George Will in Washington Post Editorial Promotes Fusion as Energy of the Future

Veteran political columnist and commentator George F. Will has an op-ed article in today’s Washington Post promoting the fusion as an power source that can take care of America’s energy needs.


To be clear, he’s talking about ‘hot’ fusion (as opposed to cold fusion or LENR).

His argument in favor of fusion is that it uses an abundant source of fuel — hydrogen, it produces no greenhouse gases and no long-lived nuclear waste, and has no risk of runaway nuclear meltdown. Will argues that the federal budget should fund the research and development of fusion, and that $30 billion dollars over 20 years (one estimate of the time and money needed) would be money well spent, saying, “given the societal will, commercially feasible production of fusion energy is possible in the lifetime of most people now living.”

He laments, however, that because fusion is not seen as immediately essential or glamorous by the public, and because the horizon for success is so far away, it is at risk of being neglected — and he notes that the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory’s staff is now less than a third that it once was.

I hope that Mr. Will soon becomes aware of what has been going on in the LENR field. He seems to be smart enough to easily recognize the many advantages that the E-Cat (and anything similar) would have over any hot fusion projects under development — in a much shorter timeframe.

I sincerely hope that it won’t be too long before opinion-makers in the scientific, political, educational, and other fields start taking LENR as seriously as they do fusion and other alternative energy technologies. There is a lot riding on the work of Rossi and Co., and I hope that 2014 will see a sea change in thinking about how we solve our energy problems.


  • Alan DeAngelis

    ” At the center of the Sun, fusion power is estimated by models to be about 276.5 watts/m3….The peak power production in the Sun’s center, per volume, has been compared to the volumetric
    heat generated in an active compost heap.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_core
    .
    The E-cat is the way to go. http://phys.org/news/2013-05-rossi-e-cat-energy-density-higher.html

  • GreenWin

    George Will is a thoughtful conservative out of step with the next phase of fusion research. He needs to follow up by speaking to Dr. Bushnell at NASA LaRC – for an overview of LENR. From there he should speak to the few remaining researchers at Princeton Plasma Physics Lab and convince them to talk to Bushnell, McKubre, Dr. Robert Duncan, etc. about transitioning their work to nanoplasmonics. They’ll be surprised at the positive potential for funding they will encounter. Princeton must take these steps to remain a leader in fusion research. Will has a PhD in Political Science from Princeton.

    • Fortyniner

      For the consumption of people like Will and politicians with almost zero technical knowledge, and of scientists deeply embedded in the waning hot fusion gravy train, promoters of CF (by whatever name) may need to present the technology as an ‘extension’ of hot fusion research – another way of achieving the same goals. Such an approach (while fairly sickening to anyone who knows the truth of the attempted suppression) would allow adoption of LENR research without loss of face either for the people who have thrown public money down the hot fusion pit for decades, or those who have happily burned it all without returning a single Watt of excess power.

      Politicians, finally seeing some real possibility of success, would simultaneously see an opportunity justify the sqandering of billions of taxpayer dollars/euros as ‘preliminary research’, while scientists might see the opportunity of creating another brand new 50-year gravy train. Of course a few of those who have most prominently led the vilification of CF might need to be tossed under the bus in the process (although most would probably just be quitely retired), but it’s hard to see that as an altogether bad thing…

      • GreenWin

        Exactly the approach in mind. This is a face-saving argument linking NASA’s “plasmon polaritons” as a form of the very same plasma the hot fusion clan has pursued for 60 years. Does big science deserve such a bail out? No. Not given their infantile reaction to CF. But it would extinguish some of their fear and loathing. AND as you adroitly point out, opens of a fresh barrel of pork for white collar welfare.

        • Fortyniner

          A tricky decision for future spin-meisters – keep the term ‘cold fusion’ and link it to establishment ‘nuclear fusion’ while hoping that the whole P&F saga is forgotten, or come up with some new terminology that dissociates the tech from P&F but which would also be difficult to link to establishment nuclear fusion, therefore leaving the latter politically exposed.

          It can be tough, being a ‘perception manager’.

          • Alan DeAngelis

            Yeah, pedigree has always entitled “brilliant” people to claim credit for another person’s discovery. Fleischmann and Pons wouldn’t be the first chemists from the University of Utah to get screwed out of getting a Nobel Prize. Henry Eyring was one of the greatest chemists of the 20th-century whose work was ignored.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Eyring

      • Alan DeAngelis

        Yeah, ride the coattails of the “incompetent boobs” they
        disparaged a quarter of a century ago. Despicable.