Scrap space research, put the money into fusion.

[mistermack]

Why on earth are we not spending more on developing nuclear fusion?
It seems to be going at a snail's pace. And the money being put into the research and developement is tiny, compared to the benfits it could bring.
The main benefit of a successful fusion industry is incredibly cheap electricity.
This is not just a pleasant reduction in one of our household bills, cheap electricity could and would transform the world we live in.
It would make vast areas of Russia and Canada as comfortable and pleasant to live in as the rest of the world. And enable all-year-round food production in that kind of area.
We could also irrigate the sahara desert with cheap electricity, either pumping water from wetter areas, or desalinating seawater, and pumping that to dry areas.

The problem of global warming due to CO2 would be a thing of the past. Electrical power would be replacing fossil fuel use all over the world, in fact you could even take CO2 out of the air, and produce hydrocarbon fuels, if electricity was cheap enough, eliminating the need for fossil fuels completely.

So what are we spending on this answer to the world's problems? The answer is about ten billion Euros on the Iter project, which will be spread over many years, and then design is supposed to start on the subsequent DEMO project in 2017, which is supposed to start generating in 2033.

Is this enough, on a project that could change the fortunes of mankind, and all life on the planet? It's not that it doesn't work. Fusion is demanding, but it's been achieved, and we are already close to producing as much energy out, as we put in. Iter should drive right through that limit, and be producing five to ten times as much energy out as that put in. ( admittedly only in short bursts ).

It's surely time now to give fusion the investment and priority it deserves, even it you have to take the money from treasured projects like space industries.

After all, if the cost of fuel could be brought right down, space travel would be much more feasible, and non polluting. So I say, stop all the spending on space, spend it instead on fusion development, and we could actually get into space quicker than if we continue as we are.
.

[cowiz]

Non-stick pots and pans.

/Close thread

[Trolldor]

lol.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

There's money enough to do both if we'd could get the politicians to stop funding churches.

[Trolldor]

Or wars.
Or paying six figure salaries to politicians.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Or wars.
Or paying six figure salaries to politicians.

Yep, but that was implied in the "stop pissing away our money" part of my post.

[mistermack]

All true. And if you take Asia, USA and Europe, we're probably spending a THOUSAND BILLION dollars a YEAR on energy. If you could advance the fusion project by one single year, that's the sort of money you could be saving, or at least cutting down on.
I'm not convinced by the global warming thing yet, but if I was, surely you should spend money on fusion, before all the other wacky warming stuff they waste money on? At least this makes economic sense, not non-sense.

Edit that. It's more like FOUR THOUSAND BILLION we spend a year on fossil fuels.
.

[Trolldor]

Actually, you aren't saving on anything just by investing in to fusion unless the money is going directly towards a workable model. The better alternatives would be to invest in the already existing sustainable methods of power, such as wind and solar.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Actually, you aren't saving on anything just by investing in to fusion unless the money is going directly towards a workable model. The better alternatives would be to invest in the already existing sustainable methods of power, such as wind and solar.

Tidal generators. The wind doesn't always blow, the sun doesn't always shine, but the tides always flow and ebb.

[Trolldor]

Actually, you aren't saving on anything just by investing in to fusion unless the money is going directly towards a workable model. The better alternatives would be to invest in the already existing sustainable methods of power, such as wind and solar.

Tidal generators. The wind doesn't always blow, the sun doesn't always shine, but the tides always flow and ebb.

Hadn't heard of tidal generators, look interesting.

All of this would be a lot more feasible if people stopped looking at them 'competitively'.

[Coito ergo sum]

I agree, spend more on nuclear fusion, but scrap space research? No way. Spend more on BOTH of those industries and spend less on fucking bullshit bank bailouts, and wasteful "stimulus" spending. We've thrown about $3 trillion dollars down the fucking shitter in the US alone. We should've taken $500 billion of that and spent it on nuclear energy, and another $500 billion of that on the space program.

The space program is by far among the least wasteful programs we spend government money on. Surely, with a $3 trillion annual budget, the US can cut some waste somewhere else besides one of the few things that actually gets results, and encourages industry, technology and science.

[Trolldor]

Like cutting back on the war.

[Coito ergo sum]

Like cutting back on the war.

Sure, that would be great.

Either way, the bullshit the government spends money on domestically is still hugely wasteful. I have no idea why the space program is so often among the first programs to lofted as the thing we should cut in order to pay for something else.

Why not - cut "turtle crossings," coupons for HDTVs, and the $16.5 billion in "earmarks" in the 2010 budget?

What about shit like this?

Rep. Kaptur was attempting to skirt the House Democrats’ ban on for-profit earmarks by securing earmarks for a new nonprofit that was very closely related to a for-profit company. According to the article, Rep Kaptur requested $10.4 million in pork-barrel earmark funding for the Great Lakes Research Center, a nonprofit organization that specializes in the same kind of work, and operates out of the same location as a for-profit company, Imaging Systems Technology. Rep. Kaptur helped Imaging Systems Technology secure $8.4 million in pork-barrel earmark funding in the past. The Times article also reported that Rep. Kaptur received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Imaging Systems Technology’s executives.

http://www.cagw.org/newsroom/porker-of-the-month/2010/

Or, this crap?

$4,545,000 for wood utilization research in 11 states by 10 representatives, including Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), in violation of the Republican earmark ban. According to the website of the American Forest and Paper Association, “The US forest products industry accounts for approximately 6 percent of the total U.S. manufacturing GDP, placing it on par with the automotive and plastics industry. The industry generates more than $200 billion a year in sales and employs more than one million people earning $54 billion in annual payroll.” Taxpayers should not be sapped into subsidizing another multi-billion dollar industry. This research has cost taxpayers more than $100 million since 1985.

$2,494,000 for climate forecasting in Florida by House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee member Allen Boyd (D-Fla.) and Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.). Spear-headed by Florida State University (2008 endowment: $570 million), the Southern Climate Consortium program “aims to use long-term climate forecasting to develop useful information for Southeastern farmers.” Perhaps this program can also help members of Congress forecast the furious political climate created by subsidizing research at large state universities that hardly need the money.

$1,026,000 for potato pest and disease research by House Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (D-Wisc.), House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), and Reps. Michael Michaud (D-Maine) and Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) in Maine, Maryland, and Wisconsin. In 2009, the United States Department of Agriculture valued American potato production at $3.45 billion. The industry should stop pestering taxpayers and pay for its own research.

$793,000 for the Center for Innovative Food Technology in Toledo, Ohio by House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee member Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio). One of the center’s publications is “The Sweet Life in Northwest Ohio,” a guide to chocolate, candy, and coffee retailers in the region. Federal handouts make anyone’s life a lot sweeter.

$349,000 for swine and other animal waste management research at North Carolina State University by House appropriator David Price (D-N.C.) and Reps. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.), Bob Etheridge (D-N.C.), and Brad Miller (D-N.C.). Congressman Price’s website notes that “better research in livestock waste management would improve public health, benefit the environment, and assist farmers.” Managing the massive waste on Capitol Hill would have an even greater effect on public well-being.

http://www.cagw.org/newsroom/releases/2 ... tment.html


There are hundreds of other examples in the current federal budget.

[Trolldor]

Cause it's Merka, your politicians are beyond error.

[Clinton Huxley]

Iran has just announced a fusion research programme.