Which party will support this effort?

[djolds1]

At this point energy is too big an issue. Fusion will get great support over the next few years, but if no progress is made, fission plants will get built for sure. It's not a matter of party any more. It's getting to be a matter of survival.

Dunno. I think the "alternative energy" pablum can be ridden a good long way.

Duane

[djolds1]

I have asked the same question. I think both would support it. My concern is some of the constituencies on either side. How will oil, coal, gas companies react? How will far left Green NGO’s react? What new unanticipated opposition might appear? How might they pressure congress/president? I think there would be some hold-outs in the fossil fuel industry, but in the end, there is just too much money at stake.

If EMC2 can release sufficiently promising results, special interests in the West trying to shut it down won't matter. China, even Pakistan, will pursue Polywell to fruition.

Duane

[Roger]

At this point energy is too big an issue. Fusion will get great support over the next few years, but if no progress is made, fission plants will get built for sure. It's not a matter of party any more. .

Fission is already getting improved support, ALL YEAR, thru the campaign

Anything with the word "nuclear" is poison with the American Left.

Duane

Daune I am a Liberal Dmeocrat. I would ask you to back that up.

Or fore ever hold your peace.

Dunno. I think the "alternative energy" pablum can be ridden a good long way.

Duane

Duane. Solar, wind, alternative liquid fuels aren't enough.

Fission will play a role, Gore said it, Obama said it Clinton said it, McCain said it, Bush said it.

Dunno is right, you dont know. SO let me tell you, all of those people advocate a continuing role for nuclear power generation going forward 20 yrs.

Maybe if you put aside your infantile political bias for one second, you would be capable of actually assimilating some accurate information.

I am by far the most politically involved member here, I work in campaigns. Last year I ran a campaign for 3 School Board candidates and flipped all 3 seats. I was paid $1000 per week. A grand a week for a School Board race.......


I spent 3 days in NH on my own dime, the weekend before the primary. I watched the first half of the Steelers game with Tom Ridge, I had a beer with Chris Shays.

I organize fundraisers, my next event is expected to gross 15 to 20k for a congressional candidate.

Yesterday I just walked into NJ Senator Menedez's office unannounced, and got 5 minutes of face time with his Director of Constituent Services, in front of the other 8 people that were already waiting in the lobby.

I am a member of my towns Democratic Committee, district leader in fact, an elected office. I am a member of my county's Democratic Committee.

I exercise the restraint required to not inflict my political views on this board. Although this is the general discussion section, and the rules are looser here, slapping other talk-polywell members in the face with your political views is not playing nice in the sand box.

If I can sit down and have a beer with Tom Ridge and Chris Shays, and have a civil discussion with men I consider to be extreme ring wingers......

Then I can ask the same of you.

[MSimon]

Roger,

If the board goes quiet for a while - slap away.

I won't mind. Joe hasn't complained so far.

Simon

[MSimon]

And Obama doesn't make promises he does not intend to keep.

The question is how long will he keep them? Until the polling results change?

That is a very good reason to build support independent of politicians. We have done a pretty good job so far.

[Josh Cryer]

All politicians are liars. All politicians are unknown variables. Politicians are "handled" by a feedback. If they *don't* do what they promised they would do, and cannot give a good explaination for their failure, then they may or may not get reelected.

Unfortunately our Democracy isn't that refined (most people don't vote and when they do it's hardly ever over important issues). But that may change. Betruger's statement remains the best comment in this thread.



Roger, I'd contest that solar is more than enough (2.5 million exajoules of useable energy, 500 used by humans from a variety of sources, etc, etc, the math is really apparent, low trophic life forms use magnitudes more energy than us). Polywell is just a game changer because solar requires, absolutely requires heavy government subsidies and intervention. And the government is slow to take on such tasks. Polywell would be handled by the market, guys like MSimon would have their own VC firms selling the things. Heck I'd be investing in the thing. Have one in my own house, even (been saving up to buy a huge swath of land to build my first house)! I'm not sure where I read it (I believe rnebel was asked about how much WB6s would cost) but someone said it'd be great to have a Polywell in every district, and the market would undoubtedly fullfill that task quite handidly.

But even that requires educating our youngsters in strong science and not crackpottery.

[djolds1]

Anything with the word "nuclear" is poison with the American Left.

Duane

Daune I am a Liberal Dmeocrat. I would ask you to back that up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjDmyToTYBE

Edwards - opposed.
Clinton - Agnostic.
Obama -supportive.

Edwards has irrevocably damaged his political career, but his voice does (did) represent a significant fraction of the Democratic Party.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/02/0 ... ear-power/

Pelosi - Agnostic trending supportive.

http://blog.heritage.org/2008/09/03/nev ... -are-they/

Yes, partisan, I know. If the attributed quotes are in error I withdraw the cite with an acknowledging mea culpa.

Reid - unclear, but apparently trending opposed.

The Democratic position seems to be shifting in response to the current energy crisis. Which leaves open the question of how much influence the far left wing/ quasi-Naderite factions have. Your input?

Or fore ever hold your peace.

We're not getting married Roger. Realistic perspectives evolve over time as the information available shifts. If I am mistaken I will withdraw my assertions and reexamine my perspectives and positions. I would expect the same from you in turn.

And as further information becomes available, reassessment happens again.

Duane. Solar, wind, alternative liquid fuels aren't enough.

Concur.

Fission will play a role, Gore said it, Obama said it Clinton said it, McCain said it, Bush said it.

Dunno is right, you dont know. SO let me tell you, all of those people advocate a continuing role for nuclear power generation going forward 20 yrs.

It would appear so. Debatable if it holds up assuming the current crisis fades as did the '70s embargo, but that is a separate issue.

Maybe if you put aside your infantile political bias for one second, you would be capable of actually assimilating some accurate information.

I responded with a generalized, tho judgmental, opinion of which party would be more supportive of polywell. You now respond with ad hominem?

I am by far the most politically involved member here, I work in campaigns. Last year I ran a campaign for 3 School Board candidates and flipped all 3 seats. I was paid $1000 per week. A grand a week for a School Board race.......

I spent 3 days in NH on my own dime, the weekend before the primary. I watched the first half of the Steelers game with Tom Ridge, I had a beer with Chris Shays.

I organize fundraisers, my next event is expected to gross 15 to 20k for a congressional candidate.

Yesterday I just walked into NJ Senator Menedez's office unannounced, and got 5 minutes of face time with his Director of Constituent Services, in front of the other 8 people that were already waiting in the lobby.

I am a member of my towns Democratic Committee, district leader in fact, an elected office. I am a member of my county's Democratic Committee.

I exercise the restraint required to not inflict my political views on this board. Although this is the general discussion section, and the rules are looser here, slapping other talk-polywell members in the face with your political views is not playing nice in the sand box.

A very impressive resume Roger. Your accomplishments deserve recognition.

However, it does appear you are attempting to intimidate me by playing the "Do you know who I AM??" game. Am I mistaken in that assessment?

If I can sit down and have a beer with Tom Ridge and Chris Shays, and have a civil discussion with men I consider to be extreme ring wingers......

Then I can ask the same of you.

Nothing I have said has been uncivil nor a personal attack upon you.

The entire point of THIS THREAD is to render judgment as to which US political party would be most useful to supporting polywell. IOW, the entire point of this thread is to inflict political judgment on the board.

I am entirely open to constructive criticism showing my positions to be in error.

I will not entertain attempts at intimidation.

Duane

[djolds1]

Anything with the word "nuclear" is poison with the American Left.

Duane

Daune I am a Liberal Dmeocrat. I would ask you to back that up.

Or fore ever hold your peace.

I also posted this in my original message:

Greens have a major hold on that side of the aisle.

Which is, basically, the root of my general judgment that the Democratic Party would not be the optimum choice to back Polywell.

Is this particular perspective in error? If so why? From here all further derived judgments follow.

Duane

[Josh Cryer]

dupe sorry

[Josh Cryer]

Can Polywell be used for nuclear poliferation? If not and it is as clean as I understand, what would be any reasonable argument against it (the pB-11 variety)? It seems that there is no reasonable objection.

Carter was anti-nuke (being a nuclear guy himself) not because it was dirty and had nuclear waste, but because it encouraged nuclear poliferation. It set a bad example for the rest of the world. "If the USA has nuclear power, why can't we? Oh forget that it lets us build the tech to build nukes and all!"

Honestly, as I understand Polywell, the dang thing would pass a high power generator inspection and anyone could have them anywhere, there are no laws against clean nuclear fusion. There are no laws, that I understand, against the components necessary to make such a thing.

[djolds1]

edit - delete

[djolds1]

Can Polywell be used for nuclear poliferation? If not and it is as clean as I understand, what would be any reasonable argument against it (the pB-11 variety)? It seems that there is no reasonable objection.

Possibly. Run the polywell on the DD or DT fuel cycle. Wrap the thing in Uranium metal, possibly even uranium yellowcake. The neutron flux might be enough to breed the U238 into Pu239.

Of course, pure fusion nukes (4th Gen nukes) eliminate the need for weapons grade fissionables to fire off the things. And there are several promising pathways.

Carter was anti-nuke (being a nuclear guy himself) not because it was dirty and had nuclear waste, but because it encouraged nuclear proliferation. It set a bad example for the rest of the world. "If the USA has nuclear power, why can't we? Oh forget that it lets us build the tech to build nukes and all!"

Honestly, as I understand Polywell, the dang thing would pass a high power generator inspection and anyone could have them anywhere, there are no laws against clean nuclear fusion. There are no laws, that I understand, against the components necessary to make such a thing.

Unfortunately, nonproliferation has for all intents and purposes failed. The number of members of the "club" will only continue to expand.

Duane

[Torulf2]

What is "pure fusion nukes (4th Gen nukes) "?

[ckrucks]

Josh Cryer Posted:
But even that requires educating our youngsters in strong science and not crackpottery.

I realize this is probably not worth posting but alongside "douchebagery" "crackpottery" is my new favorite word.

You made my day Josh...thanks!
________
Chrysler sigma history

[djolds1]

What is "pure fusion nukes (4th Gen nukes) "?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_fusion_weapon
http://www.princeton.edu/~globsec/publi ... 2Jones.pdf
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0510071