The continuing experiments on Bob Bussard’s theories of IEC fusion power generation seem to be going better than anticipated.
I’ve said before that I don’t think fusion power is a likely solution to our energy and pollution problems given the timeframe involved, and I stick by that. However, that’s no reason not to fund it to a reasonable extent; after all, this offers the potential for more return than, say, a lottery ticket.
Related Articles
2 users responded in this post
Do I detect a hint of scorn at the prospects of nuclear power?
I know that you’re aware it’s perfectly clean, and even less radioactive than coal power, not as damaging to ecosystems as hydroelectric, and more feasible than tidal or wind… So… for something that can essentially hold us indefinitely until we find a permanently sustainable form of energy, it’s sure getting a lot of flak here…
I’ll settle for an unlikely solution that works. Assuming the physics are sound and this peer review is successful, the next phase of the research is a fusor that may be capable of producing net power, within 5 years. Give commercialization another 5 years after that, and we’re talking about the same time frame as new oil being drilled off the coast of the U.S. if the moratorium is lifted today. I’d say that’s worth a $200 million research investment.