Department of Defense....

Defense against humanity, sanity, the future, democracy, a rational budget.....

When Kucinich recommended establishing a cabinet-level "Department of Peace" in 2004 it made me cringe because I knew the idiot majority (which I like to call "The Borg") would immediately bury the idea.

A DoD plan would likely cost billions in public money and the benefits would first go to the military for operations and on to corporate cash cows.

A DoP plan would likely cost far less, incorporate nonprofit funding, develop open-source, and distribute resources based on need.

Consequently I would support LSP if it were proposed by a DoP. It would likely be openly discussed, and a developed proposal would probably by viable.

A DoD proposal will likewly be a huge money sink, incorporate too many kickbacks and proprietary development rights grants to the usual Big War Profiteers, and the end result is likely a poorly-performing, inefficient design, if it gets anywhere at all.

The crux of this discussion is whether or not its likely that a big military-run "Manhattan Project" for energy technology is going to save us. Some of us assume that the military is the only way to do it- yet the SpaceShipOne experiment proved that civilian, non-military projects are just as viable. Imagine what could be acheived with cooperation- not direction- by the military, along with an open-source development framework and a project goal with more altruistic motivations.

The bottom line is, if we're looking for a radical new energy source that can't be controlled and is everywhere and essentially "free", we won't get it from the military. That would be like asking the Strategic U.S. Command to implement a system that would limit its ability to dominate. Its not going to happen. Its much more likely that they will offer a reasonable-sounding solution, steal the public money, and bury the project.

Its helpful to remember that the Manhattan Project had as its aim the goal of producing a weapon of massive and brutal destruction, completely outside the bounds of reason, and totally against international laws and even conventional morality. If we want (or need) to create weapons and systems primed for destruction, the military is a logical place to go fishing for implementation. If we want to save the human race, the planet, or raise standards of living, the military is a piss-poor place to look. There needs to be alternatives- and there needs to be people who are willing to take the necessary risks to establish those alternatives.

I'm not sure where the sudden focus on the Department of Defense came in. The SunDish was demonstrated at the Pentagon (yes, DoD), but it was a DOE (Department of Energy) project, coordinating the efforts of STM, SAIC, and others. There was and is nothing whatever militarily oriented about this technology.

Thats kind of ridiculous to me. The military provides the bulk of money for high-tech pure research- stuff that corporations cannot get into because of the massive risk and uncertain ROI.

NASA, the DOE, and DoD answer to the joint chiefs of staff, and ultimately to the Commander-in-chief (Bush).

From www.doe.gov


All of our proposals here would be militarized in implementation.

It's ridiculous to assume everything has a military connection as well. By your reasoning, biodiesel will be a 'military solution' because it is being used in some army vehicles. Not everything has a conspiratorial slant to it, despite the best efforts of some here to paint it that way.

On January 26th a demonstration of the SRP "SunDish" was presented by Salt River Project. Present were engineers from Scientific Applications International Corp. (SAIC), DTE Biomass Energy, Arizona Public Service company (APS), and representatives from the American Hydrogen Association, the Arizona Solar Energy Association, and other interested parties.

Hold on buddy...

Its 2005 and peak oil is about to occur. We spend 500 billion on defense and there's about to be an energy crisis.

I'm just pointing at the writing on the wall.

On Peak Oil happening soon, and of the US's intention of launching warfare on energy-rich regions around the planet, I have no doubt. But to summarily pronounce SunDish or other technologies as somehow unfit because of a perceived connection with the military-industrial complex is misguided at best. This technology was around before DOE funding arrived, and has survived since its withdrawal.

The SunDish is a unique application of thermal, rather than photovoltaic, solar power. The ability of its Stirling motor genset to continue producing power at night or on cloudy days makes it that much better. It is one technology that has been extensively tested in real world conditions, and it works now.

LSP and other exotic technologies may eventually produce results, but as we both agree, the Peak draws nigh, and we need solutions soon. Or yesterday, preferably. I do not believe that this solution will arrive in the form of a single miraculous invention or innovation, but from the continued development of numerous technologies already available. A singular pie-in-the-sky concept such as LSP, or cold-fusion, or zero-point energy, is highly unlikely to provide our energy needs in the near to midterm. And in the meantime, the energy resources required of such a venture will be increasingly needed to produce food and heat for the surviving population.