"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 09:04:15 -0500, "Jimmie D"
wrote in
:
"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 21:48:26 -0500, wrote in
:
snip
True, it has the dogma of being "nuclear". That's a public perception
issue. But in case you haven't noticed, public perception is easily
manipulated -- that's how politicians get elected.
but that takes one thing MONEY
and nobody has figured how to make that much money in the short term
Assuming you are right, how much money would it take? How hard is it
to convince people that a source of nearly unlimited energy is right
around the technological corner? Who would shy away from opportunities
that, until now, were only dreams? Who really cares if a few die-hard
investors lose their fortunes because they refuse to accept change?
The fortunes that will be made, in all stages of the development of
fusion energy, are going to drop Bill Gates into the middle-class tax
bracket. All that will be required is a little motivation and a little
imagination. And if you don't have that then you aren't going to make
your fortune anyway.
It is still wishful thinking that the solution is right around the corner
We won't know until we try.
and the question is who will benifit from all this new wealth.
You're kidding, right? Who -won't- benefit?
We all benifit from current energy sources but some benifit a lot more than
others. Same will happen with any other new source and things will be set up
to make sure those who are reaping the rewards now will also benifit in the
future. Hell check your NG bill, you wil find you are paying for sunshine
in the winter.