Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Cancer Spread Stopped





Just establishing a protocol thatstops cancer from spreading at all is a huge discovery.  Setting aside the desirability of an actualcure and actually halting the body’s collapse from the ravages of the diseaseis a very useful result as we have learned in the war on AIDS.  You do not die from AIDS today because the diseaseis stabilized with the cocktail.  In facta reversal of damage is achieved and the victim is on the way to dying from oldage.

Many cancer growths remain benignand if the problem is halted then they remain so.  Thus cancer therapy can resolve toidentification and immediately commencing this protocol which ends thethreat.  Actual removal of establishedcancers can be conducted as deemed safe.

Dangerous growths can at least besafely reduced to good effect.  Braintumors in particular that in clearly inoperative can be reduced throughradiation to relieve the brain of the physical pressure and interference beencaused that made its original presence clear.

The protocol could be evenapplied as a preventative measure to halt low level activity while the immunesystem is boosted to cleanse the body of such threats.  In short this is the first leg of adiagnostic and treatment revolution that will preserve the body cancer freethroughout one’s life.

Scientists bring cancer cells back under control

A new treatment for cancer that renders malignant tumours"dormant" has been developed by scientists.



By Richard Alleyne, Science Correspondent 6:30AMGMT 13 Jan 2011

Researchers believe they have found a way of making malignant cancercells benign, stopping them from spreading around the body and so threateninglife.

The revolutionary approach works by switching back on the body'snatural cancer suppressor genes that have been turned off by the disease.

While it does not reduce the tumour that is already formed it stops itspreading around the body.

The team at Nottingham University have testedthe treatment on animals and have had a 100 per cent success rate andare now hoping to team up with a pharmaceutical company to develop it forhumans.

The Research, published in the Journal Molecular Cancer, reveals how DrCinzia Allegrucci and Dr Andrew Johnson centres around reactivating tumoursuppressor genes.

Ordinarily cell division is controlled by specific genes that kill ormend rogue or damaged cells.

But cancers occur when these go wrong – especially if tumour suppressorgenes are for some reason turned off.

The team used a new technique that involves using proteins fromsalamanders that have been shown in the past to be able to switch on and offhuman genes.

When they were mixed with breast cancer cells, the team were amazedto find they reactivated the cancer suppression genes.

In mice given breast cancer, an injection of the proteins stopped thecancer in its tracks.
Now they want to isolate exactly what proteins were involved in"rebooting" the cells and reproduce them as a drug.

Nell Barrie, science information officer at Cancer Research UK, said:"It's becoming clear that cancer is driven not just by faulty genes but bychanges in cells that help to switch genes on and off.

"This interesting new technique will shed light on how thisprocess contributes to the disease, and further research could one day lead tonew treatments that help to reverse these complex changes in cancercells."

China's Prospects





Isuppose it is time to ask oneself where this all ends.  In the best of all worlds, we end up with aestablished middle class living in nice homes and apartments representing overfifty percent of the population.  That isa good thing.

The question is whether or notthis can be done without a big hiccup. Perhaps the answer is that Taiwanand Japandid it.  Once achieved though, theslowdown becomes also inevitable.  Thosecountries are trying to avoid it by investing heavily offshore to jump startother economies and it may be working.  However,Taiwan and Japan today look pretty ordinary while playingheavily in China.

Two years ago the Chinese toppedout their uptake from the villages of bright young workers and I must the curvemust be now negative.  Thus exploitationof their best growth driver is peaked and in decline.

Yet China itself still has two moredecades of solid growth ahead of itself before demographic pressures become amajor drag.  Recall that the one childpolicy began during the sixties and provided the sons and daughters that madethe first cohort in 1980.  That cohorthas just reached retirement age in China (Age fifty is treated as acut off when a worker typically returns to his home village to raise his grandchildren).  Thus the most workers are nowworking as will ever be.

In fact we now have an agingforce similar to Japanon the way.

I do not know how much longer thepresent growth rate is sustainable but down ticks can now be anticipated andare way more likely than any continuation.




JANUARY 08, 2011


Having a lot of overbuilding would be a huge issue for a western real estatemarket. The difference is that they are not urbanizing at 20-30 million peopleper year and they do not have a political system where the government can go tothe villages and rural areas and say - We have a million buses over there - geton your going to Kangbashi. There are more processes and procedures than thatbut Chinese leadership has far more flexibility to manage and direct theeconomy.

In case you missed it – 

They will have more high speed rail (13,000 km) by the end of this year thanthe rest of the world combined (10,500-11,000 km. Europe + Japan + everyone)

Chinawill also have megabuses so that they can rapidly get more mass transit withoutdisrupting existing roads. The Megabus system will Ten times cheaper than subway systems in china. Less than$2 million per kilometer for megabus system instead of $70 million per kilometer for subway (Chinawill spend $146 billion to add over 2000 kilometers of subway by 2015.)


