EU agrees to fund shortfall in ITER costs
Posted: 13 July 2010 11:07 AM   [ Ignore ]
Valued Friend
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  40
Joined  2009-04-09

BBC News Story as title

I have mixed feelings about this one. They could still fund multiple LPP style experiments out of just this years budget shortfall. Probably out of the shortfall in the tea and biscuits budget. But is it nice to see that they are still willing to try?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 July 2010 02:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Valued Friend
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  62
Joined  2010-04-22

That’s one white elephant.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 July 2010 06:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  324
Joined  2008-03-11

I’m glad it will be able to proceed without any more hold-ups.  However the reference saying some of the money will be coming out of the current (FP7) EU research budget will inevitably mean less available for other research.

In the grand scheme of things though the 10billion or so going to ITER over many years is a drop in the ocean compared to the size of the commercial energy market.  Its small even in terms of public finances considering the cost is spread amongst lots of countries (creating jobs & tax revenue back in the process).  If industry put even a fraction of a percent into research they could build 10 ITER size projects without even noticing. 

People (ie politicians, campaign groups etc) keep on going on about how important energy is, but nobody is putting money where there mouth is.  We really need to get to the point where the energy industry invests even 2% of its turnover in R&D rather than the tiny fraction it does now.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 July 2010 09:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Old Timer
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  222
Joined  2009-06-16

I am working on this from the (UK) public finances perspective but right now it is I-N-C-R-E-D-I-B-L-Y difficult to get an audience for any thing that starts with “We need to spend more money on…”

I constantly come up against two additional barriers

The first can be summarised as “They need to show it works - then there might be something to look at”. Catch 22.

The second is best expressed by my “yoof group” here http://forum.liysf.org.uk/yaf_postsm12_More-money.aspx

If at first…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 July 2010 04:10 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Valued Friend
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  57
Joined  2009-04-24
Dr_Barnowl - 13 July 2010 03:07 PM

BBC News Story as title

I have mixed feelings about this one. They could still fund multiple LPP style experiments out of just this years budget shortfall. Probably out of the shortfall in the tea and biscuits budget. But is it nice to see that they are still willing to try?

This is very good news. They could have let it dawdle along in underfunded limbo for years. And there’s a decent chance it will work.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 July 2010 05:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Valued Friend
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  62
Joined  2010-04-22

A few years ago i visited the fast breeder nuclear reactor in Kalkar, Germany. They had just cut open the reactor core so that visitors could enter. Quite a unique opportunity to see a nuclear reactor from the inside out (even one that had never been fully operational). My eyes basically popped out when seeing all those massive sodium-based cooling systems, which must have costed billions of dmarks to install in the first place, simply being dismantled and shipped out for recycling. The giant cooling towers were already being converted to serve as a climbing wall, for the amusement park that they were constructing there.

At least they picked the right location for ITER. Cadarache will be a great place for an amusement park! wink

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
     ITER’s Goals ››