the USA is building a nuclear laser in North California. Expensive. see attachment for link

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/7970619/Obama-could-kill-fossil-fuels-overnight-with-a-nuclear-dash-for-thorium.html

http://www.inhabitat.com/2009/06/01/worlds-largest-laser-to-attempt-nuclear-fusion/

I fixed your links.  Very interesting.  The second article suggests that they are going to try hydrogen fusion. Maybe it's just journalistic simplification, but I wonder why they would go for that, as opposed to deuterium and tritium fusion.

The effort needed to fuse hydrogen is much much greater.

It doubles as advancing technology for  Boeing 747-400 YAL-1, maybe there is going to be a YAL-2 in future or High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defence System in future.

Some experts don't think that fusion reactors will live up to their promise:

"“Long touted as an inexhaustible energy
source for the next century, fusion
as it is now being developed will
almost certainly be too expensive and
unreliable for commercial use.”
The dominating goal of the fusion program is
to produce a reactor fueled by deuterium and
tritium, isotopes of hydrogen containing one
and two extra neutrons. This choice of fuel
greatly eases the problem of achieving an
energy-producing fusion reaction, but the
choice also has features that make it far more
diScult to turn that energy source into a useful
power plant. The most serious diSculty concerns
the very high energy neutrons released in
the deuterium-tritium (D-T) reaction. These
uncharged nuclear particles damage the reactor
structure and make it radioactive. A chain of
undesirable eFects ensures that any reactor
employing D-T fusion will be a large, complex,
expensive, and unreliable source of power.
That is hardly preferable to present-day fission
reactors, much less the improved fission reactors
that are almost sure to come."


www.askmar.com/.../The%20Trouble%20With%20Fusion.pdf

Off-Topic replies have been moved to this Topic.

Axle wrote on Oct 30^th, 2010 at 12:21am:

Some experts don't think that fusion reactors will live up to their promise: "“Long touted as an inexhaustible energy source for the next century, fusion as it is now being developed will almost certainly be too expensive and unreliable for commercial use.” The dominating goal of the fusion program is to produce a reactor fueled by deuterium and tritium, isotopes of hydrogen containing one and two extra neutrons. This choice of fuel greatly eases the problem of achieving an energy-producing fusion reaction, but the choice also has features that make it far more diScult to turn that energy source into a useful power plant. The most serious diSculty concerns the very high energy neutrons released in the deuterium-tritium (D-T) reaction. These uncharged nuclear particles damage the reactor structure and make it radioactive. A chain of undesirable eFects ensures that any reactor employing D-T fusion will be a large, complex, expensive, and unreliable source of power. That is hardly preferable to present-day fission reactors, much less the improved fission reactors that are almost sure to come." www.askmar.com/.../The%20Trouble%20With%20Fusion.pdf

Don't count on it.  You got the the European Union through the legally distinct organisation EURATOM, India, Japan, People's Republic of China, Russia, South Korea, and the United States of America (USA) working on ITER reactor, EU has another product and US has their own.  US has DIII-D · TFTR · NSTX · NCSX · UCLA ET · Alcator C-Mod · LDX · MSTNIF · OMEGA · Nova · Nike · Shiva · Argus · Cyclops · Janus · Long path · Z machine · PACER


Iter
Timeline Date      Event
2006-11-21      Seven participants formally agreed to fund the creation of a nuclear fusion reactor.[8]
2008      Site preparation start, ITER Itinerary start[11]
2009      Site preparation completion[11]
2010      Tokamak complex excavation start[11]
2011      Predicted: Tokamak complex construction start[11]
2015      Predicted: Tokamak assembly start[11]
2018      Predicted: Tokamak assembly completion, start torus Pump down[11]
2019-11      Predicted: Achievement of first plasma[11]
2027-03      Predicted: Start of deuterium-tritium operation[11]
2038      Predicted: End of project

Axle wrote on Oct 30^th, 2010 at 12:21am:

The dominating goal of the fusion program is to produce a reactor fueled by deuterium and tritium, isotopes of hydrogen containing one and two extra neutrons. This choice of fuel greatly eases the problem of achieving an energy-producing fusion reaction, but the choice also has features that make it far more difficult to turn that energy source into a useful power plant. The most serious difficulty concerns the very high energy neutrons released in the deuterium-tritium (D-T) reaction. These uncharged nuclear particles damage the reactor structure and make it radioactive.

It's a recognised issue with the proposed D-T reaction. The alternative is Aneutronic fusion.

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

There are a few candidates on that page. Helium 3 is the prime candidate, but of course it's very difficult to come by. There is plenty of it on the moon, and that may provide a possibility for the future.

I think fusion should be abandoned in favor of Thorium reactors.
We know they work, they can't melt down, they can make other dangerous
isotopes such as Plutonium 239 safe & we have plenty of Thorium.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2011 at 8:15pm:

I think fusion should be abandoned in favor of Thorium reactors. We know they work, they can't melt down, they can make other dangerous isotopes such as Plutonium 239 safe & we have plenty of Thorium.

Any reactive material that works in a power reactor would be usable....