Video: Fusion Power Event
On March 13, the American Security Project hosted a briefing on fusion power on Capitol Hill. The event, which took place in the House Science and Technology Subcommittee Room, featured a short introduction by Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (CA-19), followed by a panel discussion with ASP’s CEO BGen Stephen Cheney, USMC (Ret.); Vice Admiral Lee Gunn, USN (Ret.); Dr. Stewart Prager, Director of the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory; and Andrew Holland, ASP’s Senior Fellow for Energy and Climate.
For a full recap of the event, click here.
Below is a full video of the event, along with the PowerPoint slides from the presenters.
Here is the presentation from Vice Admiral Lee Gunn, USN (Ret.) on long-term global energy challenges
Dr. Stewart Prager gave an overview of fusion power and the current status of the U.S. fusion program:
Andrew Holland followed with ASP’s “Apollo” Program for accelerating the development of fusion power
To check out ASP’s full White Paper, “Fusion Power: A 10 Year Plan to Energy Security,” click below:
3 Comments
Comments are closed.
[…] Video: Fusion Power Event […]
Dear ASP –
(Attn.: esp. Andrew Holland and Norman Augustine, maybe others)
Firstly, let me thank ASP for the use of your facilities during the December meeting of the FPA group, when we were “locked out” of the Capitol Club facilities. Greatly appreciated!
We have been in contact earlier about a few points in the White Paper on Fusion Power published by ASP where we may have differing opinions, but on the whole we agree that:
1) the US has fallen behind the rest of the industrialized world in fusion electricity (FE) R&D
2) the US will need FE plants, and unless it “pulls up their socks” they’ll be bought from the Far East
3) in 10 years, with adequate funding, the US can have a pilot-plant FE machine on stream.
I have been preaching (to the converted, or to the choir) for years about the need for us (US!) to re-take the lead in developing commercial-scale FE facilities. And we can! Here’s where ASP and I differ:
1) I believe we should choose only one system, that which is most likely to be successful in the near future – an advanced tokamak-based system, not ICF nor a magnetic stellarator or even an ST
2) I believe neither industry nor venture capitalists will support the pilot-plant – profitability is too far away for VCs and corporations to invest – but nor should the government. Electricity is a commodity, and should not have governmental intervention for its development (I know our competitors do it, but the US government is simply fickle – look at what happened at MIT!). There is an alternative, which is wide-spread in the US.
3) I (and a bunch of guys in the fusion community) believe we have sufficiently advanced in AT technology to build a proof-of-concept pilot plant, NOW!
Attached to this email are a few notes and suggestions as to what the US should do to achieve all of the above (and the 10 benefits you mention in your “Meeting the Challenge” short note). Please read these, and in particular, the “Costing Study” proposal, which I would address to ASP. I would be very happy to discuss this and other any other aspects of Fusion Energy in person in Washington (daily flights from GVA!).
As a loyal American, but living in Switzerland, I look forward to the opportunity of working together with ASP to bring the range of benefits FE can bring to the US, now!
Best regards,
Howard
[…] ASP hosted a briefing on Capitol Hill on March 13, 2013, launching ASP’s White Paper. To watch the event, click here. […]