[extropy-chat] Fusion Power: Linchpin Technology?

Sun Jan 21 10:44:04 UTC 2007

$200 million is well within the means of some well-heeled individuals  
and many corporations.  The research will be funded I imagine.   If  
not by a western government or privately then by the Chinese.

- samantha

On Jan 19, 2007, at 2:48 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 03:45:23PM -0700, mike99 wrote:
>>
>> Fusion Power: Linchpin Technology?
>>
>>    Cheap, abundant and clean energy is the goal of  
>> environmentalists and
>>    technologists. Where will it come from? Solar, wind, geothermal,  
>> tidal
>>    and biomass can provide some of it, but these sources have many
>>    limitations, such as low-energy density, relatively high cost, and
>>    uneven global distribution. If we could develop a technology to
>>    generate clean energy from an element found in water, our energy
>>    problems could be solved.
>>
>>    Can we do that? Yes, with fusion.
>>
>>    ...more -> [1]http://latorra.blogspot.com/
>
> Allright, let's look at this in detail. First, the full text, in
> order to be able to comment:
>
> http://latorra.blogspot.com/
>
> Tuesday, January 16, 2007
> Fusion Power: Linchpin Technology?
>
> Cheap, abundant and clean energy is the goal of environmentalists  
> and technologists. Where will it come from? Solar, wind, geothermal,  
> tidal and biomass can provide some of it, but these sources have  
> many limitations, such as low-energy density, relatively high cost,  
> and uneven global distribution. If we could develop a technology to  
> generate clean energy from an element found in water, our energy  
> problems could be solved.
>
> Can we do that? Yes, with fusion.
>
> Fusion powers the sun[1]. So, indirectly, all photovoltaic cells are  
> indirectly using the output of the fusion process. But photovoltaics  
> are far less inefficient than the fusion process itself.
>
> The development of practical fusion energy systems on earth has been  
> the holy grail of scientists since the 1950s. Today, in the early  
> years of the 21st century, the international effort to develop a  
> commercial fusion energy system is still in its early developmental  
> stages. The ITER "tokamak" (toroidal) fusion reactor now being built  
> in France is experimental, not a commercial energy producing  
> system[2]. Many decades will elapse before any electricity from this  
> particular fusion technology can enter the public energy grid. The  
> current ITER timeline projects commercialization no sooner than 2050  
> and probably much later.
>
> But the ITER machine is not the only possible fusion device. Dr.  
> Robert Bussard and his colleagues claim to have developed a  
> different method of producing fusion power using an Inertial- 
> Electrodynamic Fusion Device that is thousands of times more  
> efficient than the tokamak method, and can be built and deployed to  
> produce commercially usable energy in a decade or so[3a & 3b]. In  
> 2006 the International Academy of Science gave Dr. Bussard its  
> highest award for this research[4].
>
> According to Dr. Bussard, these are some of the advantages of his  
> fusion power system[5]:
>
>
>
>     * Stop Greenhouse Effect
>     * Eliminate Acid Rain Sources
>     * Decrease Thermal Pollution Sources
>     * Stop Nuclear Waste Production
>     * Destroy Nuclear Waste Inventory
>     * End Water Shortages Forever
>     * Cheap Fuel Free Electric Power
>     * Clean Low Cost System
>     * Fresh Water From The Sea
>     * Practical Space Flight
>     * Global Economic Stability
>     * Cheap, Clean Therma/Electric Power Readily Available
>     * Fixed Energy Prices Stabilize Economy
>     * Low Value Cane In Third World Countries Becomes High Value  
> Export Product
>     * Third World Nations Can Become Economically Viable
>     * Profitable Industrialization Possible
>     * Destroys World Market For Gasoline
>     * Eliminates Effect Of Oil Cartels
>     * Oil States Suffer Drastic Income Losses
>     * Desalinization Plants Allow Irrigation Of Arid Lands
>     * Cheap Water Allows Effective Agriculture
>     * Low Cost Power Stabilizes Industrial Nations
>     * Oil Wars Vanish
>     * Mid-East Stabilized by Economics
>     * Third World Becomes Fiscally Responsible
>     * End Use Market Price Ca. $5,000 B In Year 2000 $
>     * Sell/Lease Systems To Supply Energy Plants/Production
>     * Royalty/Lease Fees at 2% of Market Price Equivalent To Ca. 2m/ 
> kWhr Surcharge Yields Net Income (Profit) at Ca. $100 B/Year (which  
> means an estimated electrical cost of 1 cent/kWhr - ed.)
>
>
> If even half of these benefits were to materialize, the world would  
> be transformed. So when will this actually happen?
>
> Maybe never. Dr. Bussard's government research funding of a few  
> million dollars has been terminated. He estimates the cost of fully  
> developing his technology into a commercial system to be about $200  
> million. This is a tiny fraction of the $12 billion of the ITER  
> project. It's even a smaller fraction of the US Federal budget for  
> 2007, which is over $3 trillion. The money Dr. Bussard needs to  
> complete the development of his safe, clean, energy system would be  
> a mere rounding error in the US government's budget, and certainly  
> less than is currently sinking into the sump of fraud, waste and  
> abuse (not to mention misguided policy initiatives).
>
> The dream of fusion power is still a dream deferred. The giant, slow- 
> moving ITER project cannot deliver any useful power until the second  
> half of the 21st century, if then. Dr. Bussard's fast, relatively  
> cheap fusion system could be fully developed, tested and – if it  
> works as promised – deployed by 2017.
>
> Fusion may be the linchpin technology for technical and economic  
> development. Like the linchpin that prevents a wheel from sliding  
> off its axle, fusion can secure the wheel of progress to the axle of  
> safe energy. It can be the source of the clean, abundant energy  
> required for both economic abundance on earth and the exploration  
> oand settlement of space in our solar system and beyond.
>
> Is it worth risking some government money on such a project? I  
> cannot imagine any convincing reason not to.
>
>
> -- 
> Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
> ______________________________________________________________
> ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820            http://www.ativel.com
> 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat