Show me research on this not funded by the government. Show me research not funded by any government in the world.
That wasn't the point.. And I've never suggested the gov't doesn't have a role in advancing R&D when there is private market failure.
The point was the US gov't had, as a result of taxpayer funded research, the opportunity to advance an energy technology that was far safer, cost effective, and efficient back in the '60s. The technology was invented under the leadership of Alvin Weinberg, who advocated moving forward with Thorium
en.wikipedia.org
Weinberg was fired by the Nixon Administration from ORNL in 1973 after 18 years as the lab's director because he continued to advocate increased nuclear safety and Molten Salt Reactors, instead of the Administration's chosen Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor ( LMFBR) that the AEC's Director of Reactor Division, Milton Shaw, was appointed to develop. [13] Weinberg's firing effectively halted development of the MSR, as it was virtually unknown by other nuclear labs and specialists. [14] There was a brief revival of MSR research at ORNL as part of the Carter Administration's nonproliferation interests, culminating in ORNL-TM-7207: 1980–07, "Conceptual Design Characteristics of a Denatured Molten-Salt Reactor with Once-Through Fueling", by Engel, et al. It is still considered by many, to be the "reference design" for widespread, commercial Molten Salt Reactors (MSRs). [15] [16]
en.wikipedia.org
Government decision WR.. By Nixon, who wanted to pursue, on the advice of the military, plutonium production for weapons. It was a "reasonable" decision, given the politics at the time, but there should have been no reason a "two-track" policy couldn't have been pursued, to include MSR development.
Now China, after obtaining all of our Thorium R&D for FREE from Oak Ridge, says they will have their initial Thorium reactor on line by 2017..
Not if you are a person who believes in limiting government. Limiting gov't, not removing it from filling in the gap when there is private market failure. Without gov't R&D, we wouldn't have the internet, commercial jet aircraft, or satellite communications. But the gov't should not maintain a monopoly over that R&D.. It should license it to the private sector so that the private sector can commercialize it using private investment dollars.
Gov't, no matter what the politico-economic theory that is applied, must serve the interests of the people who ELECT that government, not merely parochial corporate, or governmental interests. Taxpayers funded that R&D, and the taxpayers should receive an ROI on that research when it promises to decrease our economic costs vis-a-vis energy.
Hawk |
