A FEW corrections to your editorial are in order. First, this is not the first step. This is one of the many steps in an ongoing commercial research endeavor.
Since 1951, dozens of government and academic laboratories around the world have built experimental tokamak reactors and failed. None has ever produced more energy than they consume; nor are these units ever expected to.
All hope for previous, hot fusion reactors has been abandoned, and all bets are now on the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, known as ITER.
Second, experimentally, it has never, ever, been shown possible to harness fusion power through hot fusion. Hot fusion has never worked because it has never generated more energy than it consumes. I would not call this generated energy. The costs and complexities of hot fusion have been too complex for any one nation to solve. Thus, the inspiration for ITER.
With the first commercial hot fusion reactor expected mid-century, this science experiment will have run over 100 years before providing energy to this energy-starved earth, that is, if it ever works. Critics have ridiculed that hot fusion is just 20 years away, and it always will be. Now, the first commercial hot fusion reactor is expected in 2050.
Certainly, the hot fusion field deserves a chance, as should any good science research in the public interest. But 100 years? ITER is expected to cost a total of 10 billion euros, including operating expenses over 35 years. Add this to the $16 billion the United States taxpayers have already spent, and youve got a hefty price-tag.
Steve Krivit, Los Angeles, USA