China'sold target for 2020 for nuclear power was 40 GWe. A new target is 48.5Gigawatts by 2015. More than the old 2020 target and in half the time.

Things are just different when your economy is going at 300 miles per hourinstead of 65 miles per hour. 

Full Spectrum Solar Advance





This new protocol effectivelytaps the full spectrum, and I presume wee are talking about the visiblespectrum.  We live in an ocean ofinfrared radiation that would be neat to convert into brake horsepower.  Obviously this has to now be made efficientin order to be useful.

The good news is that what theyhave so far will be easy to manufacture and we could have a fairly efficientsolar cell able to across the available spectrum.  This means a greater energy gain per squarefoot.

In the best of all worlds,capturing around thirty per cent of the available spectrum would pretty wellend the hunt because everyone could agree that diminishing returns thenrules.  Up to that point, we know that smallincremental advances have big consequences. This is one such. 

Commercial equipment makers claimas high as fifteen percent efficiency, but no one bothers to explain quite howthat is actually measured.  In thisexample, we are using three bands.  Ifone band is good for 12% and the other two are good for 5% then we end up withan output equivalent to 22% using the measure equivalent for the single bands.

This will be worth tracking tosee what is made of it all.

A Step Closer toPractical Full Spectrum Solar Cells

JANUARY 25, 2011





A solar cell’s ability to convert sunlight to electric current islimited by the band gaps of the semiconductors fromwhich it is made. For example, semiconductors with wide band gaps respond toshorter wavelengths withhigher energies (lower left). A semiconductor with an intermediate band hasmultiple band gaps and can respond to a range of energies(lowerright)


Although full-spectrum solar cells have been made, none yet havebeen suitable for manufacture at a consumer-friendly price. Researchersat BerkeleyLabs have demonstrated asolar cell thatnot only responds to virtually the entire solar spectrum, it can also readilybe made using one of the semiconductor industry’s most common manufacturingtechniques.


Using the unique features of the electronic band structure of GaNxAs1-xalloys, we have designed, fabricated and tested a multiband photovoltaicdevice. The device demonstrates an optical activity of three energy bands thatabsorb, and convert into electrical current, the crucial part of the solarspectrum. The performance of the device and measurements ofelectroluminescence, quantum efficiency and photomodulated reflectivity areanalyzed in terms of the band anticrossing model of the electronic structure ofhighly mismatched alloys. The results demonstrate the feasibility of using highlymismatched alloys to engineer the semiconductor energy band structure forspecific device applications.

How to make a full-spectrum solar cell

“Since no one material is sensitive to all wavelengths, the underlyingprinciple of a successful full-spectrum solar cell is to combine differentsemiconductors with different energy gaps,” says Walukiewicz.


One way to combine different band gaps is to stack layers of differentsemiconductors and wire them in series. This is the principle of currenthigh-efficiency solar cell technology thatuses three different semiconductor alloys with different energy gaps. In 2002,Walukiewicz and Kin Man Yu of Berkeley Lab’s MSD found that by adjusting theamounts of indium and gallium in the same alloy, indium gallium nitride, eachdifferent mixture in effect became a different kind of semiconductor thatresponded to different wavelengths. By stacking several of the crystallinelayers, all closely matched but with different indium content, they made aphotovoltaic device that was sensitive to the full solar spectrum.


However, says Walukiewicz, “Even when the different layers are well matched,these structures are still complex – and so is the process of manufacturingthem. Another way to make a full-spectrum cell is to make a single alloy withmore than one band gap.”


In 2004 Walukiewicz and Yu made an alloy of highly mismatched semiconductorsbased on a common alloy, zinc (plus manganese) and tellurium. By doping thisalloy with oxygen, they added a third distinct energy band between the existingtwo – thus creating three different band gaps that spanned the solar spectrum.Unfortunately, says Walukiewicz, “to manufacture this alloy is complex andtime-consuming, and these solar cells are also expensive to produce inquantity.”


The new solar cell material from Walukiewicz and Yu and their colleagues in Berkeley Lab’s MSD and RoseStreet Labs Energy, workingwith Sumika Electronics Materials in Phoenix, Arizona, is another multibandsemiconductor made from a highly mismatched alloy. In this case the alloy isgallium arsenide nitride, similar in composition to one of the most familiarsemiconductors, gallium arsenide. By replacing some of the arsenic atoms withnitrogen, a third, intermediate energy band is created. The good news is thatthe alloy can be made by metalorganic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD), one ofthe most common methods of fabricating compound semiconductors.


