|
We could take
the same approach we took on Kyoto -- make promises of financial commitments we
know we haven't got a snowball's chance in hell of meeting, with the expectation
that the other international ITER partners will bail us out once the viability
of the project becomes threatened.....
(Boy, I think
maybe I should run for Liberal Minister of the Economy, huh
?)
Jaro
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Cuttler [mailto:jerrycuttler@rogers.com] Sent: Sunday December 29, 2002 9:18 PM To: cdn-nucl-l (E-mail) Subject: [cdn-nucl-l] Iter fusion reactor bid needs more funds? This is a new development. We always assumed
that we could just offer the site and not pick up a huge tab for the
construction.
The attractiveness of the site was suppose to be
our stake. Now, it seems, that is not enough.
Would additional government funding for
Iter would compete with funding for developing
the ACR?
Building the $12 billion project in Canada would
yield economic payback, but the same argument is made for the competing
sites.
Darlington was suppose to be the most
attractive site. If it is, then we shouldn't have to contribute very
much.
What do you think?
Jerry
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|