>This implies that no singlecountry will be able to affordthe construction of this machine and also the operation timemust be strictly restricted. Meh, $100 bi

>This implies that no singlecountry will be able to affordthe construction of this machine and also the operation timemust be strictly restricted. Meh, $100 billion? The US has spent more than that on it's own defense initiative ($200 billion from the sources I found). [1] And as for the power usage, 1 of the two reactors on the new class of aircraft carriers would provide 125MW (or 700MW of thermal energy, granted I'm not a physicist, but the thermal power is probably what they're after here?) [2], so I don't think it'd be out of the realm of possibilities to either build more reactors for the project, or do a combination of hooking up to existing naval reactors and new reactors to run. If the Cold War was going on, I'd be shocked if this wasn't something the U.S military looked into doing. No one is thrilled with MAD approach, it's more of just no one has found a better way to deal with nuclear weapons. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A1B_reactor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A1B_reactor