Slashdot Mirror
EU Intent on Hosting International Fusion Reactor
Raunch writes "The BBC says that EU is determined to be one of the sites that host the multi-billion-dollar International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor Even if they have to do so less-than-internationally: 'If there is no agreement at six we are determined to do it with fewer.' Not only that, but 'The EU wants an agreement on the project before the end of the year'"
delay the fusion project. Reason: oil industry. I attended a presentation about the technical background of Fusion(tokamak) reactors in Hungary last year. Probably 2036 is the time when the first feasible fusion reactor could have started working, that was the plan a year ago. It happens to be at the same time when oil supplies run out. If these kind of reactors make it before that time, oil companies lose money. And thats a thing the USA wont let.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
I hope they get this wrangling over the site over with soonish and get down to building something. We need some abundant energy source pretty soon to avoid either global anarchy when the fossil fuels run out or global catastrophe when we gas the planet with CO2. ITER is the best chance yet. I bet there'll be cool science/technology spin-offs too.
The world is everything that is the case
I wouldn't be surprised if the US starts to put its thumb on the scales...
They already do support the Japan site, for that reason, but because they only supply a small part of the money and because Europe has by far the most experience with fusion research, the EU is apparently willing to ignore that thumb. Of course, such a threat is mostly a bargaining tactic, it'll be much cheaper if other countries outside the EU pay for part of ITER, but whatever. The US doesn't that much say in this.
Both Japan and the EU have offered to pay a large percentage of the costs if ITER is built on their sites; I don't think there's a profit to be made, it's mostly a prestige thing.
If I were a fusion scientist going to work on ITER, I'd much prefer to live in beautiful France than in the sparsely populated bit of North Japan where ITER would be built.
I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
If our supplies of coal and oil even get close to drying up before we can mass produce electricity from fusion generators then the world is in big trouble. Not only do we rely on oil for our light and heat but for transport of *all* goods, food and clothes. Our economies and lives would be thown into turmoil and you can bet that the powerful countries won't object to war to solve these problems (maybe they are doing so already?) Our civilisation hinges upon our supplies of energy (see Last and First Men :) and this makes research into fusion power the most important endevour of our time.
With regards the EU making the world a more dangerous place comment, I can only assume that was a joke.
If I were a fusion scientist going to work on ITER, I'd much prefer to live in beautiful France than in the sparsely populated bit of North Japan where ITER would be built.
Northern Japan is very beautiful itself. You should go for a visit, get a rail pass and head north (as surprisingly few tourists do. Plenty of nice scenery in Nikko (just north of Tokyo and inland), and Matsushima (very beatiful there) in Tohoku (the northern half on Honshuu). Still fairly touristy for either of those, but I wouldn't want to push you too far from the mainstream.
Jedidiah.
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
With the cost of Iraq war draining at about $1.5B per week, it roughly takes 1 month of war for 1 reactor, in monetary terms.
But anything that suggests that the US is anti-science and politically vindictive automatically gets a +5 insightful.
It is true. The new draconian security-based policy over the last few years has had a large, direct and negative impact on my colleagues in the United States, and therefore on my (Canadian) research as well. The policy may be designed to stop terror, but it is also causing serious and possibly devastating problems for legitimate foreign (i.e. other than Canada, Australia, Japan, western Europe,and don't forget about Poland) collaboration.
Long live Schrodinger's cat...
Back on topic, it'd strike me as odd to put our last resort for our energy future in a country renowned for its earthquakes. What if it got destroyed before it could be fully tested? It would be a disaster of epic proportions.
I understand it's a hard concept to grasp for people living in areas that are never struck by earthquakes, so let me explain. Little quakes are a mere nuissance. There's hardly ANY structural damage. Also, even within Japan, there are areas that are never affected by earthquakes. This is where the majority of fission (yes, I said fission!! Not Fusion! RTFA!) reactors are placed in remote areas of Japan, which are never affected. Places like Fukushima and Niigata. Woops! Niigata was just hit by an earthquake. However, the reactors were fine. They're build to withstand severe quakes. (Honestly, it isn't that hard. It does, however, cost a lot of money.)
If there's something to worry about nuclear reactors (fission, fusion, what not) in Japan, it's NOT the earthquakes. The Japanese (specifically the electricity companies) have, over the course of the last 5 years, demonstrated how they are unable to properly run one of these. They have the tech to build them, and run them, but the internal bureaucracy of the electric companies results in dangerous practice. IF they had properly followed the manuals, none of the accidents that have occured over the last 5 years would have ever occured. (Google it, there are a few to freak out over.)