How band gaps work


Band gaps arise because semiconductors are insulators at a temperature ofabsolute zero but inch closer to conductivity as they warm up. To conductelectricity, some of the electrons normally bound to atoms (those in thevalence band) must gain enough energy to flow freely – that is, move into theconduction band. The band gap is the energy needed to do this.


When an electron moves into the conduction band it leaves behind a “hole” inthe valence band, which also carries charge, just as the electrons in theconduction band; holes are positive instead of negative.


A large band gap means high energy, and thus a wide-band-gap material respondsonly to the more energetic segments of the solar spectrum, such as ultravioletlight. By introducing a third band, intermediate between the valence band andthe conduction band, the same basic semiconductor can respond to lower andmiddle-energy wavelengths as well.


This is because, in a multiband semiconductor, there is a narrow band gap thatresponds to low energies between the valence band and the intermediate band.Between the intermediate band and the conduction band is another relativelynarrow band gap, one that responds to intermediate energies. And finally, theoriginal wide band gap is still there to take care of high energies.


“The major issue in creating a full-spectrum solar cell is finding the rightmaterial,” says Kin Man Yu. “The challenge is to balance the proper compositionwith the proper doping.”

In solar cells made of some highly mismatched alloys, a third band ofelectronic states can be created inside the band gap of the host material byreplacing atoms of one component with a small amount of oxygen or nitrogen. Inso—called II-VI semiconductors (which combine elements from these two groups ofMendeleev’s original periodic table), replacing some group VI atoms with oxygenproduces an intermediate band whose width and location can be controlled byvarying the amount of oxygen. Walukiewicz and Yu’s original multiband solarcell was a II-VI compound that replaced group VI tellurium atoms with oxygenatoms. Their current solar cell material is a III-V alloy. The intermediatethird band is made by replacing some of the group V component’s atoms –arsenic, in this case – with nitrogen atoms.


Finding the right combination of alloys, and determining the right dopinglevels to put an intermediate band right where it’s needed, is mostly based ontheory, using the band anticrossing model developed at Berkeley Lab over thepast 10 years.


“We knew that two-percent nitrogen ought to do the job,”says Yu. “We knew where the intermediate band ought to be and what to expect.The challenge was designing the actual device.”


Passing the test


A test device of the new multiband solar cell was arranged to block currentfrom the intermediate band; this allowed a wide range of wavelengths found inthe solar spectrum to stimulate current that flowed from both conduction andvalence bands (electrons and holes, respectively). In a comparison device thecurrent from the intermediate band was not blocked, and it interfered withcurrent from the conduction band, limiting the device’s response. (For bestresolution, click on image.)




At top, a test device of the new multiband solar cell was arranged to blockcurrent from the intermediate band; this allowed a wide range of wavelengthsfound in the solar spectrum to stimulate current that flowed from bothconduction and valence bands (electrons and holes, respectively). In acomparison device, at bottom, the current from the intermediate band was notblocked, and it interfered with current from the conduction band, limiting thedevice’s response. (For best resolution, click on image.)

Using their new multiband material as the core of a test cell, the researchersilluminated it with the full spectrum of sunlight to measure how much currentwas produced by different colors of light. The key to making a multiband cellwork is to make sure the intermediate band is isolated from the contacts wherecurrent is collected.


“The intermediate band must absorb light, but it acts only as a stepping stoneand must not be allowed to conduct charge, or else it basically shorts out thedevice,” Walukiewicz explains.

The test device had negatively doped semiconductor contacts on the substrate tocollect electrons from the conduction band, and positively doped semiconductorcontacts on the surface to collect holes from the valence band. Current from theintermediate band was blocked by additional layers on top and bottom.


For comparison purposes, the researchers built a cell that was almost identicalbut not blocked at the bottom, allowing current to flow directly from theintermediate band to the substrate.

The results of the test showed that light penetrating the blocked deviceefficiently yielded current from all three energy bands – valence tointermediate, intermediate to conduction, and valence to conduction – andresponded strongly to all parts of the spectrum, from infrared with an energyof about 1.1 electron volts (1.1 eV), to over 3.2 eV, well into theultraviolet.


By comparison, the unblocked device responded well only in the near infrared,declining sharply in the visible part of the spectrum and missing thehighest-energy sunlight. Because it was unblocked, the intermediate band hadessentially usurped the conduction band, intercepting low-energy electrons fromthe valence band and shuttling them directly to the contact layer.


