Re: Cold Fusion Discussion

[Rondo Jeffery <RJEFFERY@WEBER.EDU>]

Regarding funding for cold fusion, Richard says:

> > > Richard Tarara <rtarara@SAINTMARYS.EDU> 09/17/99 07:45AM >>>
> Why do we always assume that:

<snip>

> 2)  That only the U.S. matters?  Certainly countries like Japan would be
> more than eager to latch onto physics that might lead to energy independence
> and great financial gain.

<snip>

The fact of the matter is that Japan was one of the biggest supporters of cold fusion research.  After Pons and Fleishmann left Utah, they went to France and set up a lab with funding from Japanese industry (Toyota, I believe).  They continued for nearly ten years, until the funding was gradually reduced.  I haven't checked recently, but the last I heard Toyota was dropping their support.  There are still ardent supporters of (read, believers in?) palladium-based electrolytic-cell "cold fusion."  They continue to sing the "conspiracy theory" theme, that they were "done in by hot fusion interests."   But, I don't buy that argument.  There were too many people around the world who tried to duplicate the effect Pons and Fleishmann claimed, without success.  If an effect is real, and of such a magnitude as was claimed, it shouldn't be necessary to dig it out with statistics to verify it.

On the other hand, Peter Vajk has reminded us of the danger of putting funding for basic research into the hands of politicians, or those who have their own projects to support.  I seem to remember, though, that there were serious problems with the giant orbiting solar collector system, like beaming that much energy down through the atmosphere to the antennae on the ground.  But it is clear that solar energy is our ultimate renewable energy source.  More research needs to be done in that area before it is economical on the large scale.

I remember when I was growing up in the late '50s (I guess that dates me, doesn't it?), the prospects for a fusion reactor were estimated at 30 years in the future.  Well, that has come and gone, and we are still hearing projections of 30 years or more.  Peter Vajk cites 50 years as the best estimate of a hot fusion reactor going on line. Clearly, we need research in alternate energy sources, but where is the funding going to come from?

Rondo Jeffery
Weber State University
Ogden, UT 84408-2508
rjeffery@weber.edu