This brings me to the reason why I don't like nukes. Nukes are safe, when properly handled. They can be contained. However the keyword is "when properly handled", and even though people understand HOW to do this, they just don't. Human error is the reason for almost all nuclear accidents. And as long as people run these things (including computer programs that PEOPLE write), nukes will never truly be safe.
As an interesting side note, Japan has constantly been telling it's people that Japan HAS TO use nuclear reactors, because there aren't enough natural resources, oil and coal polute, yada yada yada. Most people believed this. Until last year.
Last year, the gov't was able to prevent eventual disaster at the Fukushima nuke plants, because they found out about forged inspection results. There were several cracks in some of the pipes, and so on. So much came out, that they ordered ALL the plants be shut down there, and everything be completely re-inspected and fixed. These plants in Fukushima supposedly supplied the majority of electricity to Tokyo, so Tokyo had about 50% of it's supposed electricity sources cut off. Since Tokyo gets WAY hot and humid in the summer time, there were suppose to be rolling black outs, brown outs, and what not. It never happened, even though most of the nukes were shut down. (Some electricity was purchased from Osaka, but due to infrastructure limitations, the ammount was minimal.)
So, what happened? Everyone changed the settings on their air conditioners just 1 or 2 degrees higher than usual. Tokyo never exceeded 85% energy consumption of max available electricity, at the peak moments in the year of the most electricity consumption. Tokyo never needed nuclear plants. (For the sceptics, I should note that Japan does not have any coal burning reactors, and the majority of fire powered reactors use natural gas, not oil.)
As an interesting side note, some people in Japan claim that electric cars and trains don't reduce pollution, because they rely on electricity generated by either fire power (a term loosely used in Japan, which really means natural gas and not oil, but in this instance is suppose to create the image that it's oil) or nukes (again, nuclear contamination). However, another interesting thing happened. Niigata got earthquakes, and as a result, there was some damage to HYDRO plants that the train companies owned, which supplied anywhere from 25% to 50% of the electrical power to Tokyo trains. Mind you ,
Um.. have you been following the news lately? As we speak (or read), there are anti-french riots in the Ivory Coast because France is still acting like an Imperial power in Africa. The French are actually engaged in a shooting war with Ivory Coast nationalists who want the French to stop interfering in their country's internal affairs. Throughout its "former" colonies in Africa, France does not hesitate to intervene and play kingmaker.
Wrong ; we're there on the behalf of the UN. With a mandate. We've been brutally attacked, and we shot back and made sure Ivory army had no more helicopetrs to do that again. Full stop.
How about Corsica and the resistance to French colonialism there? The Corsican resistance periodically explodes bombs to try to drive the French out.
Trouble is the so-called corsican nationalists top at 9% in the democratic elections. I understand you're suggesting to let that fanatical minority have control over the 91% who feel they're as French as I am ? Or perhaps we should send the army down there to settle democracy the US way ? Same apply in New Caledonia btw. And to finish the picture, you should know there's no poll made public recently as to know wether mainland french wish to keep Corsica. For what I hear, I'm damn sure that most of us are ready to dump Corsica and give money to anybody willing to get them. But that would really be injust to the majority of perfectly normal citizens who happen to have a bunch of murderers for neighbours in their island.
France's opposition to the US war in Iraq had *nothing* to do with priciple and everything to do with * French national interests in Saddam's Oil industry - The French were willing to let a brutal dictator continue to make mass graves as long as the oil contracts flowed to french companies - blood for oil ;
USA got more than half the total money flow made through this program. Go wash your hands.
You know, HighOrbit, we've got a saying down there : "the day when idiots will fly, there will be an endless night". Hopefully, you're showing that they'll actually fly much to high to hide the sun.
Call me flamebait.
Clinton pulled out because the US wanted to experiment on fusion in a whole other are, namely firing lasers at tritium-pellets.
If you read the articles liked to the main page, you can clearly see that after 3 years the USA came back around the table, but oposed France as an area where Iter could be build, because of France's oposition to the war.
Which is really silly and childish. The USA should grow up and respect the wishes of other countries not to support an illegal war, and not try to link an international scientific endeavour with their foreign politics and their scewed worldview that the US should rule everything, blessed as it is by God Himself.
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
I know Chinese people who simply refuse, on spec, to ever speak to anyone of Japanese decent. Yes it really is that serious.
I hope most chinese people aren't that racist. I had a next-door neighbour who used to berate us each year for going on holiday in france because they were "collaborators". Luckily most people aren't so idiotic.
Current death toll from Amnesty International's actions in Nepal:9560
What's this?