Further support for the success of the multiband device and its method ofoperation came from tests “in reverse” – operating the device as a lightemitting diode (LED). At low voltage, the device emitted four peaks in theinfrared and visible light regions of the spectrum. Primarily intended as asolar cell material, this performance as an LED may suggest additionalpossibilities for gallium arsenide nitride, since it is a dilute nitride verysimilar to the dilute nitride, indium gallium arsenide nitride, used in commercial“vertical cavity surface-emitting lasers” (VCSELs), which have found wide usebecause of their many advantages over other semiconductor lasers.


With the new, multiband photovoltaic device based on gallium arsenide nitride,the research team has demonstrated a simple solar cell that responds tovirtually the entire solar spectrum – and can readily be made using one of thesemiconductor industry’s most common manufacturing techniques. The resultspromise highly efficient solar cells that are practical to produce.

Lab Produced Meat Closer




Of course the first argument infavor of growing meat is that it frees up massive tracts of range land.  Then we have the argument against theprospect of quality.  Yet the fact that Iam now posting on the early advent of replacement parts for human beings tellsme that quality will be attained and so will inexpensive production.

I think that the land argument ispretty irrelevant and the debate there should focus on optimization of landusage.  The natural world is quite ableto provide us with all the meat protein we want in a highly sustainable way.  What is more important is that we need thesustainable way in order to optimize the land itself.  We eat the natural surpluses to prevent overproduction and the resultant biome failure that this inspires.

We will still want to produce ourown inexpensive meat substitute as a simple method of converting plantfeedstocks into high quality edible food.

Recall the conversion ratios weare starting to see in aquaculture. Today half of all fish consumed is farmed.  Think about that for a moment when you go tothe fish counter.  Notice that there isplenty of it and it is clearly cheaper than any wild counter part.  Goodbye to the wild fishery.  It will not take a generation to finish thejob since we now have a replacement for tuna.

I see no reason to suppose thatcultured meat will not accomplish the same revolution.  Humanity wants a modern diet as soon aspossible and a cultured cutlet will always be welcome.  It will also be eventually superior to thenon uniform supply of meat products we presently consume.



South Carolina scientist works to grow meat in lab

In a small laboratory on an upper floor of the basic science buildingat the Medical Universityof South Carolina,Vladimir Mironov, M.D., Ph.D., has been working for a decade to grow meat.

January 31, 2011
By Harriet McLeod

CHARLESTON, South Carolina (Reuters) - In a small laboratory on anupper floor of the basic science building at the Medical University of SouthCarolina, Vladimir Mironov, M.D., Ph.D., has been working for a decade to growmeat.

A developmental biologist and tissue engineer, Dr. Mironov, 56, is oneof only a few scientists worldwide involved in bioengineering"cultured" meat.

It's a product he believes could help solve future global food crisesresulting from shrinking amounts of land available for growing meat theold-fashioned way ... on the hoof.

Growth of "in-vitro" or cultured meat is also under way inthe Netherlands, Mironovtold Reuters in an interview, but in the United States, it is science insearch of funding and demand.

The new National Institute of Food and Agriculture, part of the U.S.Food and Drug Administration, won't fund it, the National Institutes of Healthwon't fund it, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration funded itonly briefly, Mironov said.

"It's classic disruptive technology," Mironov said."Bringing any new technology on the market, average, costs $1 billion. Wedon't even have $1 million."

Director of the Advanced Tissue Biofabrication Center in the Departmentof Regenerative Medicine and Cell Biology at the medical university, Mironovnow primarily conducts research on tissue engineering, or growing, of humanorgans.

"There's a yuck factor when people find out meat is grown in alab. They don't like to associate technology with food," said NicholasGenovese, 32, a visiting scholar in cancer cellbiology working under a People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals three-yeargrant to run Dr. Mironov's meat-growing lab.

"But there are a lot of products that we eat today that areconsidered natural that are produced in a similar manner," Genovese said.

"There's yogurt, which is cultured yeast. You have wine productionand beer production. These were not produced in laboratories. Society hasaccepted these products."

If wine is produced in winery, beer in a brewery and bread in a bakery,where are you going to grow cultured meat?

In a "carnery," if Mironov has his way. That is the name hehas given future production facilities.
He envisions football field-sized buildings filled with largebioreactors, or bioreactors the size of a coffee machine in grocery stores, tomanufacture what he calls "charlem" -- "Charleston engineered meat."

"It will be functional, natural, designed food," Mironovsaid. "How do you want it to taste? You want a little bit of fat, you wantpork, you want lamb? We design exactly what you want. We can design texture.

"I believe we can do it without genes. But there is no evidencethat if you add genes the quality of food will somehow suffer. Geneticallymodified food is already normal practice and nobody dies."

Dr. Mironov has taken myoblasts -- embryonic cells that develop intomuscle tissue -- from turkey and bathed them in a nutrient bath of bovine serumon a scaffold made of chitosan (a common polymer found in nature) to growanimal skeletal muscle tissue. But how do you get that juicy, meaty quality?

