From: Dickey, Michael F (michael_f_dickey@groton.pfizer.com)
Date: Wed Aug 07 2002 - 08:05:07 MDT
"Barring a Singularity or Civilization-wrecking disaster, I would caution
you that the "little farther in the future" may end up lasting decades or
centuries. It's not just technology, it's not economics, its both. Your
thorium reactors may be in use for 100 years before fusion becomes
commerical, or (despite constant sunny forecasts), photovoltaics are still a
dream of tomorrow, as they were in 1980."
I was referring more to the order that the technology will likely become
viable, which is why I listed solar power last. I think a thorium breeder
reactor is buildable and maintanable with current tech levels, just have to
get over public opinion issues. Fusion reactors are next inline, they have
reached break even, and have followed the trends predicted by the actual
phycisists and scientists working on them for the past 20 years. People who
know nothing about fusion reactors keep making crazy claims about when they
will be viable. Also, its amazing they have progressed at all with the
paltry funding fusion research recieves.
Fusion Reactors - "Now, one obvious and frequently noted flaw in this plan
is that fusion reactors do not exist. However, that fact is simply an
artifact of the mistaken priorities of the innocent gentlemen in Washington,
D.C., and similar places who have been controlling scientific research and
development's purse strings for the past few years. Lack of funding, not any
insuperable technical barriers, currently blocks the achievement of
controlled fusion. The total budget for fusion research in the United States
currently stands at about $250 million per year- less that half the cost of
a Shuttle launch, or, in real dollars, about one-third of what it was in
1980. Under these circumstances, the fact that the fusion program has
continued to progress and now is on the brink of ignition is little short of
remarkable."
Robert Zubrin - Entering Space - page 84
The nimrods who headed 'Atoms for peace' though controlled fusion power was
at the *most* two years away after the first uncontrolled nuclear fusion
bomb. They chastised Edward Teller for suggesting that it would take 5
years just to study the feasibility of you, and probably 10 - 15 years to
get it working. A prediction he made only with reluctance. This attitude
has continued ever since from the lay public and politicians. Since the
70's fusion reactor physcists were predicting break-even energy levels
around 2000, it was achieved in 2001 and I believe.
Michael Dickey
-----Original Message-----
From: Spudboy100@aol.com [mailto:Spudboy100@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 12:54 AM
To: extropians@extropy.org
Subject: Re: Propane and Propane Accessories (synth fuels)
Michael Dickey noted:
<<I envision in the near future synthetic fuels being manufactured by
applying
energy to CO2 and Hydrogen pulled out of the atmosphere and creating
Hydrocarbon fuels, using the synth fuels as high energy density batteries.
Cheap energy production will be required to do this, either as waste heat
from other manufacturing process (as noted in this article) or through an
infrastructure of fast throium breeder reactors (Id prefer to see the latter
option in the near future, completely relegating our reliance on imported
energy) or a little farther in the future, fusion reactors. A little
farther after that, solar power.>>
Barring a Singularity or Civilization-wrecking disaster, I would caution you
that the "little farther in the future" may end up lasting decades or
centuries. It's not just technology, it's not economics, its both. Your
thorium reactors may be in use for 100 years before fusion becomes
commerical, or (despite constant sunny forecasts), photovoltaics are still a
dream of tomorrow, as they were in 1980.
I am not gloating (far from it!) but there are so many bright forecast for
technology that never seem to mature, something is always lacking. I do know
that Los Alamos scientists did come up with a sequestering coČ for buring
coal. An article I recently read displayed how Vermont is able to have
"green" energy, using wind and biomass, to supplement Uranium-235, to a tune
of 70% of its electricity.
LEGAL NOTICE
Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. Access to this E-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the contents of this E-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in reliance on it is unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, please inform the sender immediately.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:56 MST