The Focus Fusion Society › Forums › Reframing fusion, managing expectations › Campaign – Peace sign vs. don’t mess › Reply To: Physics Nobel to Big Bangers
Originally my point had to do with the logo exclusively, but Rezwan has taken it in a new and important direction. How is the whole concept of Focus Fusion to be sold, not only now as an innovational research project, but, if it can be made to work, as a radical new type of electrical generator. An approach which would work in Berkeley would fail in Houston and vice versa. The peace symbol is only a symbol ( if I may presume ) of a larger issue, the benefit as it is percieved. For some, reduction of the overall carbon footprint would be telling, for others the savings of money would be most important. A few would like the novelty of the technology, others would just like to stick it to the coal companies.
The people i read on this website are those who “got it” right away. They all seem to understand the importance of the work being done and the implications, but most people will have to have it explained or even sold to them. How to do this. The means would have to be diverse.
I can only speak for the people who live around me in Southern California. We have a fission power plant at San Onofre just down the coast from us, and it has been viewed with suspicion and dread by most of us since it was built. The beach next to it has been off limits for years due to radioactive contamination, and nobody would dare eat the fish from that area. The plant is aging and nearing the point of retirement or rebuilding. To pitch support for research into a method of electrical generation which would eliminate this expensive monstrosity might bear fruit, but the same arguments would have less weight in L.A., 75 miles distant. There the savings of money on electrical bills may be telling. Both these points may be unimportant elsewhere. An isolated community near Death Valley without any electricity could be impressed by the low cost of building their own power plant.
To return to Rezwan’s point, the approach we use must be tailored to the audience, including the symbol. The respondents to this site seem to come from diverse enough locations that I feel that they could speak authoritatively for the people around them — what would those people find persuasive about a research project now and ( hopefully ) a finished product later?