the start of year 1, paying $100 a share. We assume a P/E
ratio of 30 in calculating the value of the company, which is conservative for a rapidly
growing high-tech company that is actually turning a profit.
Projection One
Year
3
4
5
0.3
0.3
0.3
6
7
8
9
10
10
10
10
10
20
2.5
7.5
18
40
Income ($ millions)
Gov’t fees
License Sales
Royalties
0.3
0.3
0.3
10
12.5
17.5
28
60
Company Value
9
9
9
300
375
525
840
1800
Value per share
($ thousands)
%ROI per annum
0.28
0.28
0.28
9.3
12.7
16.4
26.3
56.2
41
29
23
113
100
89
86
88
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0.3
0.3
0.3
10
10
10
10
20
2.5
7.5
18
40
Total
Projection Two
Year
Income ($ millions)
Gov’t fees
License Sales
Royalties
0.3
0.3
0.3
10
12.5
17.5
28
60
Company Value
9
9
9
300
375
525
840
1800
Value per share
($ thousands)
%ROI per annum
0.28
0.28
0.28
2.2
2.8
3.9
6.3
13.4
41
29
23
68
61
58
58
63
Total
As can be seen, even with quite conservative assumptions, annual average ROI will be in
the area of 60% per annum for Projection 2 and around 90% per annum for Projection 1.
On the basis of these large ROI, LPP feels that non-voting shares will be an excellent
investment. We are selling only non-voting shares simply because we believe the risk of
efforts to suppress this technology is high, and selling voting shares will make it too easy
for others to take over and suppress focus fusion. As a result, all voting shares will rest
with the inventor and family.
Risk factors
All new technology development program involve risk, which is compensated for by
expected high rates of return in the event of success. In our case, LPP locates the largest
risk in Phase I of the project. While the theoretical projection LPP has made strongly
indicates that new energy production can be achieved with focus fusion in an extremely
economical manner, and these theoretical models have been tested by experiment and are
based on firmly established physical principles, considerable extrapolation is involved. It
is always possible that unforeseen factors may prevent the achievement of break even,
although LPP considers this unlikely. There are no known physical problems that would
prevent achieving net energy production.
Once break even is achieved the risks involved in Phase II are much lower, and in fact
are, in our view, negligible. Mature technologies are available that can be tailored to the
task of efficiently extracting and converting energy emitted by the focus fusion device.
In Phase III, three are some risks that fossil fuel interests, through their influence on the
governments of oil-producing nations will attempt to create unjustified regulatory barriers
in the way of marketing focus fusion reactors. However, we believe that the extremely
safe and environmentally benign nature of focus fusion, together with its great economy,
will produce sufficient political pressure to overcome such barriers. In any case, we
believe that there will be many non-producing, oil-importing nations who will be eager to
purchase and license this technology. So overall, LPP believes that, once breakeven is
achieved at the end of Phase I, the risk that the technology will not achieve a high market
penetration are very low.
Competition
The most successful magnetic confinement tokamak is the JET (Joint European Torus) in
Culham, England. This $1 billion machine is most powerful tokamak today and the last in
a long line of attempts in many countries over the last 40 years to achieve fusion. The
JET is still not expected to produce more fusion energy than it consumes and the US
DOE projects another 35 years before a commercial prototype may be ready.
The most prominent inertial confinement laser fusion experiment is the NIF (National
Ignition Facilities) at the Lawrence Livermore National Labs. This $3 billion machine
uses high powered lasers to heat and compress a small sphere of fusionable material to
high temperatures and pressures. It is not expected to produce economical energy even if
it ever reaches breakeven.
The most important electricity provider today is the fossil fuel power plants, capturing
90% of the market, which are the main competitor for focus fusion. However, when the 2
MW focus fusion reactors come on the market, they will completely displace the oil,
coal, and natural gas power plants within a few years because of the substantially lower
capital cost, ease of use, lack of appreciable fuel cost, and the complete lack of harmful
pollution to the air, water, or ground. Therefore, even fossil fuel power generation plants
do not present any real competition to focus fusion.
Project Personnel
The key technical team members in this project have extensive experience in plasma
theory, simulation and experiments. Eric J. Lerner, president of Lawrenceville Plasma
Physics, leads the technical team. He will be responsible for theoretical modeling of the
DPF, evaluation of experimental data and general direction of the experimental work,
integration and comparison of simulation with experimental results and design of
electrodes and experimental conditions. Mr. Lerner has been active in DPF research for
20 years. Beginning in 1984, he developed a detailed quantitative theory of the
functioning of DPF. Based on this theory, he proposed that the DPF could achieve high
ion and electron energies at high densities, suitable for advanced fuel fusion and space
population. Under a series of contracts with JPL, he planned and participated in carrying
out experiments that tested and confirmed this theory. In addition, he developed an
original model of the role of the strong magnetic field effect on DPF functioning,
showing that this effect could have a large effect on increasing ion temperature and
decreasing electron temperature. Mr. Lerner received a BA in Physics from Columbia
University and did graduate work in physics at the University of Maryland.
The simulations will be carried out through a subcontract with George Mason
University, who in turn will sub-subcontract part of this work with Naval Research
Laboratory. This will be collaboration between John Guillory of George Mason
University and Robert Terry of NRL. Dr. Guillory is Senior Contract Professor in the
School of Computational Sciences at George Mason University. He has been active in
plasma physics research for over thirty years, with extensive work in collective and
quantum effects or electron and ion beams in plasmas, which has particular relevance to
electron and ion interactions in the DPF, as well as in electromagnetically-driven plasma
x-ray sources. He developed the “snapshot” technique for multiscale plasma simulations.
Dr. Guillory received a B.A. in Physics at Rice University (Phi Beta Kappa, honors) and
a Ph.D. in Physics at University of California, Berkeley.
Dr. Robert E. Terry is a research physicist in the Radiation Hydrodynamics
Branch of Naval Research Laboratory Plasma Physics Division with over 25 years
experience in numerical modeling and simulation of plasma phenomena, often in direct
support of experiments. His work has involved studies of micro instabilities similar to
those in the DPF and the development of detailed x-ray radiation simulations, for zpinches and other ns-scale plasma devices. He received a BS in Physics from MIT and a
Ph.D. in Physics from John Hopkins University.
At LPP, the experimental work will be carried out, under Mr. Lerner’s direction,
by Xin Pei Lu who is currently a Post Doctoral Research Associate at Old Dominion
University in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. Dr. Lu will join
LPP as a Research Scientist if the present project is funded. Dr. Lu has ten years of
experience in experimental work with pulsed power plasma devices, assembling
complete pulsed power facilities and performing experiments and spectroscopic analysis
of dense plasma in liquids. A laboratory technician, experienced with high-voltage
experimental equipment, will also be hired to assist in the carrying out of the
experiments.
A Billion Degrees on Earth
Updated from Future Energy, Vol. 1, No. 4, Spring, 2003, p. 1
Futurists agree that “Only a Technology Revolution Can Save the Earth” (C. Arthur, The
Independent, 11/1/02) and that “A Quest for Clean Energy Must Begin Now” (A. Revkin, NY
Times, 11/1/02). Answering the call is the pioneering discovery made by physicist Eric Lerner et
al. with NASA JPL support. For the first time of temperatures above one billion degrees have
been achieved in a dense plasma. Achieved with a compact and inexpensive device called the
plasma focus, it is a step toward controlled fusion energy using advanced fuels that generate no
radioactivity and almost no neutrons (www.focusfusion.org). This new technology is
environmentally safe, cheap, and effectively an unlimited energy source using a hydrogen-boron
reaction. Mr. Lerner announced the achievement at the International Conference on Plasma
Science on May 26, 2002 and at the Fifth Symposium on Current Trends in International Fusion
Research on March 24, 2003. The other leaders of the research team are Dr. Bruce Freeman of
Texas A and M University, where the experiments were performed in August, 2001 and Dr.
Hank Oona of the Los Alamos National Laboratory.
The results (entitled, “Towards advanced-fuel fusion: electron, ion energy >100keV in a dense
plasma”) are posted at the physics on-line archive website: http://arXiv.org/abs/physics/0205026
and updated in the Proc. of the Fifth Symp. on Current Trends in Inter. Fusion Research. Lerner
has projected decentralized 2 MW power plants, at a cost of less than one million dollars to build.
