Fusion is here, today, tomorrow, maybe…

ITER Tokamak and plant systems 2016

So, are you up on your p’s & Q’s: Qtotal and Qplasma? Do you know the difference? If your taxes are being used on fusion energy efforts in your region then you better have a good talk to your representative about the details. Because as you’ll see in this video, even as recently as 2016, the head of the USD 65 billion ITER fusion project, Dr. Bigot, is telling little porky pies about the realty of their projects’ ultimate outcome. Why on earth would be be doing that? Oh, might have answered that in the previous sentence. It’s a big budget production.

Full credit to the efforts of all involved at ITER to create such an incredible feat of international collaborative scientific and engineering marvel. But will it get to the end once the cat is out of the bag (watch the video) and the mainstream realise they’ve been duped by clever scientific distinctions into funding a massive science experiment?

Also disappointing are the delays inevitably caused to other demonstrably viable technologies – like Molten Salt Fission – because of these deceptions. Tsk-tsk, Dr. Bigot.

Post note: ITER will be testing fuel “breeder blankets”, which may include a molten salt shielding and fuel production blanket of fluorine, lithium and beryllium (a “FLiBe” salt). The blanket is to produce the all important – but very, very rare – tritium fuel to make it all work. The Lithium needs to be Lithium-6. For Molten Salt Fission, Lithium-7 is necessary, because you do NOT want tritium production in Fission machines (in the thermal spectrum). We are very aware of that distinction and the implications for Lithium supplies around the world.

Ask us at SAFE Fission ConsultTM if you need help understanding all of this. We have experts from all sectors ready to help.

Whilst fusion is not our focus – ours is production of energy using Molten Salt Fission Energy Technology and Thorium – we’ve found it appropriate for a couple of focused articles – this one on ITER and one on JET – to highlight the inappropriate gap between the science and the spin.  Both articles are be found here.

This spin on fusion distracts from real progress on carbon free power production for our societies. It diverts attention from real technologies. It confuses the public. It diverts public money – and a few duped private investors – who, given full knowledge, would provide their support to such projects more judiciously.

For more comprehensive study on the inadequacies of fusion for power production we refer you to the work of Steven B. Krivit and this site New Energy Times.