Analyzing Context

Analyzing the context surrounding nuclear fusion will form my argument for project 3. Understanding the various opinions, ideas and controversies surrounding nuclear fusion as well as knowing who are the major players in the nuclear fusion debate culminates in a better understand of the context surrounding the debate about how economical is nuclear fusion.

ClkerFreeVectorImages, "Context Question Direction Meaning Arrow Circle" 2012 via pixabay.com CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication

1. Their are a couple key perspectives surrounding the debate about whether or not nuclear fusion is economically viable. They both are centered around the lack of progress made in the field of nuclear fusion. On one side, scientists argue that not enough money has been set aside for nuclear fusion research which is why nuclear fusion has been in the experimenting stages for so long. On the other side, critics of expenditures on large nuclear fusion projects say that enough money has been spent on nuclear fusion and little progress has been made. They believe that money could be put to better use improving proven clean energy sources like wind, solar, geothermal and hydroelectric.
2. The major points of contention are the massive amounts of money being dumped into nuclear fusion project like the one currently being built in France which is projected to be finished in 2020 and could cost over 20 billion dollars to complete. As mentioned in this TIME's magazine article, the ITER nuclear fusion project is simply an expensive science project that will never produce anything for society once its use is outlived as a testing ground for nuclear fusion. This is a major point of contention for skeptics of nuclear fusion.
3. While nuclear fusion does cost extreme amounts of money to simply create the apparatuses that house a nuclear fusion reaction, it is widely accepted that nuclear fusion does have the potential to create large amounts of power at cheap and renewable cost. It is easy to see this agreement in the following two articles: the first article is from the Institution of Engineering and Technology website writes about the gold mine a working nuclear fusion reactor would be because of its widely accessible fuel (seawater) and the amount of power released when the reaction occurs, and this second article is from the New York Times website which explores new start-ups and how these same nuclear fusion ideas are cyclical and have no chance of working explains that nuclear fusion does have the potential to create large amounts of power for cheap.
4. The people who wish to spend money on proven methods are more conservative in their approach to their expenditure of money and this group are the individuals against the large expenditure of money on nuclear fusion experiments. Their conservative way of spending money influences them to go with an option that has a larger guarantee of success but smaller reward than an option that has a larger reward but smaller guarantee of success. This is the main ideological difference between the two groups on either side of the nuclear fusion debate.
5. Specifically, in this article from euroscientist.com is suggesting to its audience to take a good look at nuclear fusion and all of the fake promises surrounding it. It is a scathing review of nuclear fusion and slight progress it has made over the past decades of research and experimenting. Next, this article from TIME magazine is suggesting to its audience to give nuclear fusion another chance because these small groups of engineers are working in specific avenues to make nuclear fusion a reality. Two different articles coming from two different viewpoints about the argument of nuclear fusion's relevance.
6. The best perspective is that nuclear fusion has the greatest potential in regards to creating the most clean and renewable energy. Nuclear energy may be the only way to save Earth from global warming and carbon emissions that are destroying our atmosphere. Nuclear energy is the most viable option to create a world that runs on clean energy. 
7. The cost of nuclear fusion is the greatest perspective that has a negative effect on my argument. The cost of nuclear fusion has always been a high price but as experiments reach the billions without any progress regarding the actual implementation of nuclear fusion into the energy grid, this prospective gains strength each day scientists do not come through with a breakthrough in nuclear fusion technology.