Genovese said scientists want to add fat. And adding a vascular systemso that interior cells can receive oxygen will enable the growth of steak, say,instead of just thin strips of muscle tissue.

Cultured meat could eventually become cheaper than what Genovese calledthe heavily subsidized production of farm meat, he said, and if the publicaccepts cultured meat, the future holds benefits.

"Thirty percent of the earth's land surface area is associatedwith producing animal protein on farms," Genovese said.

"Animals require between 3 and 8 pounds of nutrient to make 1pound of meat. It's fairly inefficient. Animals consume food and produce waste.Cultured meat doesn't have a digestive system.

"Further out, if we have interplanetary exploration, people willneed to produce food in space and you can't take a cow with you.

"We have to look to these ideas in order to progress. Otherwise,we stay static. I mean, 15 years ago who could have imagined the iPhone?"

Monday, January 31, 2011

Eliminating Left Hand Turns





Thesestudies will have areal impact on street design and planning.  The bottom line is that left hand turns are hugelyinefficient during periods of heavy traffic and need to be diverted into rightturn loops.  The saving on fuelexperienced by myth busters is actually a shocking result and informs us justhow much fuel is spent idling while waiting for a traffic signal.

Fundamentally we need to stopcatering to the left hand turn and spend of making the alternates work well.  This means improving the available right handturn corridors so that the traffic can use it smoothly.  It may seem an inconvenience to drivers whowant to go left but we now know better and should we think on it, idling in aleft hand turn lane while waiting for a traffic opening has always beenproblematic.

The direct saving in both fuelusage and accident rates provide a direct incentive to reengineer all such busystreets and theirs feeders.  I know fromexperience that there are plenty of locations were doing a right hand turn isnot particularly practical and this will take time to fix if it can be done.

Yet beginning with the easy oneswill allow us to educate the public.

Obviously this clearly applies to heavily traveled streets and not your typical residential street network.  however, fixing all this will impact on a lot of residential streets to some degree.


JANUARY 10, 2011




Superstreets are thoroughfares where the left-hand turns from sidestreets are re-routed, as is traffic from side streets that needs to cross thethoroughfare. In both instances, drivers are first required to make a rightturn and then make a U-turn around a broad median. While this may seemtime-consuming, the study shows that it actually results in a significant timesavings since drivers are not stuck waiting to make left-hand turns or fortraffic from cross-streets to go across the thoroughfare.

* a 20 percent overall reduction in travel time compared to similar intersections thatuse conventional traffic designs

* superstreet intersections experience an average of 46 percent fewer reported automobile collisions – and 63 percent fewer collisionsthat result in personal injury



US motor vehicle deaths by year

2005   43,443  
2006   42,642 
2007   41,059
2008   37,261 
2009   33,808  

About 90-115 people die every day in vehicle crashes in the United States

Worldwide an estimated 1.2 million people are killed in roadcrashes each year and as many as 50 million are injured. Projectionsindicate that these figures will increase by about 65% over the next 20 yearsunless there is new commitment to prevention.

There is the potential that widespread superstreet adoption would save severalthousand lives per year in the USA and a few hundred thousand lives worldwide.

The paper is called Operational Effects of Signalized Superstreets in North Carolina.

Mythbusters showed that only using right turns saves gas
The myth was setup from the perspective of a delivery truck driver.Several locations within the San Francisco area were setup as delivery points, then tworoutes were derived. The first route was a more “logical” route trying not tofavor right turns. This route had eight left turns, four right turns, and atotal distance of 5.2 miles. The second route tried to exclude as many leftturns as practical. The “right turn” route was 6.8 miles long, had one leftturn and twenty-three right turns. Each route visited each stop in the sameorder.

The MythBusters concluded that right turns were indeed more efficient in theirtest. While the route favoring right turns was a longer distance and took alonger amount of time, it used only 4.0 gallons of fuel compared to 6.8 gallonsof fuel on the “control” route.


No Left Turn: ‘Superstreet’ Traffic Design Improves Travel Time, Safety



Release Date: 01.10.2011

Filed under Releases

The so-called “superstreet” traffic design results in significantlyfaster travel times, and leads to a drastic reduction in automobile collisionsand injuries, according to North Carolina State University researchers who haveconducted the largest-ever study of superstreets and their impacts.

Superstreets are surface roads, not freeways.  It is defined as athoroughfare where the left-hand turns from side streets are re-routed, as istraffic from side streets that needs to cross the thoroughfare. In bothinstances, drivers are first required to make a right turn and then make a U-turnaround a broad median. While this may seem time-consuming, the study shows thatit actually results in a significant time savings since drivers are not stuckwaiting to make left-hand turns or for traffic from cross-streets to go acrossthe thoroughfare.

