When Fusion Causes Fission
I'm going to try to reconstitute this post. Blogger swallowed it whole yesterday, and then my computer froze up like Anna Nicole Smith at a spelling bee.
French President Jacques Chirac has told the Japanese people that he still welcomes their participation in the ITER project... If it's built in France.
How terribly diplomatic of the progressive, multilateral Europeans. And where do the other parties involved stand on the issue?
If I had to guess, I'd say that Japan's probably a better place to build the reactor. Not only do you have the benefit of the Japanese and South Korean industrial efficiency, but you have a far better economic environment in Asia than in Europe. The reactor isn't expected to be completed until 2050 as it is; do you honestly think that the French laborers are reliable enough to keep the ting on schedule, let alone finish it? Don't forget, folks, that since the calendar turned 2005, the following things have happened in France:
The French government passed legislation relaxing work week regulations to allow people to work more than thirty-five hours. The original legislation to limit the work week was aimed at boosting the French economy and creating jobs, but it has actually done the opposite. The French populace met this relaxation with widespread protests.
The International Olympic Committee visited Paris to evaluate it as a possible site for the 2012 Olympic games, and the Parisian labor unions went on strike.
Many French folks also strike after every national holiday, just so they can have another day off. I encountered this in September of last year, when one day made the difference between whether or not I was able to go to the top of the Eiffel Tower.
I don't know about the sites themselves; they could be comparable; but from a labor and economic standpoint alone, Japan is a much better site to build this reactor.
And the other participants? The United States, to the best of my knowledge, doesn't have anything to gain by sticking it to France on this issue. The South Koreans could stand to profit due to their proximity to Japan; but my guess is that the amount they'd stand to profit from supporting one reactor isn't that much.
What do the Chinese have to gain by supporting France as a candidate? Well, I seem to remember some stories in the news lately about the Chinese government lobbying to get a European Union weapons embargo lifted. The Chinese also have rather poor relations with the Japanese. Something about an invasion and occupation in the last century? I'm not really clear on the details. (Something about some lady named Nan King?)
And Russia? Well, it doesn't surprise me that the Russians want cozy relations with the European Union, and we know that they already have good relations with the Chinese (who have bought a lot of their old military hardware). There's also the issue of the Russo-Japanese War, the centennial of which is this year. (For those of you who weren't around at the time, Japan pretty much owned Russia, no questions asked.)
In the end, the French can always, in all cases, be relied upon to do one thing: whatever is best for France. I have to give President Chirac credit, though: physically travelling to Japan to tell them that they're welcome to participate if they do it the French way takes a big pair. Not as big as President Bush's, but big nontheless.
In the end, this may effectively divide the ITER coalition. If that happens, who do you think will finish first, and whose reactor will actually work? If you said "France," you're not paying close enough attention.
French President Jacques Chirac has told the Japanese people that he still welcomes their participation in the ITER project... If it's built in France.
French President Jacques Chirac said Monday that the European Union hopes for an agreement soon to let Japan take part in a revolutionary nuclear project, despite a row over which country will host it.
Talks have been deadlocked for months on where to build the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), with the European Union threatening to go alone if Japan does not drop its bid.
"France along with Europe hope for Japan's participation as part of the international cooperation on ITER," Chirac said on a visit to Tokyo.
"I have no doubt that an agreement on this issue can be found quickly between the European Union and Japan," he told a seminar on sustainable development organized by the Nikkei financial press group.
How terribly diplomatic of the progressive, multilateral Europeans. And where do the other parties involved stand on the issue?
The United States and South Korea support Japan's offer to build ITER in Rokkasho-mura, a northern Japanese village near the Pacific Ocean, while China and Russia back the EU bid for the southern French town of Cadarache.
European Union leaders at a March 23 meeting in Brussels said they would go ahead with construction in Cadarache and gave Japan until July to agree.
If I had to guess, I'd say that Japan's probably a better place to build the reactor. Not only do you have the benefit of the Japanese and South Korean industrial efficiency, but you have a far better economic environment in Asia than in Europe. The reactor isn't expected to be completed until 2050 as it is; do you honestly think that the French laborers are reliable enough to keep the ting on schedule, let alone finish it? Don't forget, folks, that since the calendar turned 2005, the following things have happened in France:
Many French folks also strike after every national holiday, just so they can have another day off. I encountered this in September of last year, when one day made the difference between whether or not I was able to go to the top of the Eiffel Tower.
I don't know about the sites themselves; they could be comparable; but from a labor and economic standpoint alone, Japan is a much better site to build this reactor.
And the other participants? The United States, to the best of my knowledge, doesn't have anything to gain by sticking it to France on this issue. The South Koreans could stand to profit due to their proximity to Japan; but my guess is that the amount they'd stand to profit from supporting one reactor isn't that much.
What do the Chinese have to gain by supporting France as a candidate? Well, I seem to remember some stories in the news lately about the Chinese government lobbying to get a European Union weapons embargo lifted. The Chinese also have rather poor relations with the Japanese. Something about an invasion and occupation in the last century? I'm not really clear on the details. (Something about some lady named Nan King?)
And Russia? Well, it doesn't surprise me that the Russians want cozy relations with the European Union, and we know that they already have good relations with the Chinese (who have bought a lot of their old military hardware). There's also the issue of the Russo-Japanese War, the centennial of which is this year. (For those of you who weren't around at the time, Japan pretty much owned Russia, no questions asked.)
In the end, the French can always, in all cases, be relied upon to do one thing: whatever is best for France. I have to give President Chirac credit, though: physically travelling to Japan to tell them that they're welcome to participate if they do it the French way takes a big pair. Not as big as President Bush's, but big nontheless.
In the end, this may effectively divide the ITER coalition. If that happens, who do you think will finish first, and whose reactor will actually work? If you said "France," you're not paying close enough attention.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home