ITER Funding By US Cut To Zero

Discuss funding sources for polywell research, including the non-profit EMC2 Fusion Development Corporation, as well as any other relevant research efforts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

MSimon
Posts: 14334
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

ITER Funding By US Cut To Zero

Post by MSimon »

http://iecfusiontech.blogspot.com/2007/ ... t-cut.html

Science Magazine reports that the Federal Science budget has cut ITER funds to zero.

Nanos
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 8:57 pm
Location: Treasure Island

Post by Nanos »

> We will know the answer in 3 to 6 months.

Is that counting from now, eg. From April+

Or is it still on track for Febuary+ ?


April 1st would be a great day to announce results :-)

MSimon
Posts: 14334
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

The 3 to 6 months is just a rough estimate based on what I heard in August and then counting from 1 Sept.

I have heard that we may know as early as some time in March or as late as August '008.

A lot depends on when they get the eqpt. they need. How long it takes to shake it down. How well the experiments go.

JohnP
Posts: 296
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 3:29 am
Location: Chicago

Post by JohnP »

This is surprising and confusing. Are the DOE's priorities being set for them? Is this fallout from a more general federal budget-trimming, or is this because of disillusionment with ITER? Or both?

And what of other fusion projects like IC?

MSimon
Posts: 14334
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Pure speculation:

This is a result of budget trimming and holding the money in "reserve" in case WB-7 green lights further efforts.

Mumbles
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 3:03 am
Location: Leonardtown, MD, USA

No "reserve"...

Post by Mumbles »

MSimon wrote:Pure speculation:

This is a result of budget trimming and holding the money in "reserve" in case WB-7 green lights further efforts.
I would most strongly endorse the first part of your sentence, and refute the second part...

I would offer that the U.S. Federal governement doesn't work that way. There is no "holding in 'reserve'".

Two things to consider - 1) the US Navy is funding EMC2's continued WB6 and WB7 work to the tune of $2M. The US Navy and the DOE budget are disconnected and not coordinated.

2) If the politicians or powers that be really were hoping for the Bussard reactor to work, why have we never even heard it mentioned outside of our little group? Why has not even seed money been spent by DOE towards this program?

Now I am not saying that if WB6 & 7 come through, that DOE won't be falling all over themselves to scrape up funding to help build a full scale reactor. I am just saying, since I live the life every day, that in government acquisition, no one holds money 'in case' - because then some other program comes along and grabs it.

Oh, and where we are right now in the budget cycle, everyone is trying to cut, cut, Cut, CUT. A big cut like the ITER money goes a long way towards meeting the Federal Science budget's bottom line... (Maybe I am just a cynic, but who knows...?)

Be Safe
Mumbles

jlumartinez
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 7:29 pm
Location: Spain

Post by jlumartinez »

I think it is a pity to stop totally funding ITER until we are not sure of having an alternative. By now it is the only possible reactor to get fusion power, although with many drawback. I can think in 3 possible reasons for the US to stop funding:

1- Budget shortage as consecuence of economical situation and the costs of the Iraq War.

2-US have a "hidden" alternative to ITER for getting fusion. In that case they will prefer to focus in this new fusion concept

3- Bali Conference (CO2 emissions) crisis with the European Union. The reduction could be a revenge against the EU

My heart will vote for option 2 but my brain says 1 or 3

MSimon
Posts: 14334
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Mumbles,

I might agree, except all the projects got reduced. ITER got zeroed.

Of course you are right about reserves. Maybe a better way of putting it would be that they see no point in ITER if WB-7 is a success. If WB-7 is promising there will be an emergency appropriation to speed research into a production reactor. So they put off ITER awaiting WB-7 results. If WB-7 flops ITER can always be restored.

The Navy has a plan for $200 million over 5 years for a 100 MWth fusion demo. With 5X to 50X that I think I could get a production reactor in 3 to 5 years. It would be worth it. It would completely change geopolitics.

Mumbles
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 3:03 am
Location: Leonardtown, MD, USA

International Ill Will...

