Are there any inherent advantages of using He3-He3 over d-He3?

[privick]

From what I have researched so far, He3-He3's only advantage is that it produces minuscule amounts of neutrons at the expense of lower energy output, higher ignition temperature, and longer confinement time. The expenses also do not even take into account the higher Bremsstrahlung losses eating away at potential power output. With these reasons in mind, am I missing something that makes He3-He3 a third generation fusion fuel hence more desirable than d-He3? This is even more confusing as it would seem that d-He3 is easier to achieve with most of the benefits of aneutronic fusion. Furthermore, d-He3 produces more energetic products and is self sufficient in producing helium 3 as a side reaction. Is reducing the neutron output from a few percentage points (in d-He3) to near zero warrant He3-He3 as a desirable fusion fuel cycle?

 

[Astronuc]

Is reducing the neutron output from a few percentage points (in d-He3) to near zero warrant He3-He3 as a desirable fusion fuel cycle?

Short answer, no. One may wish to research more into aneutronic fusion reactions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aneutronic_fusion

The d + ³He => ⁴He + p + 18.3 MeV is aneutronic, but given equal amounts of d and ³He in a plasma, there will be side reactions. One has to look at the reaction rates of d+d, d+³He and ³He + ³He at the temperature that is optimal for the desired reaction (d+³He).

Looking at ³He + ³He => ⁴He + 2p + 12.86 MeV, there is no advantage to that reaction in terms of energy. The bremstrahlung and recombination losses would be greater for a pure ³He plasma, and the optimal temperature much greater than that for a d + ³He reaction.