It comes from believing that the chance of fusion reaching something that's useful is very small. If it's sufficiently small, then the expected payoff < the cost of the program, and hence the program is not worth pursuing.
Where you and he differ is in your judgment of how likely fusion programs are to succeed.
I personally don't think ITER is worth pursuing. I'm skeptical about other tokamak efforts as well. Small efforts that might yield more attractive reactors (Zap, Helion) may be worth pursuing, not least because such efforts would be cheaper.
the idea that ignores the fact that tackling hard technological problems actually generates a ton of economic activity and generates solutions to other domains.
magnetic confinement, lasers, material sciences have all advanced because of these projects and had impacts in other markets.
even if the money invested never ends up with an ITER reactor. we've still come out ahead economically.
pfdietz|4 years ago
Where you and he differ is in your judgment of how likely fusion programs are to succeed.
I personally don't think ITER is worth pursuing. I'm skeptical about other tokamak efforts as well. Small efforts that might yield more attractive reactors (Zap, Helion) may be worth pursuing, not least because such efforts would be cheaper.
jatone|4 years ago
magnetic confinement, lasers, material sciences have all advanced because of these projects and had impacts in other markets.
even if the money invested never ends up with an ITER reactor. we've still come out ahead economically.