Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: International Collaboration for a New Source of Energy

  1. #1

    International Collaboration for a New Source of Energy

    The ITER Story

    Fossil fuels were the energy source that shaped 19th and 20th century civilization. But burning coal, oil and gas has proved highly damaging to our environment. Carbon dioxide emissions, greenhouse effect gases, and fumes all contribute to the disruption in the balance of our planet's climate.

    Global energy consumption is set to triple by the end of the century. And yet supplies of fossil fuels are depleting and the environmental consequences of their exploitation are serious. Two questions loom over humanity today: how will we supply all this new energy, and how can we do so without adding dangerously to atmospheric greenhouse gases?

    No single nation can face these challenges alone.

    Twenty-five years ago, a group of industrial nations agreed on a project to develop a new, cleaner, sustainable source of energy.

    At the Geneva Superpower Summit in November 1985, following discussions with President Mitterand of France and Prime Minister Thatcher of the United Kingdom, General Secretary Gorbachev of the former Soviet Union proposed to U.S. President Reagan an international project aimed at developing fusion energy for peaceful purposes.

    The ITER project was born. The initial signatories: the former Soviet Union, the USA, the European Union (via EURATOM) and Japan, were joined by the People's Republic of China and the Republic of Korea in 2003, and by India in 2005. Together, these six nations plus Europe represent over half of the world's population.

    Conceptual design work for the fusion project began in 1988, followed by increasingly detailed engineering design phases until the final design for ITER was approved by the Members in 2001. Further negotiations established the Joint Implementation Agreement to detail the construction, exploitation and decommissioning phases, as well as the financing, organization and staffing of the ITER Organization.

    In ITER, the world has now joined forces to establish one of the largest and most ambitious international science projects ever conducted. ITER, which means "the way" in Latin, will require unparalleled levels of international scientific collaboration. Key plant components, for example, will be provided to the ITER Organization through in-kind contributions from the seven Members. Each Member has set up a domestic agency, employing staff to manage procurements for its in-kind contributions. The ITER Members have agreed to share every aspect of the project: science, procurements, finance, staffing ... with the aim that in the long run, each Member will have the know-how to produce its own fusion energy plant.

    Selecting a location for ITER was a long process that was finally concluded in 2005. In Moscow, on June 28, high representatives of the ITER Members unanimously agreed on the site proposed by the European Union—the ITER installation would be built at Cadarache, near Aix-en-Provence in Southern France.
    ITER - the way to new energy

    Instead of fighting each others for natural resources, I believe it would be smarter to bring all the nations together in this kind of project. People deserve peace around the world and it will protect the environment without pollutant wastes.

    I guess it is the time to move on in a different direction that can benefit everybody.
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.

    Voltaire


  2. #2
    They've been telling us for 50 years that the supplies of fossil fuels are depleting, but we keep finding more and more. We currently have over a hundred years worth of fossil fuels with the reserves we are currently aware of, and there are more yet to be found.

    I think creating a group like this is a good idea, as long as it is funded by private funds and not taxpayer funds. Most of these projects typically mean that we fund them with taxpayer dollars, the research groups that collect high salaries, piss away billions of dollars holding conferences, and building expensive prototypes that never work and are never economically feasible.

    This group has already been together for a long time. What have they accomplished thus far? I would consider any group that has not accomplished anything in 25 years to be a complete failure and a high risk investment.

    It would be nice if they actually came up with a plan that would benefit everyone, but at this point it sounds like the group is just another funding channel for environmentalists.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -- Benjamin Franklin


  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by TopDogger View Post
    They've been telling us for 50 years that the supplies of fossil fuels are depleting, but we keep finding more and more. We currently have over a hundred years worth of fossil fuels with the reserves we are currently aware of, and there are more yet to be found.
    That's correct, and do you know why? Because it allows them to justify increases of the fossil fuels price.


    I think creating a group like this is a good idea, as long as it is funded by private funds and not taxpayer funds. Most of these projects typically mean that we fund them with taxpayer dollars, the research groups that collect high salaries, piss away billions of dollars holding conferences, and building expensive prototypes that never work and are never economically feasible.

    This group has already been together for a long time. What have they accomplished thus far? I would consider any group that has not accomplished anything in 25 years to be a complete failure and a high risk investment.

    It would be nice if they actually came up with a plan that would benefit everyone, but at this point it sounds like the group is just another funding channel for environmentalists.
    Well, I believe that taxpayers money could be used to finance smart clean energy projects that will not be more expensive than the actual energies used, plus if you need to secure interests overseas and to spend additional money for wars and conflicts, I am sure that the total cost at the end is cheaper.

    As far as the project itself, it is pretty recent that all partners signed to start the project. It will maybe takes time to build it, but the concept is pretty good, perhaps a better solution to the nuclear power plants and extremely safe.

    I am very optimistic in this kind of project
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.

    Voltaire


  4. #4
    I am only optimistic about environmentalists when I start seeing them produce results that have a positive impact on something. Obama pissed away many millions of dollars iin wasted investments in alternate energy sources and none of them have produced anything that is cost-effective.

    President Obama's Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures

    Much of the money simply flowed back to Democrats in the form of campaign contributions.

    The formula was simple.

    1. Obama awards a multi-million dollar grant or loan guarantee to an alternate energy company.

    2. The company donates a large percentage of the money to the Democrats.

    3. The company pays its workers large salaries and bonuses.

    4. The company files for bankruptcy.

    5. The US taxpayers are on the hook for the bill.

    The brilliance of the scheme is that taxpayer money is used to fund Democrat campaigns.

    I am fully 110% behind any plan that eliminates the need for oil without bankrupting the economies of civilized countries. The best part of that is that the Middle East economies would shrivel up and they would no longer be a threat to the world.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -- Benjamin Franklin


  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by TopDogger View Post
    I am only optimistic about environmentalists when I start seeing them produce results that have a positive impact on something. Obama pissed away many millions of dollars iin wasted investments in alternate energy sources and none of them have produced anything that is cost-effective.
    The ITER project is not about environmentalism even if it coincide with them, it is about research of new energies wich ITER is a clean, economical and not pollutant. What they are building in France is the biggest experiment. Now we have to wait and see. If it is successful, this technology could be implemented in any devises as mentioned below.

    Like they said:

    ITER is the culmination of decades of fusion research: more than 200 tokamaks built the world over have paved the way to the ITER experiment. The smallest the size of a compact disc...the largest as high as a five-storey building; ITER is the result of the knowledge and experience these machines have accumulated.

    ITER will be twice the size of the largest tokamak currently operating, conceived as the necessary experimental step on the road to a demonstration fusion power plant. Launched as a daring exercise in international collaboration in 1985, twenty years of design work and complex negotiation have been necessary to bring the project to where it is today. Construction works began in 2010 on the ITER site in Cadarache, France.
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.

    Voltaire


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •