Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

LPP questions/discussion

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Here's my take on investing in LPP. At this point, buying shares shouldn't be considered an investment, but more of a charitable donation.

I agree 100%. The Focus Fusion Society is setup as a 501(c) exempt organization, although they are behind on their 990-N filings. This gives those of us who are not millionaires the opportunity to contribute and at least get a tax deduction.

I don't think any of us will live long enough to see a commercial product come out of this, but it is an important long term technology for space travel and the colonization of Mars.

I also want to thank Julian Cox for his accurate, well thought out and rational postings on this thread. LPP is in extremely serious need of better management, business acumen and public relations, so your offer to help in those areas are appreciated.
 
Last edited:
All,

I don't agree that the odds of LPP achieving success are "near-zero." It isn't 100%, but it sure as hell isn't 0%.

Mr. Lerner appears to have a credible theoretical model and approach that unless I'm mistaken, has been vetted by a team in Italy, partially by one in Asia and by the external working group who recently gave the recommendation that they clearly deserve more funding. I've been watching LPP for years and they've consistently marched forward, carefully accomplishing each line-item on their list in the order they said they would. Sure, there have been delays that are almost exclusively related to insufficient funding. In fact, the only significant unexpected thing I remember is that they discovered a 3x advantage in the plasma behavior last year. I don't think they're actually using that 3x advantage in their numbers although they could.

I feel very good about the next step, which should demonstrate a jump in output using tungsten electrodes. The outcome is supported by previous DPF experiments but nobody has ever demonstrated it for this purpose. If LPP gets what is expected by the math, I believe they'll be able to achieve feasibility using the rest of the methods they already have in their plan, which I believe are much better understood by existing science.

The easiest action is to say "It'll never work." That doesn't take courage or research. With every major technological advancement, almost everyone claims it will fail. That's the safest thing to say when you don't understand the details. In LPP's case, I think the prospects look better than powered flight must have looked in 1903. I wouldn't call that "near-zero" or charity.

-Paul
 
Paul,
Our stories are remarkably similar. I too first encountered LPP in a Google tech talk in 2007. I too read everything I could find about it; as well as about Dr Bussard and the other fusion start ups. I too rejected the other approaches as unworkable. I too read and thought about every article critical of Eric's approach. I was not dissuaded.
Perhaps the only advantage I had was that I had been following the technology behind Tokamaks since the mid 60's, so I was somewhat familiar with the technology. I bought my first shares in LPP in 2008. More since then.
I invested in this company because I want this to happen. Money would be nice too.
Am I disappointed in their timeline? A little I guess. I am continually surprised at how slow the public is to see the promise in this. I understand that this is closely tied to their and ability to raise money, and hence to their timeline. I am hopeful that results from the coming spring will turn the tide.
I just wanted you to know that I heartly agree with every word you said in your post. The only difference being that you said them much better than I could have.

- - - Updated - - -

The preceding post is in response to Paul's post #56 I obviously didn't do something right.
 
I agree with Paul that LPP's mathematical model of their DPF device makes their odds of scientific success far better than near-zero.

The model is based on proven laws of classical and quantum physics. That is solid ground to stand on (unlike cold-fusion claims of mysterious new forces at work). The question is: Does the model correctly apply the proven laws, or is it missing something?

Years of experiments indicate that the model is correct. The model predicts the following phenomena, which have all been proven in the laboratory:

1) Smaller DPF electrodes produce higher fusion yield.

2) Plasma temperature in the DPF can reach 1.8 billion degrees Celsius (well above the 1.6 billion needed for hydrogen-boron ignition).

3) Fusion reactions are produced by ions circulating in the plasmoid, not passing through once.

4) Fusion reactions increase exponentially (by the 5th power) with increasing input current.

5) Fusion reactions increase from using an axial magnetic field (patented by LPP).

The model has allowed LPP to get higher fusion yields than any other DPF researchers (dozens of groups) in the last 50 years.

So there is good reason to believe the model's other predictions will also prove correct. One of those predictions is hydrogen-boron ignition. You never know for sure until you see it, and there could be some unknown problems ahead with the electrode material or the mathematical model. But right now, such problems look less likely than achieving hydrogen-boron ignition within the next 1-2 years.

Then more challenges will lie ahead in designing a prototype fusion generator (Phase 2 of LPP's business plan) and licensing the technology non-exclusively to high-tech manufacturers (Phase 3). LPP will need talented engineers and managers, as Fluxcap and DaveT correctly pointed out. But the scientific achievement of ignition (for the first time in history) will create such a media frenzy that LPP should have no trouble attracting top people and raising additional capital (~$50M) from large investors.

The probability of scientific success will become clearer in May, when LPP begins using their new tungsten electrodes. These are designed to eliminate plasma contamination by metal ions from arcing within their old copper electrode. Eliminating the arcing and plasma contamination should allow higher compression of the plasma and dramatically higher fusion yield. By that time, hopefully LPP's current share offering will be sold out. New investments are coming in now from TMC readers (thanks folks).

LPP is on a road with many signs pointing toward the destination. No one has traveled this road before, so there is no guarantee it has no detours or roadblocks, but the probability of reaching the destination is much better than near-zero. And as Julian said, the benefit to the world of reaching the destination is near-infinite.
 
Just remembered another quote from Nigel's article about the optimistically named National Ignition Facility (NIF). The NIF scientist is named Dr. Hurricane, which you'd expect from The Onion, but it's in Scientific American, I swear.

Hurricane compares the ongoing ignition quest with climbing a mountain of unknown height with a summit wreathed in clouds and therefore invisible. This step of getting more energy out of the fuel than is put in represents a base camp of sorts, farther up the mountain than any have ever tread before and from which new paths to reach the summit of ignition might be tried.
High-Powered Lasers Deliver Fusion Energy Breakthrough - Scientific American

For LPP, ignition is not wreathed in clouds of unknown height, but clearly visible ahead. LPP does not have a base camp from which to seek new paths by trial-and-error. They have a map derived from laws of physics that scientists and engineers rely on every day.
 
"2) Plasma temperature in the DPF can reach 1.8 billion degrees Celsius (well above the 1.6 billion needed for hydrogen-boron ignition)."

How was this measured?

That's a logical question, since you can't buy a thermometer that goes that high.

According to LPP's paper in Physics of Plasmas, the energy (temperature) of the deuterium ions in the plasmoid (tiny ball of plasma) was calculated by measuring the speed of neutrons shooting out of it. LPP set up three neutron detectors (scintillator-photomultiplier tubes) at different distances from the plasmoid (1.2, 11 and 17 meters) and measured the time delay between neutrons arriving at the near and far detectors. Small delay means fast neutrons, which means hot ions producing the neutrons.

I believe this measurement method is scientifically sound, because otherwise LPP's paper would not have been accepted for publication in the leading peer-reviewed journal of its field, published by the American Institute of Physics.

Note that the fusion fuel used by NIF and ITER is deuterium and tritium (DT), because DT fusion reactions occur at lower temperature and release more energy than others. However, tritium is radioactive, and the resulting very-fast neutrons damage the surrounding machinery and turn it radioactive over time.

LPP currently uses deuterium only (DD reactions), so they can measure the resulting neutrons and calculate what is happening in the plasmoid. When LPP has eliminated plasma impurities that disturbed the plasmoid symmetry, and the neutrons show the plasmoid is compressing fully, then LPP will eventually switch from deuterium to hydrogen-boron fuel. This fuel releases twice as much energy as DD reactions, but no damaging neutrons. Most of the energy is released as a beam of fast helium ions, which converts directly to electricity in an induction coil placed around the beam.
 
I want to revisit the question: Why is it that Blackrock or similar funds are not invested in LPP? I think it's the same reason that our LAME congress hasn't appropriated any money to Eric's project. He only needs (right now) a million dollars or so. From their perspectives, having hundreds of millions (or billions) of dollars to invest or appropriate; is it easier to have many projects each requiring small amounts of money? Or just a couple of projects each requiring massive sums (ITER) of money? Which is easier to administer?
 
I want to revisit the question: Why is it that Blackrock or similar funds are not invested in LPP? I think it's the same reason that our LAME congress hasn't appropriated any money to Eric's project. He only needs (right now) a million dollars or so. From their perspectives, having hundreds of millions (or billions) of dollars to invest or appropriate; is it easier to have many projects each requiring small amounts of money? Or just a couple of projects each requiring massive sums (ITER) of money? Which is easier to administer?

Most VCs want a level of control and ownership that LPP simply isn't going to give to them. But silly investors like me are prepared to gamble. (Note: I'm on the advisory board of a VC, and have owned a company that got VC investment, so I do know a bit about how they work.)
 
I've been looking into LPP for more than a year now. What Eric Lerner and team are doing, is good science. They systematically apply since long proven physics, collect a ton of experimental data and identify root causes for unexpected behavior like underperformance for a given set of parameters. They then can remove those root causes - rinse and repeat. So far, they are the front runners in their field. I personally find this specific fusion approach fascinating, because it actually uses the natural instabilities of plasmas to get the desired effects, instead of fighting them with brute force. ITER, for instance, tries to force plasma to behave, at an unfathomable technical and energetic expense. I doubt ITER will make it, for those reasons.

After extensive studies, I can see two realistic candidates in this race to affordable/cheap fusion for the masses: Dense Plasma Focus (LPP) and the Polywell. By the way, there was a somewhat curious fusion reactor video announcement, coming from Lockheed Martin's Charles Chase (Skunkworks) at Google's "Solve for X" : Solve for X: Charles Chase on energy for everyone - YouTube . In all likelihood, this has to be the polywell type of fusion reactors. They say they had a kind of breakthrough idea that enables them to have a small-room-sized prototype 100MW reactor until 2017. Skunkworks is said to only come out of their labs to make an announcement, if they have made sure there is a high chance of success. So, what is this announcement supposed to mean. What does it tell us? Is commercial, compact fusion a lot closer to fruition than 99.99% of all people think?

Aneutronic p+B11 fusion is IMHO the only responsible fusion approach. We can't continue to produce lethal radioactive waste in fission reactors or even future fusion reactors to burden and make the lives of 10000's of generations to become a living hell. So, if i'm asked as an investor: Would you invest in a company like LPP, even though there is so much risk to lose all your investment? My answer would be a definitive yes. This special subject of absolutely clean fusion power is, from my perspective, on a whole different level than any other investment opportunity. Eric Lerner is a scientist, and a good one at that. The results of his scientific endeavor passed the peer review process in acknowledged scientific journals so far, so there are no complaints to be made about the credibility of his and his team's work. If LPP's crowdfunding approach works out and they can show that their modified tungsten electrodes produce the expected improvements, then there is no doubt to me that the rest is most probably going to work out as well. After that, they need X-ray transparent beryllium electrodes (for the X-rays to not get converted to heat in the electrode) and need to test out their "X-ray solar cell onion" IP (my naming here in lack of a proper official name, IIRC) to convert a big percentage of the fusion's electromagnetic energy (X-rays) to electricity. The other big usable part comes from the pulsed ion beams (made of Helium ions, created during fusion) going through an electronically controlled coil. A lot to do. As long as it's real science, I have no complaints or doubts about feasibilty.

So, we do have two candidates IMO: One has probably access to as much money as needed (Skunkworks from Lockheed Martin), and the other one that has been trying to do this on a shoestring for many years (LPP). If Skunkwork's announcement has a foundation in reality (that is, proven physics), I think that Lockheed Martin could well be the first to achieve commercial, compact fusion power. It would be a different reactor type than LPP's device, but could also, like LPP's reactor, directly convert fusion power to electricity without the need for the conversion chain "fusion heat->steam->generator->electricity" as Tokamak reactors like ITER (or DEMO, for that matter) would necessitate.

Whether or not Lockheed Martin comes out with a working fusion reactor - they can at least fund their research decently, and they have an impressive track record that shows they know what they are doing, if they go to the lengths to announce something publicly. Anyways, I'm more than willing to throw some bucks at LPP and let them do their stuff. I don't care if I don't get a profit from it. Clean fusion power is a much too important technology for us as a species. Our ability to survive long-term depends on finding potent, environmentally neutral power sources - like p+B11 fusion. We also need it for space travel and colonies in space. Thinking big is the key. Well, Elon knows more about that than most ;) . Electric cars and their recharging would also become a no-brainer. Imagine huge charging stations, powered by small-room-sized fusion reactors, dedicated to charging all kinds of electric vehicles. That is the future we need. Solar is fine and dandy, but in the end fusion power is going to be the basis for an all-electric planetary society. I'm volunteering to give some of my money to very promising companies like LPP. And even if it were all to be lost - this is my decision. I want to live in a fusion powered future. And I want to do my part to even only slightly increase the chances of success. Maybe one could put it this way: "Don't ask what fusion can do for you. Ask, what you can do for fusion." .

My $0.02
 
By the way, there is a big difference in power levels between the planned Polywell reactor and the Dense Plasma Focus (DPF) reactor. The Polywell is intended for the 100MW regime, while the DPF is planned for the 5MW regime. It is a lot smaller than the Polywell and does not have to be cooled as much, which is obvious, considering it is supposed to deliver 1/20th of the Polywell's power. Regarding market opportunities, there is a clear distinction for both the candidates. Restricted by exponential physical power scaling laws of the Polywell, it needs to be built with a pretty much fixed geometry (diameter about 3m). At this size, it is predicted to produce around 100MW of electrical power. The point I want to make is that the DPF would be able to easily satisfy smaller power needs in a smaller physical volume, while the Polywell makes most sense for big, power hungry loads. So I see different possible market opportunities in case that both reactor types somehow manage the transition from credible science, to engineering prototypes and finally, commercial products.
 
So not much talk in this thread in the last two months. Those who have invested in LPP know that there was a minor internal shall we call it "debacle" that now seems to have been settled and now they are reporting that the Tungsten anode has been manufactured and is to be installed (April 14th). The cathode (outer electrode) is larger and more complex and will be finished in either May or June. Progress in second half of 2014 will be extremely exciting to witness.

Julian Cox (if you're reading this thread): Did you ever get anywhere with LPP when it comes to the finacial side of thing, attracting capital etc?

Tungsten_Anode_Complete2ee9cd.jpg
 
So not much talk in this thread in the last two months. Those who have invested in LPP know that there was a minor internal shall we call it "debacle" that now seems to have been settled ...

Dude, you can't post things like that without giving more details. I'm pretty sure it's against TMC rules. Come on, spill the sauce...:smile:
 
Focus Fusion needs to have three things right in order to accomplish fusion

1. Right temperature
2. Long enough confinement
3. Right density.

They have thus far accomplished the first two. The results were published in scientific papers. In theory the third one should also be accomplished. In order to do it in reality they are in need for beryllium cathodes. These cost around $250K

to fund the purchase of the beryllium cathode Focus Fusion started an Indiegogo crowd funding campaign. The campaign can be found here:
FOCUS FUSION: emPOWERtheWORLD | Indiegogo

it would be great if they can find the money to purchase this cathode. Any help would do!
 
What happened to the millions they raised from the up-thread investment round (or maybe it was rounds plural, I don't recall)?

LPP did not raise millions in the recent investment round. They have raised approximately 3 million over the last several years, which has been spent on their successful research efforts to date. More research requires more money, and they are trying all avenues to stay on track.