[MainFrame65]

The high cost of fission energy comes primarily from overcoming the fanatical resistance to its use from the enviro whackos. However, natural Uranium (and Plutonium, which is derived from Uranium in a nuclear reaction) is similar to fossil fuels in that it is energy stored by nature at a different time and place, that we collect, process, and use. We have a lot of it, particularly since we have many tons of bomb-grade stuff that would need to be diluted twentyfold for power reactor use. But we are using up what exists on this planet, and it is not being replenished.

Fusion, on the other hand, is a NEW energy source if we can figure out how to do it. And of course, the fuel for fusion energy is ... Hydrogen! Well, actually Deuterium, an uncommon form of Hydrogen, but the amount of it found in the oceans would last for thousands of years.

But in the meantime, fossil fuels as an energy source will not go on forever. Renewable source fuels are not up to the task, and solar, wind, and tidal will never be more than marginal - they are intermittent and unreliable.

Hydrogen is an energy VECTOR, not an energy source. You only get out of it a portion of the energy that you expend manufacturing it. But someday, that may be the best that you can do. We use a lot of energy from incredibly expensive sources because of its convenience and portability. Think of a flashlight, or a portable radio.

[cinFLA]

Fusion, on the other hand, is a NEW energy source if we can figure out how to do it.

You say that fission energy is like oil, etc. Only stored energy which is non-replenishable. However, you say, Fusion is a new energy! Perhaps you should not violate the first law of thermodynamics so easily.