Skip to main content

Can world's largest laser zap Earth's energy woes?

Image
By scooby
Anonymously contributed:


http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/science/04/28/laser.fusion.nif/index.html?hpt=Mid

Comments

Anonymous said…
Great article. I love the Lab's P.R. representatives comment that "the NIF has held all of its milestones"and "held to its budget". Its years behind schedule and billions over budget but that doesn't stop the Lab P.R. juggernaut from whipping out another whopper. The NIF could fail completely and you would never know it if all you had was the Lab's P.R. department reporting on it. I suspect there are serious problems with this experiment that have been hidden from public (Congressional) scrutiny.
4/30/2010 6:49 AM
Anonymous said…
No it can not. That's not what it was built for. It's strictly weapons verification. The rest is bogus sales tactics.
4/30/2010 4:44 PM
Anonymous said…
What surprises me is how poor a job CNN does on this report. Maybe their ratings are so bad because their reporting is so bad.

They do present some more pessimistic comments for "balance", but the article gives NIF spokespeople the majority of coverage. Clearly, CNN accepts what they have been told. Maybe someone should tell them that there is essentially no tritium in seawater. Tritium is radioactive and what we have for fusion experiments is man-made.

That "seawater" whopper must have come straight from NIF.


So how many of this blog's readers believe that NIF will:

1) produce fusion neutrons

2) achieve fusion ignition (the "I" in NIF)

3) provide a path to a practical fusion reactor

4) provide an historic energy miracle, LOL
4/30/2010 7:54 PM
Anonymous said…
April 30, 2010 7:54 PM

I believe 1 and 2, not 3 and 4.
5/02/2010 6:34 AM
Anonymous said…
When will Ed Moses begin telling the press that NIF can turn lead into gold?

I can hardly wait!
5/02/2010 11:14 AM
Anonymous said…
Regardless of answers to 1), 2), 3), and 4) NIF will be regarded a success since Plan B is to require it to certify the U.S. nuclear stockpile without underground nuclear testing. Did we get it right Ed Moses!
5/03/2010 7:07 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.
124 comments
Read more

tcp1 looking good

By scooby
I just received my annual TCP-1 letter from LLNS and a summary of the LLNS Pension Plan. Looked in pretty good shape in 2013. About 35% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 134.92%). This was a decrease from 2012 where it was 51% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 151.59%). They did note that the 2012 change in the law on how liabilities are calculated using interest rates improved the plan's position. Without the change the funding target attainment percentages would have been 118% (2012) and 105% (2013). 2013 assets = $2,057,866,902 2013 liabilities = $1,525,162,784 vs 2012 assets = $1,844,924,947 2012 liabilities = $1,217,043,150 It was also noted that a slightly different calculation method ("fair market value") designed to show a clearer picture of the plan' status as December 31, 2013 had; Assets = $2,403,098,433 Liabilities = $2,068,984,256 Funding ratio = 116.15% Its a closed plan with 3,781 participants. Of that number, 3,151 wer...
105 comments
Read more