From: Jay Willingham (jaywillingham@cfl.rr.com)
Date: Sun Jul 20 2003 - 17:50:44 EDT
I am not so sure.
The magnetic field experiments and the laser experiments are the only ones
being worked to any degree, and those are really starved for funding.
The Manhattan project comes to mind when someone says more money will not
speed up the various experiments.
Jay Willingham
----- Original Message -----
From: "Iain Strachan" <iain.strachan.asa@ntlworld.com>
To: "Jay Willingham" <jaywillingham@cfl.rr.com>; "Glenn Morton"
<glennmorton@entouch.net>; "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2003 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: the hydrogen economy
> > Money seems to be the main weak factor in that equation.
> >
> > Jay
>
> I don't think that money is the real issue here. I recently spoke to a
> physicist who works on JET (the large fusion experiment close to where I
> live) and he gave the timescale as 50 years; 12.5 years to build the next
> experiment (ITER) and 12.5 years to run it, during which they get the
plasma
> parameters right for fusion and then a similar timescale for the proposed
> demonstration fusion reactor (DEMO); 12.5 years to build and 12.5 to run.
> He was not of the opinion that the timescale could be speeded up by
throwing
> yet more money at it. These experiments are major undertakings. For
> example the magnetic induction coils are so vast that they could not be
> transported for long distances. Therefore before you can build your
fusion
> reactor you have to build an entire manufacturing plant on site.
>
> However, we must stop the sliding goalpost and not allow things to drag
on.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Iain .G.D. Strachan
>
> There are 10 types of people in the world ...
> those who understand binary and those who don't.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jay Willingham" <jaywillingham@cfl.rr.com>
> To: "Glenn Morton" <glennmorton@entouch.net>; "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2003 3:21 PM
> Subject: Re: the hydrogen economy
>
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Glenn Morton" <glennmorton@entouch.net>
> > To: "Jay Willingham" <jaywillingham@cfl.rr.com>; "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
> > Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2003 8:58 PM
> > Subject: RE: the hydrogen economy
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > >-----Original Message-----
> > > >From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
[mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
> > > >Behalf Of Jay Willingham
> > > >Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2003 5:09 PM
> > > >To: Glenn Morton; ASA
> > > >Subject: Re: the hydrogen economy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Hydrogen strikes me as a junk science/green politician's answer.
> > > >
> > > >Where are we in the development of fusion as an energy source?
> > >
> > > Not very far. The only thing constant about fusion energy is that it
is
> > > always 50 years away. We really will need to change that constant.
> > >
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Jul 20 2003 - 17:51:09 EDT