So this is hot fusion, not cold. Hot fusion has been around for a long time. In fact I remember a couple of high school kids made a hot fusion device once.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor
[Note: Typically in most H-bomb designs most of the energy still comes from fission - the fast neutrons from the fusion in the secondary igniting fission of the DU tamper round the secondary].
Unless you're talking about a thermonuclear weapon, it's not easy at all. In fact, decades of research have yet to produce a break-even reaction in the laboratory.
Only in the stars and in thermonuclear weapons. It has not been achieved in a break-even sense anywhere else, in spite of decades of research. Many very large projects are dedicated to achieving it, including the National Ignotion Facility:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Ignition_Facility
The linked article shows that, in spite of vast amounts of money being spent, the project has yet to achieve break-even (i.e. produce more power than required to start the reaction).
> In fact I remember a couple of high school kids made a hot fusion device once.
No, that did not happen. It's an urban myth.
Nowhere near break even though.
Translation: no break-even fusion reaction. If this approach held promise for fusion power research, it would be being explored instead of the millions of dollars in the much more common laser-confinement and tokamak approaches.
Strictly speaking and from a technical standpoint, if it doesn't produce more power than is present for conventional reasons (like electronic current flow), and in spite of its name, it's not a fusion reactor as that term is understood in physics.
It's a nice plasma source, and it produces neutrons -- very useful -- but it's not a fusion power source.
Read my comment above I say "Nowhere near break even though."
Incidentally, there has been a lot of work in inertial electrostatic confinement - it doesn't look terribly promising and no it is not break even but people do appear to be working in this area:
Let's be clear about what we're talking about. A fusion generator by definition produces more power than it requires. Apart from stars and thermonuclear devices, this has not been achieved anywhere. Without clear terminology, we will go in circles.
Also, the NASA project documents specify and require a net power gain in the fusion reaction:
http://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/niac/2012_phaseII...
Quote: "an in-depth analysis of the rocket design and spacecraft integration as well as mission architectures enabled by the FDR need to be performed. Fulfilling these three elements form the major tasks to be completed in the proposed Phase II study. A subscale, laboratory liner compression test facility will be assembled with sufficient liner kinetic energy (~ 0.5 MJ) to reach fusion breakeven conditions."
> Nowhere in this thread was there a claim about power generation.
Except in the NASA documents that describe the project under discussion.
And yes I was referring to the Fusor linked below. That is hot fusion.
No -- in general, "hot fusion" means producing more power than is required to start the reaction. Otherwise the term "hot fusion" makes no sense, since a reaction with a power gain < 1 is endothermic.
I emphasize that the term "hot fusion" is used in a lot of different ways, by people who aren't using it in its strict physical meaning. But in physics, "hot fusion" should mean an exothermic fusion reaction.
> And yes I was referring to the Fusor linked below. That is hot fusion.
It's not a fusion generator, which by definition produces more power than it requires. And the NASA documents that describe the project under discussion specify a fusion generator, a device with a power gain > 1.
http://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/niac/2012_phaseII...
"an in-depth analysis of the rocket design and spacecraft integration as well as mission architectures enabled by the FDR need to be performed. Fulfilling these three elements form the major tasks to be completed in the proposed Phase II study. A subscale, laboratory liner compression test facility will be assembled with sufficient liner kinetic energy (~ 0.5 MJ) to reach fusion breakeven conditions."
Note that last few words.