December 21, 2003

WHO NEEDS 'EM?:

Decision on nuclear fusion site put off (The Japan Times, Dec. 22, 2003)

Six parties involved in a $12 billion, 30-year energy project failed Saturday to reach an accord on the venue for the world's first prototype nuclear fusion reactor due to a sharp division over the two rival sites in Japan and France.

Representatives from China, Japan, South Korea, Russia, the United States and the European Union instead agreed to work out a compromise by the end of January and try to hold a fence-mending meeting in early February. [...]

Japan has proposed hosting the project in the village of Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture, while the EU has selected the southern French town of Cadarache as its candidate.

Announcing the joint communique, Werner Burkart, deputy director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said, "I hope that a few months from now there will be the final decision on the implementation of ITER."

Burkart said the venue for the February meeting will be determined by the six parties, but he signaled the IAEA's readiness to host the meeting in Vienna, where the agency's headquarters is located.

The IAEA participated in the meeting as a facilitator.

Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroyuki Hosoda, who represented Japan at the meeting, said, "The six parties were divided into equal halves."

While avoiding citing specific countries, Hosoda, who was formerly state minister in charge of science and technology, said two supported Japan and two threw their support behind the EU bid.

According to conference participants, South Korea and the U.S. expressed support for Japan's bid, while China and Russia rallied behind France.


Why not just cut the French, Chinese and Russians out of the deal?

Posted by Orrin Judd at December 21, 2003 6:17 PM
Comments

Exactly.

Posted by: Mark Byron at December 21, 2003 9:15 PM

Because it is an expedition into a trackless waste. It is technology that no one has been able to make work in the half century that they have been trying. I am very sckeptical that anyone will make it work this time.

So why not have the Froggies pick up the tab.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at December 21, 2003 11:37 PM

Robert Schwarz has it exactly right. Some wag once said that fusion is the power source of the future - and always would be. When I was at university studying nuclear engineering (class of '81), we were all abuzz over the imminent prospects for fusion break-even. As if!

Even if break-even and beyond are achieved, the complexity/cost of the reactors would preclude their general use. They would be at least an order of magnitude more complex than the fission reactors we don't use today.

Posted by: bruce_cleaver at December 22, 2003 8:48 AM

I am still waiting for that "Mr. Fusion" energy converter I saw in Back to the Future. Putting a rotten bannana peal into it to make your car run just seemed like a great idea!

Posted by: BJW at December 22, 2003 9:42 AM

Bruce, thanks, I am Not a Nuclear Scietist, but I am a student of history. History is that it takes 2 generations to perfect a new technology. If you can't do it in that time frame, you probably won't

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at December 22, 2003 11:02 PM

The primary problem with fusion is containing the reaction, and high-energy neutrons present no easy way to be contained. They have no charge, and they will eat away over 2 inches of high-strength steel a year (at current power levels). If that problem could be solved, fusion would be much closer.

Posted by: ratbert at December 23, 2003 4:19 AM
« BREAD WITH THAT CIRCUS?: | Main | THE BENCHMARKS: »