Post by Mumbles »

MSimon wrote:Maybe a better way of putting it would be that they see no point in ITER if WB-7 is a success.
I really doubt they would jeapordize international relations over a "could, possibly be" (WB-7). Don't get me wrong, I am here because I believe the Bussard reactor has great potential. But the same thoughts were undoubtedly on everyone's minds when the tokamak was originally popularized... It will take proven, repeatable results to convince the world. (OK, selling them cheap electricity will probably get their attention, too...)

But underfunding/non-funding an international project that we have previously commited to is not a decision that is acceptable if we want to maintain good relations with our partner nations. If anything, this can be viewed as a sacred cow, and by attacking it, the next higher rung on the ladder gets forced to make the hard call on the budget. Even in the starter post and the article originally cited, there are words that: " Although appropriators expressly forbid DOE to shuffle money from other programs to satisfy its planned $149 million contribution in 2008, Marburger predicts that the prohibition will not stand. "I can't see DOE not living up to its obligations," he says. "The department will have to use its money to stay in the project, so [the language] really just amounts to another earmark." "

The political/budgetary games continue...
MSimon wrote:The Navy has a plan for $200 million over 5 years for a 100 MWatt fusion demo. With 5X to 50X that I think I could get a production reactor in 3 to 5 years. It would be worth it. It would completely change geopolitics.
I would say "Show me the Money!" But what I really me is "Show me the Results!!" The money will follow. DoD, DoE, energy companies, private investors, they will all jump if this thing can be PROVEN.

And I heartily agree that this would change geopolitics. It has the potential to take mankind off fossil fuels (and all the wars, bad politics, economic hardships, global warming theories it has created), be an input to new sources of water (reverse osmosis facilities) - and thus food (through irrigation) for the world, AND be the basis for getting mankind off this rock and have us truly become a space-faring civilization.

I think the Bussard reactor is worth it as an investment - even if it is considered a long shot - because the payoff is so huge. All of mankind stands to benefit.

My two cents
Be Safe
Mumbles

MSimon
Posts: 14334
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

America already pulled out of ITER once under Clinton.

As to international relations maybe this is pay back for the beat down at Bali.

America's CO2 output has risen 6% since Kyoto. Europe's 18%. They were supposed to be cutting back. By treaty. Instead without a treaty America has done 3X better.

Why do we want to get into a treaty that will be binding because of American law, but the Euros will not be required to follow because of their laws? It would be stupid. Add in that China is building coal plants at a rate equal to one Great Britain of electrical output a year and it would mean transferring American production to China at an accelerated rate. We weren't born yesterday.

If DOE is stupid enough to transfer the money to ITER, Congress will just slash its budget further. Not going to happen. BTW who ever said that not spending the money is just another earmark doesn't understand Congress or earmarks.

Results await confirmation by WB-7.

There is a lot of venture capital awaiting the results of WB-7. As you point out money is no problem.

If the suckers of the world (including China) want to waste their money on ITER let them.

BTW you underestimate Congressional knowledge of the Bussard Reactor. You will see proof of that if WB-7 green lights further efforts. If WB-7 is a flop it won't matter.

Funny thing is Bush signed on to ITER and the Dems cut the funds. There is some meaning there.

Maybe it has something to do with the Euros not delivering on the eqpt and troops promised for Afghanistan. We shall see.

The question is not "do we want to maintain good relations with them?", the question is "do they want to maintain good relations with us?"

So the Euros are pissed at the Americans. So what? We keep pulling their nuts out of the fire and they are mad at us? Serves them right. It is in the nature of the world. We will be selling them Bussard reactors. What are they going to do? Steal the designs and piss us off?

What the Euros need is a balanced fusion program. What they have is all their eggs in one basket that is expected to take 80 years to deliver the first egg at exorbitant prices.

Japan and Australia have IEC Programs. What is wrong with the Euros?

JohnP
Posts: 296
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 3:29 am
Location: Chicago

Post by JohnP »

BTW you underestimate Congressional knowledge of the Bussard Reactor. You will see proof of that if WB-7 green lights further efforts.
If the energy gods smile in '08 and we do a balls-out development on the full scale reactor, that would be one of the best things this country's done lately.

