Reply To: Global Warming

[Rezwan]

Patientman wrote:
And, the mission of Focus Fusion maybe stated in a much different light. We are not directly conducting the research and development and therefore, limited in that outcome.

The Focus Fusion Society, as I see it, is dedicated to a final outcome of cheap, clean, safe, abundant energy with aneutronic fusion. That puts it in an interesting position relative to LPP.

LPP is one approach to aneutronic fusion. It is the one with the most promise, with the best concept. It is not, however, guaranteed to succeed. This is a proof of concept experiment, which means by definition, the concept is unproven.

The Focus Fusion Society thus fully supports LPP through networking, documentation, building awareness, and reframing the fusion issue for the public and policy makers. It also has to manage expectations. In the event it takes LPP longer than expected to produce results, or in the event that it doesn’t (but at least inspires other aneutronic approaches out there), people have a way of turning nasty on those who’ve made public attempts at fusion. This is where fusion gets its “oversold” rap and turns people off. We don’t want people turned off because of setbacks or failures. No matter what the outcome, the quest for aneutronic fusion must continue.

I would say in this light, our goal is to stress the due diligence, discipline and duty required in pursuing fusion. In this light, we are objective, unemotional scientists and science lovers. At this phase, LPP’s job is not “to make fusion happen”, but “to duly carry out their experiment to show whether fusion is feasible under these conditions or not.”

I’m almost done with the basic structure of FFS’ general fusion plan. It’s got 3 basic plans within it. Plan A is the LPPX plan – making sure we’ve done due diligence with the LPP experiment. If the outcome of LPPX phase 1 is proof of feasibility – hurray! We’re on to phase II and switch to “Plan AF” – “after fusion”. This plan kicks off with “celebrate achievement!” and then “convince world and fearmongers fusion isn’t a bad thing and try not to get killed by oil interests etc.” And many other things.

If, however, the result of phase I is no go, or need more work, or we need to try something more advanced to boost the possibility – then we are at “Plan BF” – “Before Fusion”. Again, we stress due diligence, with LPP and with other fusion contenders.

For purposes of planning, a lot of reframing the issue, policy support, economic support issues and the like are the same for LPPX and other fusion contenders, so it’s a good idea to work together now to build a broader fusion coalition.

I’m touched by the faith a lot of people have on this site that the LPP experiments are simply pro forma. It’s not the preferred “objective scientist” approach, but enthusiasm is always nice. Then again, I’m concerned this attitutde creates unsupportive conditions for the scientists, both at present, and if things stretch out. I also find it trivializes the potential accomplishment. I get a sense from people posting on the website that they’re saying “What’s taking you so long” rather than, “Goodness! That sounds incredibly difficult, if not impossible! How can we better support you?”

To sum up – I think FFS needs to take a comprehensive approach, a broad perspective so that it can both support and be a safety net for the people involved in the work of fusion – and to keep the quest going until fusion is achieved. And then we switch our operations to making sure everyone has access to the energy.

LPP needs money. FFS needs money. (Send some to FFS now! It’s tax deductible! Oh, that’s another thing FFS will try to do once we become a world class nonprofit – lobby for exemptions to the SEC investor laws so that people can send money directly to LPP and be investors. Micro/longtail investing. Gov. 2.0. Of course, there’s the uncertainty thing again. LPP could succeed right away and there will be no need to change investment laws for it – although on principle, I think those laws should be changed.)

It’s a lot to think about and do, and to really make it work, we need to go to the next level as a nonprofit organization. You nail it here:

Patientman wrote: I only wish to help the focus of this non-profit business in raising more funds and rise above the “Green” noise which keeps the FFS story buried.

Those green organizations are incredibly well organized. And there are so many of them. Lots of $, very well connected.

Patientman wrote: It is up to Rezwan and the board to determine the mission statement.

The board. We need to develop one. Our organization is totally anemic without it. Right now the board consists of 3 people with very little board experience. FFS is a membership organization. Changing the bylaws to allow for a more effective board has been on my to do list for ages. Of course, the board should really be doing that, not me.

As to mission statements, From “The Board Member’s Guide to Fund Raising” by Fisher Howe:

A structured strategic or long-range planning exercise is often the best approach to the preparation of a mission statement. The mission statement will be what comes out of a planning exercise, not what goes into it; it will be the core understanding around which can be built a clear, unambiguous articulation of purposes, programs, and priorities – clearly of great value to board and management. It also affords a firm basis for arriving at an estimate of the resources needed to support the organization on which a fundraising program depends.