Some very disappointing news: it seems that federal funding for a demonstration nuclear fusion reactor called ITER (all $160M of it) is gone, as of 2008. The reactor is to be the first that can successfully produce more output energy than the input, so it’s a pretty massive step forward. If nuclear fusion can be successfully commercialized, I’d say that several of the world’s biggest problems will disappear overnight, so this is incredibly frustrating. While it is an international project, without the U.S.’s commitment it will likely proceed at a much slower pace - after all, the project began in 1985, but has already had a turbulent funding history. (Interestingly, Ontario was probably going to be the site of the reactor, before the Canadian government pulled the plug on funding in 2003.)

While I don’t know where the money trail leads, at least a chunk of it ended up with the Department of Energy, funding R&D for near-term solutions (presumably commercializing thin-film solar and other renewables). Even still, it’s shameful that we need to choose between short-term and long-term answers regarding energy policy. Realistically, is there any other issue that is more pressing at the moment?

One of the commenters at the linked article noted that the entire 2007 National Science Foundation budget was $6 billion, while the war in Iraq was budgeted more than $150 billion. Political myopia is nothing new, but its patently obvious that the Iraq war is inextricably linked with energy. But I’m repeating myself…

(Also, if you have any interest at all, a skim of ITER is actually pretty fascinating. Wikipedia that shit.)