About the VC funding though - is EMC2 a going concern again? The patents etc are still in force?

jlumartinez
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 7:29 pm
Location: Spain

Post by jlumartinez »

Just one simple question: Which is the total CO2 emission per citizen in the US and in Europe? Not the increment. Maybe Europe has grow faster than the US because of the western european countries development ??? Who knows?? We know we have to improve and we want to do it even taking risk in the global market.

I hope you really develop the IEC fusion power, because it will be good for the world. I thnink it is not a matter of getting it working just to improve economy the economy for 1-2 years until everyone has developed independiently. I am starting to be fed up of reading political ideas in this forum. I want to talk about Polywell. I don´t want the war. I want peace, but I don´t want to listen insults neither. I want to have friends. I don´t like conflicts. I want to leave the planet better that I found it. I want to get rid of poverty. We shouldn´t go inside what politicians decide as payback for the Bali crisis. we should be joined to help Polywell getting fusion energy!!!

dch24
Posts: 142
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:43 pm

Re: International Ill Will...

Post by dch24 »

Mumbles wrote:I would say "Show me the Money!" But what I really me is "Show me the Results!!" The money will follow. DoD, DoE, energy companies, private investors, they will all jump if this thing can be PROVEN.
That was my biggest letdown of the day. :lol: I tried several times to click on your linky, PROVEN, before I realized it was just an underline. :lol:
MSimon wrote:Funny thing is Bush signed on to ITER and the Dems cut the funds. There is some meaning there.

Maybe it has something to do with the Euros not delivering on the eqpt and troops promised for Afghanistan. We shall see.

The question is not "do we want to maintain good relations with them?", the question is "do they want to maintain good relations with us?"
Honestly, the U.S. owes a lot to Europe, from the years 1965-1982.
MSimon wrote:So the Euros are pissed at the Americans. So what? We keep pulling their nuts out of the fire and they are mad at us? Serves them right. It is in the nature of the world. We will be selling them Bussard reactors. What are they going to do? Steal the designs and piss us off?
Well, the designs are out in the open. What have we done to pull their nuts out of the fire? Iraq? Heh. :lol: (And maybe they're mad we're reaching into their private places?)

Still, MSimon, you've got some really great insight here. I'll have to think this over. Most surprising was this:
MSimon wrote: BTW you underestimate Congressional knowledge of the Bussard Reactor. You will see proof of that if WB-7 green lights further efforts. If WB-7 is a flop it won't matter.
That's really interesting.

And what about this reactor being donated to Alaska by Toshiba:
http://dwb.adn.com/front/story/4214182p-4226215c.html
http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news-toshiba-micro-nuclear-12.17b.html

JD
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:16 am
Location: Fairbanks Alaska

Post by JD »

dch24

Okay what about the reactor going to Galena, Alaska (a truly miserable place and pushing about -50F at the moment). Toshiba wants a location with little interference for purposes of testing. The Alaska state government is interested since it will save quite a bit of cash from the subsidized shipment of diesel via river barges. Toshiba is not doing it out of the goodness of their hardened little corporate hearts. A win for both and not relevant in any fashion to the previous argument.

By the way exactly what the hell do we/I owe the Europeans? Perhaps you're sentence structure is confusing. As far as other things okay I guess the cost and expense of maintaining major military forces (and early on major economic aid) to Europe for decades means nothing. So send all the money to us that the various nation states saved by not maintaining a credible military and we'll call it even neighbor.

MSimon
Posts: 14334
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Compare and contrast:

Rhineland 1936

Iraq 2003

It is my contention that we have averted a World War by acting in the ME in 2003. We will never know though.

Did the Israelis prevent Iraq from getting nuclear weapons when it bombed Osirak? We will never know because the weapons never materialized.

BTW that reactor story is at least 2 years old and there has been no follow up I'm aware of. I could see such nukes used in guarded industrial processes. Sitting unguarded in your local neighborhood? Too risky. Once you add guards the cost of electricity goes way up because of the low capacity. Not enough KWhs to spread the cost sufficiently.

Suppose the thing produces 100 KW and the fully burdened cost of the guards is $20 an hr. That adds 20 cents a KWh to the cost. You are back in the price range of oil plus you have all the problems of nukes.

It makes no sense.

Post Reply