This should be what Obama's Manhattan Project/man on the moon project should be. I think is doable in less than ten years if people wanted to make it happen. Renuables should also be use to complement this projects specially solar power.

This plus a Hydrogen economy will set USA/Rest of the world in a very stable direction.

Can we get a *long tag on this ?

Invocations (long) cannot be called by charliem because charliem is not privileged - sorry.

For me the embedded video cuts off after 2 minutes and you have to visit the website to watch the remainder.

This is what I have been saying for years!

This Professor stole MY ideas!

>> ^nickreal03:
This should be what Obama's Manhattan Project/man on the moon project should be. I think is doable in less than ten years if people wanted to make it happen.

Not going to happen. The US is already involved in the ITER project and the earliest prediction for ITER is a commercial reactor by 2050. And that's IF nothing goes wrong.

Current research is still working towards achieving net gain, which is a far cry from practical fusion power. People have been promising fusion power "soon" since the 70s. The fact is we're not even close to starting research on commercial fusion, and we don't know if a practical fusion plant is even possible.

Our energy needs grows exponentially, and when and IF fusion power becomes available, it will already be too late. We NEED research on renewable fuels and alternative energy such as solar power to bridge that gap, and putting our hopes on a hail mary like fusion is only an invitation to disaster.

to Mentality
But isn't that what they said about a man on the moon as well? or the atomic bomb? I think if we put the effort and energy will be doable for 2020. We just need to make it a priority. I will even support a partner ship with EU as a world priority one project.

*long

*promote

This video has been flagged as being at least 10 minutes in length - declared long by NordlichReiter.

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Saturday, January 24th, 2009 6:42pm PST - promote requested by NordlichReiter.

interesting, but i'm very skeptical of the timeframes given... not to mention the hypothetical building costs for this hypothetical commercial energy production

as an example of this, here's a recent time magazine article on the "comeback" of nuclear power plants:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1869203,00.html

just look at those cost overruns and timeframes for a *known* and now-politically acceptable method of energy production -- now we just need to get over our fears of safely transporting our nuclear waste by inter-state rail to the massive yucca mountain repository

all that aside, i really hope that we don't put all our eggs in one basket - there's certainly no dearth of promising energy alternatives

imho, this man is brilliant - please take the time to consider this testimonial

http://www.oceancommission.gov/meetings/may13_14_02/craven_testimony.pdf

for further consideration:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_thermal_energy_conversion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_power

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_power

http://www.evhotspot.com/ocean-current.html

http://www.gizmag.com/energy-island-otec/8714/

anyway, good sift... thanks

Moving this video to nickreal03's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.

The embed doesn't work for me, at all.

I went and downloaded the absolutely latest version of flash player, and the embed still doesn't work.