"Superstreet" traffic designs result in faster travel timesand significantly fewer accidents, according to the new study.
“The study shows a 20 percent overall reduction in travel time comparedto similar intersections that use conventional traffic designs,” says Dr. JoeHummer, professor of civil, construction and environmental engineering at NCState and one of the researchers who conducted the study. “We also found thatsuperstreet intersections experience an average of 46 percent fewer reportedautomobile collisions – and 63 percent fewer collisions that result in personalinjury.”

The researchers assessed travel time at superstreet intersections asthe amount of time it takes a vehicle to pass through an intersection from themoment it reaches the intersection – whether traveling left, right or straightahead. The travel-time data were collected from three superstreets located ineastern and central North Carolina,all of which have traffic signals. The superstreet collision data werecollected from 13 superstreets located across North Carolina, none of which have trafficsignals.

The superstreet concept has been around for over 20 years, but littleresearch had been done to assess its effectiveness under real-world conditions.The NC State study is the largest analysis ever performed of the impact ofsuperstreets in real traffic conditions.

A paper on the travel time research is being presented Jan. 24 at theTransportation Research Board Annual Meeting in Washington, D.C.The paper is co-authored by Hummer, former NC State graduate students RebeccaHaley and Sarah Ott, and three researchers from NC State’s Institute forTransportation Research and Education: Robert Foyle, associate director;Christopher Cunningham, senior research associate; and Bastian Schroeder,research associate.

The collision research was part of an overarching report of the studysubmitted to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) lastmonth, and is the subject of a forthcoming paper. The study was funded byNCDOT.

NC State’s Department of Civil, Construction and EnvironmentalEngineering is part of the university’s College of Engineering.

Richard Dell on Space Fusion





Thetake home from this industry insider is that over unity fusion is likely tohappen in the next couple of years.  Iconcur for the same reasons.  This weeksdemonstration of twenty times unity will turn out to be a very useful form offusion energy but specifically limited to producing heat.  The forms we are referring to will producehigh energy plasma and an energy takeoff that is mostly electrical which is waymore flexible.


His focus here is to tap suchenergy to drive an impulse motor space craft. Recall that it is only necessary to sustain a one g thrust on a continuousbasis to go to the nearby stars on a long trip. However, the same system puts everything within the solar system a fewweeks away.  Thus a fusion reactor and aone g thruster rigged up as a space craft completely opens up the solar systemto us.

The image gives us some of thepresent design concepts.  I think that weneed a prime space lifter to haul components out of the gravity well and thateverything else must be assembled there. A fusion based lifter would make it practical.

It is great to see folks getting excited about space travel again.



JANUARY 05, 2011


Here is the Richard Dell Jr interview. Mr. Dell believes that he andhis team have developed a method for generating fusion power which isappropriate for providing the propulsion for exploring and colonizing space. Heis confident that this approach could lead to spacecraft capable of flying tothe moon and landing on it, and returning to earth usinga single craft without jettisoning any stages or equipment. This technologycould also be used to send humans to mars in only 2 months. His company, which is stilllargely in stealth mode, plans on generating short term revenue by selling moreefficient satellite maneuvering thrusters to the satellite industry. Mr. Dellis confident that breakeven fusion power generation will be demonstrated withinthe next 3 years.


Highlight answers from Mr Dell in this the interview: 



This technology will change everything. By 2020, we could be activelyimplementing commercial settlement and/or tourist expeditions to Mars.


2011 or 2012 will be the year of small scale fusion


This system will have ten times the propulsive thrust of a George Miley IECfusion propulsion proposal 


5 weeks to Mars with Helium 3 version of the fusion spaceship


In the 98 pager there is a description of being able to use the IEC in jet modefor propulsion. 


Way down the development path would be big fusion rockets like this





The ships that are designed 


IEC Fusion Ship I
500 MT
Isp =16,000
Thrust = 1028 Newtons

IEC Fusion Ship II
500 Mt
Isp = 35,000
Thrust = 4369 Newtons

But near term are progressively better propulsion units that start withsatellite maneuvering thrusters that are ten times better than today’s Hallthrusters.

IEC power units can be added in series to develop higher power units such asrequired for deep space propulsion -- Magnetically Channeled Spherical Array,MCSA

High Power Operation
Eliminates Grid Structure
Increase Energy Confinement Time

They are tuning the IEC configuration for space propulsion

If they pulse it up to several thousand amps then it is OK if IEC only hasscales by cubing the power instead of to the fifth power to get to 25Megawatts.

A 7page paper- Magnetically-Channeled SIEC Array (MCSA) Fusion Device forInterplanetary Missions


Question: Tell us about how you became involved with Dr. Miley

Answer: Several years back I was a Program Manager for a small, family ownedcompany. While I worked there I became very interested in developing an Advanced Aerospace Research Center and began to makecontact with a variety of physicists, technologists and foundations. The ArlingtonInstitute and the Institute for Advanced Studies in Austin introduced me to Dr. Miley, about fouryears ago this March. I am truly grateful to the principals of both of theseInstitutes and I confess that I owe them a debt of gratitude more than I couldpossible ever repay.




So, we all shared at least one thing in common, that the problem with a youngperson out in the middle of a cornfield in Indiana is the same problem for theyoung person in the slums of LA - they have had their frontier taken away fromthem. Think about that. Americahas always had a frontier. We lost it for a couple decades, it was given backto us briefly from ’69 to ’72 and then it disappeared again. It’s time to giveour young people back their frontier. They want it, they need it, it offers aneconomic engine of unparalleled capabilities for our young people and ourNation.

And so our little loosely organized group is focused on three areas, energy,the environment, and space. The thrust I’d prefer to discuss first is SPACE,the commercial development of manned and unmanned space technologies thatenable and expedite exploration and settlement of our Moon and Mars and to doso in this century. Let that sink in. This century. OK? So we hope to beginnext generation development of technologies that facilitate this objectiveusing intellectual property that stands the test and muster of our intellectualproperty analysis as well as showing feasibility in data and testing at thesame time. The combination of the two is the fulcrum.

98 page technical presentation from 2009 by George Miley 



There has been advances since the presentation but the solidity of thetechnical basis can be seen.

Question: In a minute I want to ask you more about your intellectual property,but first, tell me more about the device you call an LTV?

Answer: Lunar Transit Vehicle. Moon and back safely, carry six people plus twopilots/attendants or two pilots and a good bit of gear. Nothing new here,except the Miley IEC technology and hybrid of airbreathing MHD hybrid IEC isan application which we believe we can now amplify in terms of propulsivethrust by 10 times. We want to develop larger prototypes of fusion poweredpropulsion systems that would allow a single stage re-usable rocket/spacecraftto fly to and land on the moon, recover regolith samples, do valuable science, offer some entertaining tourist sights, andreturn to earth safely. We are confident that our aneutronic fusion spacepropulsion system could be a key factor in opening up space and creating athriving space industry. I’m actually hoping with this interview to get someattention from the folks I heard some kid describe recently as the “SpaceBarons”. Space-Barons, if you want the next stage of propulsion, if you wantseven or eight week flights to Mars, we are here and open for business.

Question: Where is the intellectual property coming from?

Answer: We have a commercialization agreement with Dr. George Miley and hisNuclear Plasma Laboratory organization known as NPL. Wecreated a joint venture to explore a novel form of liquid sodium borohydridefuel cell, and I am developing a program for IEC Propulsion. What we all wantto see is improvements in the Inertial Electrostatic Confinement (IEC)prototypes as we build larger and better. We have been conducting extensive Rand D as well as doing commercialization assessments through our cooperativeefforts with M-CAM. The past four years of diligence on a variety ofspace-related energy technologies may soon pay off.

Question: What’s M-CAM?

Answer: Well, I mentioned intellectual property diligence before, and havinglearned the M-CAM system I am still quite utterly blown away when I try toimagine what it was like to do diligence on technology *AND* intellectualproperty assessment before this kind of capability was available. M-CAM takesall the voodoo out, and the best antiseptic is applied, complete illumination.Without the M-CAM team and their software, the past four years of diligence andgroundwork on a whole variety of space-related energy technologies could neverhave paid off.

Question: Back to the technology, how closely are you collaborating with Dr.Miley?

Answer: We have been working with him for the past four years, and we hold himin the highest regard. We have an extraordinary working relationship with him,and now that Bussard has passed away, Dr. Miley needs to be the pivotal figurefor aneutronic fusion propulsion research. George is trying to create a fusionprogram that burns aneutronically, without magnets, and that burns a relativelyinexpensive fuel. This is what we need to get to Mars and back in less than twomonths, and with some excellent inherent shielding of 99% of cosmic radiation.Shielding can deal with the 1% we can’t filter out, the worst of the stuff, themetallic ions.

Question: What are the main technologies that you are developing?

