Europe, the U.S. and five other nations signed a 10 billion euro ($12.8 billion) agreement to build an experimental nuclear-fusion reactor that one day could replace conventional nuclear power plants.
The U.S., South Korea, China, India, Japan, Russia and the European Union agreed to finance and share the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor...
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=ap0cgfDMHuuE&refer=europe
2006-11-21 06:44:38 · 5 answers · asked by Apolo 6 in Environment
YES YES YES YES
Nuclear fusion is very difficult to achieve. That $12.8 billion is a drop in the bucket compared to what will really be required to make fusion reactors a commercial success.
However, if we can make nuclear fusion a commercial success, it will do so much to reduce pollution from other sources that it will be well worth it.
2006-11-21 07:32:40 · answer #1 · answered by Otis F 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
OK we've spend $300,000,000,000,000 on the iraq war and what has been the end result. At least we won't kill anybody and can acomplish something for better mankind with this.
2006-11-21 14:47:09 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the grand scheme of things that is not too much money to spend to look into this.
2006-11-21 14:45:50 · answer #3 · answered by Staceyflourpond 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, hell yes. the money risk isnt really that significant (even when it will probably end up going 5 times the planned budget )and the rewards would be.
2006-11-21 15:57:35 · answer #4 · answered by Gary L 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
To be honest, what is the alternative?
2006-11-21 14:48:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