Replies

I did not mean to imply that Hydrogen Fusion reactors were "just around the corner". The technical hurdles are indeed staggering. I am simply stating that it needs to be a goal, since it offers the multiple advantages of nearly limitless energy from ordinary water, very little in the way of toxic residue, and the chance to tell all the third world dictators with oil wells to "shove it".

As far as our own U.S. coal reserves...

Is coal a fairly dirty power source? It sure can be, look at how it is used in China. There are cleaner and more efficient ways to burn and process it. It will still release scads of junk in the air, though. My point here is that it's OURS, on OUR soil, under OUR control, and we need to exercise the leverage that gives us, if for nothing else, the short term while other technologies are developed and deployed.

I did not mean to imply that Hydrogen Fusion reactors were "just around the corner". The technical hurdles are indeed staggering. I am simply stating that it needs to be a goal, since it offers the multiple advantages of nearly limitless energy from ordinary water, very little in the way of toxic residue, and the chance to tell all the third world dictators with oil wells to "shove it".

Why are you so fixated on fusion? Fission is here and it works fine.

I've worked on DOE fusion projects and they have *nothing* to do with building power plants. They just spin it to the public that way.

I am simply stating that [fusion] needs to be a goal, since it offers the multiple advantages of nearly limitless energy from ordinary water, very little in the way of toxic residue, and the chance to tell all the third world dictators with oil wells to "shove it".

I agree that fusion should be a goal but keep your time expectation realistic (30-50 years) and have a backup plan in the event it never comes to commercial fruition which is a very real possibility. Incidentally currently envisioned fusion schemes do produce significant toxic wastes as a result of the need to frequently replace the plasma chamber blanket which is highly activated by the intense neutron radiation.

We certainly do agree that this country MUST develop independent and practical energy sources for strategic reasons. However I believe, based on facts and figures, that the ONLY practical and reliable energy technology in todays world that can lead to strategic independence with acceptable environmental impact and safety is new generation nuclear fission reactors. Even starting today it will take 10 years minimum to license and construct new reactors that can begin to contribute to the goal of independence. The first such reactors will merely replace the older reactors that will be shut down and taken out of service, hence no net gain for many years.