Answer: There are two primary technologies that George’s people are developing.They are modifying current IEC designs to increase plasma flow and pressure. Theyare also developing a novel form of airbreathing hypersonic spaceplane with anIEC. This is called airbreathing MHD-IEC hybrid. The other is an injection ofIEC with a unique device to enable a vehicle to do a horizontal liftoff andthen proceed to LEO. By using these two technologies, we can develop a highlyefficient single-stage-to-orbit vehicle that can operate both within andoutside of the atmosphere. It could lift off from earth, land on the moon andcome back, without jettisoning any stages or equipment. This work is beyond thetheoretical and is now solidly in the realm of applied practical science.

Question: What fuel source will this fusion drive consume?

Answer: Initially it will use Proton-Boron 11. The ideal fusion fuel isHelium 3, which is found in abundance on the moon. PB11 is nearly as good, andrequires minimal shielding from radiation. So we will initially use PB11,and switch to HE3 when it becomes available, or when the Russians let us havemore, hahaha.

Question: You’re joking about the Russians, right?

Answer: ‘Not at all’, or perhaps ‘yes and no’ would have been better. The‘rumor on the street’ to explain why the Russians took He3 off the market isbecause they have an He3 reactor, big project…a project incidentally I would haveliked to see take root in Southwest Virginia.

Question: OK, back to Space, what are the size and weight parameters of thisproposed fusion powered spacecraft?

Answer: It is all very preliminary, so I can only provide ballpark estimates.George did some incredible simulation work to lay out the metrics, publishedthem over 15 years ago, btw. So imagine a 500 metric ton spacecraft outfittedwith a certain number of IEC fusion propulsion devices. With PB11 fuel, itcould lift off from earth, and reach Mars in eight weeks or less. Using HE3fuel, it could get to Mars in only five weeks. These reactors would be smallenough to be placed on a spacecraft the size of a standard commercial jet.

Question: How much funding is your program receiving? When will the firstprototype IEC drives be unveiled?

Answer: Both of those questions involve proprietary knowledge which I am notinterested in doing in this interview. I can, say, however, that all of ourfunding is from private sources - we aren't currently looking for anyGovernment funding. We have been informally working on this for the past fouryears, and we hope to be going public with more details in mid 2011.

Question: Are you collaborating with any other fusion groups, such as EMC2 orGeneral Fusion?

Answer: Developing partnerships and closing on funding agreements is where weare. We are interested in creating entrepreneurial partnerships which play tothe key values of our strategy. and bring more business to our company, whilesupporting efforts that move and advance our technology and commercializationcapabilities. So we are open to collaborating with other companies and we wishthe groups you referred to the very best of luck in 2011.

Question: How will your company generate revenue in the short term?

Answer: Current satellites maneuver based on Hall thrusters, whichare ion thrusters capable of providing small amounts of thrust. Dr. Miley hasdeveloped a new propulsion technique that provides an ultra-maneuverablethruster that can provide an order of magnitude more thrust than an equivalentHall thruster. We see strong short term Return On Investment (ROI) by sellingthis thruster to the satellite industry.

Question: When will we see breakeven fusion power generation?

Answer: We are confident that breakeven will be demonstrated within the next 24to 36 months by someone. I predict that 2011 or at the very least, 2012 will beremembered as the "year of small scale fusion"- there are just waytoo many people building fusors out there and for those who would prefer tokeep the djini in the bottle, sorry, but it’s bound to happen, and it surelooks to many of us that it could be sooner than anyone expects.

Question: How long will the research phase continue?

Answer: This project will be over 5-7 years, but will see economic returns waybefore the program is finished. We’re looking for the two year returns, not thethree year returns. This will be primarily servicing the small satellite sectorinitially, unless we can wake one of the Space-Barons out of their “chemical-enginehypnosis”. But ultimately this will be geared for deep space capabilities withmanned missions within the solar system.


Question: Will this system be safe? Are there any radiation issues with thesesystems?

Answer: To call these systems minimally radioactive is a disservice. Lessradiation will be generated than exists in background space. These systems arecompletely safe. When I first became acquainted with these technologies almostfive years ago I first asked what were the implications in terms of counter-terrorismand I was delighted to find that all IECs work basically the same, ifcontainment is lost, it is like blowing out a candle. It would be moredangerous to blow up a refrigerator than one of our reactors.

Question: How will this technology change the world in the next decade?

Answer: This technology will change everything. By 2020, we could be activelyimplementing commercial settlement and/or tourist expeditions to Mars. There isno silver bullet for jump-starting the commercial space industry except fusion.The demand for Space is there, we’ve all seen it. We are confident that withina decade we will have developed all of the infrastructure and commercialbreakthroughs necessary to enable the rapid manned occupation of the Moon andMars.

Question: How can someone get in contact with you to discuss this program?

Answer: I would prefer to receive email on this topic to my home email address,so you can publish the following : omega dot arimathea at gmail dot com.

Ad astra!