The new technology already faces efforts to suppress it. Dr. Richard Seimon, Fusion Energy
Science Program Manager at Los Alamos, demanded that Dr. Hank Oona, one of the physicists
involved in the experiment, dissociate himself from comparisons that showed the new results to
be superior in key respects to those of the tokamak and to remove his name from the paper
describing the results. Seimon also pressured Dr. Bruce Freeman, another physicist and co-author
of the paper, to advocate the removal of all tokamak comparisons from the paper. Seimon did not
dispute the data nor the achievement of record high temperatures. However, the tokamak, a much
larger and more expensive device, has been the centerpiece of the US fusion effort for 25 years
and apparently is now undermined by a smaller upstart.
“Both of my colleagues in this research have been threatened with losing their jobs if they don’t
distance themselves from comparisons with the tokamak” says Lerner.
In 2002, the US DOE also insisted that another project report’s negative assessment of federallyfunded tokamak fusion research be withdrawn by Rand Corp.’s Robert Hirsch, who was then also
fired. The report, “Energy Technologies for 2050” is now being sterilized by Rand for DOE
review (see “Report Generates Negative Energy” Wash. Post, 3/18/03, p.A27
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42399-2003Mar17.html).
However, as if by design, the US DOE projects at least another 35 years before their
commercially practical magnetic tokamak fusion demonstration plant is “fired up around 2037,
with operations lasting until at least 2050” (Platts Inside Energy, 12/2/02, p.6). Though the
tokamak may never become commercially viable, the US government is determined to continue
the research endeavor, because, as Lerner explains, “The tokamak can only produce expensive
electricity that is not competitive to the oil and gas industry.”
History of the Dense Plasma Focus (Focus Fusion) Development
1964--The Plasma Focus is invented simultaneously in the US and the USSR by Mather
and Fillipov.
Late 60's to early 70's-- Winston Bostick and Victorio Nardi at Stevens Institute of
Technology, Hoboken, NJ, develop the basic theory of the plasma focus, showing that
energy is concentrated into tiny hot-spots or plasmoids, contained by enormous magnetic
fields. Their discoveries become highly controversial, as other researchers insist that the
energy is far more diffuse and ignore mounting experimental evidence from Stevens and
other groups. During this same period US fusion efforts become concentrated almost
exclusively on the tokamak. However, the number of groups around the world doing
focus work grows to a few dozen. Funding for each group remains very limited. Work is
also hampered by lack of quantitative version of Bostick-Nardi theory.
1986-- Eric Lerner of Lawrenceville Plasma Physics publishes first quantitative theory of
dense plasma focus (DPF) and plasmoid, using theory to successfully model quasars.
The theory is based on Bostick-Nardi model, and was developed with advice from Nardi.
In the next few years this theory is extended to predict plasma focus performance for
various fuels, showing that improved performance is expected with hydrogen-boron
fuels.
Late 80's to early 90's-- End of Cold war and decrease in general funding of physical
science leads to drastic cuts in focus fusion, with about half of the groups ceasing to
function and many others redirecting research to x-ray lithographic applications.
Fusion funding is cut and concentrated ever more narrowly on Tokamaks.
1994--Experiments performed at University of Illinois on small plasma focus confirm
predictions of Lerner's theory, including five-fold enhancement of output with smaller
electrodes.
2001--Experiments at Texas A &M university confirm predictions from Lerner theory
that energies above 100 keV (equivalent to 1.1 billion degrees) can be achieved with
plasma focus.
2002--New theoretical calculations indicate that strong magnetic field in DPF can
suppress heating of electrons and thus x-ray cooling of plasma. This makes achieving net
energy easier and implies that very compact electrodes are desirable.
Magnetic Field Effects
One of the key problems on the way to a functioning focus fusion reactor is the way that
x-rays can cool a proton-boron (p-11B) plasma. When hot, high-velocity electrons
collide with boron nuclei, the electrons are accelerated. All accelerated charges emit
radiation, and the electrons emit x-ray radiation that can leave the tiny plasmoid, robbing
it of energy and cooling it. Previous calculations indicated that fusion reactors would
heat the plasma only about two or three times as fast as the x-rays cooled it, a relatively
narrow margin.
