posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 10:26 AM
Sometimes these projects and the direction taken is to do with accessibility of technology and also how funding works. Stereotypical oil company
conspiracies out of the way, what normally is the case is that politicians are often business men, their science knowledge and interest vanished
somewhere around high school while they were picking on and beating up 'nerds'. To them giving funding is about investment for payback in some way
while they are still in a job.
Most of these projects require a lot of RnD because we do not currently have all the technology. Just because it has been some 20-30 years in the
making, doesn't mean there has been nothing useful out of it. Quite often though never shouted about, development of materials and technology is
supported and advanced in the interest of these projects and are a benefit to the general public in the long run. Going up to a politician and saying
"We need funding for 20 years" is just about the same as stamping "Denied" on your own forms.
An example of this is in the international linear collider, which has been on the table for about... 10 years now i think. Why? well because its
difficult to get someone with no interest in science to agree to fund a project when the current status is the following
-LHC was just built, why do you need another one?
It is like the problem faced by a kid who's computer is 3 years old and wants his/her parents buy another to play games on... the parent says... why
do you want a new one? The one you have is brand new!
Magnetic containment is probably the most well understood in terms of technology and handling.