#Nuclear thread: Fusion is the Maginot line of the antinuclear movement. Why build what works since 1950 when you can throw the kitchen sink at something that's extremely unlikely to be viable for another fifty? (1/5) @CarloStagnaro @liberioltre https://twitter.com/luisbaram/status/1276561222662488066

It can and will be used to drain resources earmarked for Gen IV nuclear power plants. And it conveniently uses a mind trick: Since it took only seven years from fission bomb to fusion bomb, but that's because fusion bombs have... a fission bomb inside. (2/5)

So, an honest proponent should tell you: "we'd like to be able to initiate fusion without fission. BUT, the military advantage of doing so and the money spent during the cold war militates against us ever being able to, otherwise we'd have one already." (3/5)

Of course, another way to look at it honestly would be to say "We'll build a fission reactor in order to use it to initiate fusion", which of course would not go anywhere: the story sold so far is that Fusion is "clean" and you don't need fission plants, which are "dirty". (4/5)

So, that excuse is valuable to squash all the reactor designs using high level waste as either fuel or initiator for Thorium MSR plants. You don't want cheap clean electricity, that would mess with the ideology. (end)