But new calculations performed by Eric Lerner of Lawrenceville Plasma Physics indicate
that the strong magnetic fields in a plasmoid can make that situation far better for fusion.
The magnetic field makes it harder for the ions to heat the electrons, allowing the
electrons to be far cooler than the ions. Cooler electrons radiate less x-ray energy, so that
fusion power may be about ten times as large as x-ray losses, rather than just two or three
times. In addition, the new calculations seem to indicate that more compact focus devices
with higher magnetic fields are more desirable.
To understand how the magnetic effect works, it's important to note first how ions heat
electrons in the plasma. For fundamental mechanical reasons, a particle can only impart
energy to particles that are traveling slower than it is. A simple way of seeing this is to
imagine two runners, one fat (the ion) and one skinny (the electron). If the electron is
running faster it can catch up to the ion and give it a shove, increasing the ion's energy.
But if the ion is running faster, it can give the electron a shove, increasing the skinny
runner's energy. In either case the faster particle gives up energy to the slower particle.
This is the case even if the slower particle has far more energy to begin with due to its
greater mass. Since ions have at least 1836 times as much mass as electrons, slower
moving ions often have far more energy than electrons, but if the electrons move faster,
the ions gain still more energy at the electrons' expense.
In a plasma without a strong magnetic field, however, the are always a few electrons that
are randomly moving more slowly that the ions. The ions give up energy to those
electrons, which then mix in with the rest. So in a "normal plasma" energy does get
equalized and the ions and electrons end up at the same temperature, with the average ion
moving far slower than the average electron, but faster than some electrons.
A powerful giga-gauss magnetic field, more than several billion gauss (several billion
times the magnetic field of the Earth) changes this situation. The magnetic field imposes
a lower speed limit on the electrons – ALL electrons have to travel faster than this critical
velocity. This is a quantum-mechanical effect. In any magnetic field, an electron moves
in a helical orbit around the direction of the magnet field, the magnetic field line. The
size of the orbit, the gyroradius, gets smaller for lower electron velocities and for
HIGHER magnetic fields. But quantum mechanics dictates that associated with each

Kinetic energy in physics is simply E = ½mv2 so if the speeds (v) are similar, a proton (ion) with 1836
times more mass (m) than an electron will have 1836 times more kinetic energy. Kinetic energy in gases is
also E = 1.5kT so that measuring the rms velocity yields a measure of the average temperature of the gas.
electron is a wave, which gets longer as the electron velocity goes down.  An electron
can only be located with one wavelength, not within a smaller volume.
At a certain point, the gyroradius shrinks down to the same size as the electrons
wavelength. It can't shrink any further. So for a given magnetic field, there is a
minimum velocity that an electron can have – a smaller velocity would makes its
gyroradius smaller than its wavelength, an impossibility.
This means that for very powerful magnetic fields, ions moving slower that the slowest
possible electrons will not be able to heat the electrons at all. They will have NO
electrons moving slower than they are. But if the ions have to move faster than the
electrons to heat them, they must have far greater energy – at least 1836 items as much
energy, or 1836 times higher temperature. So instead of ions and electrons having the
same temperature, the electrons are far cooler than the ions. This in turn leads to far less
x-ray cooling and is a unique discovery constituting intellectual property of LPP.
The effects of magnetic fields on ion-electron collisions has been studied for some time.
It was first pointed out in the 1970's by Oak Ridge researcher J. Rand McNally, and more
recently astronomers studying neutron stars, which have powerful magnetic fields, noted
the same effect. However, Lerner was the first to point out that this effect would have a
large impact on the plasma focus, where such strong magnetic fields are possible.
Experiments have already demonstrated 0.4 gigagauss fields, and smaller DPF, with
stronger initial magnetic fields can reach as high as 20 gigagauss, Lerner calculates. This
should be achievable in the next round of experiments, once funding is obtained. The
higher magnetic field intensity will ensure higher plasma temperature on the average,
creating a greater fusion energy yield on the order of megawatts.

This is due to the famous Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (∆x∆p >ћ/2) which is really a law in physics
that sets a lower limit on things like size (x) and momentum (p = mass times velocity).