• starbreaker@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    We already have a perfectly good nuclear fusion reactor about 93,000,000 miles from our planet. We just need to make better use of its output.

    • sleep_deprived@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean yeah, we should absolutely be replacing as much fossil fuel use as we can with existing renewable energy tech. But there’s no reason we shouldn’t also be investing in fusion research, at least as far as I’m aware

      • DroneRights [it/its]@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because bad actors like fossil fuel and car companies will say “look, the government is funding fusion. Don’t make us go renewable now, just wait five years until fusion is here.” You have to consider the political impacts pursuing research will have on society’s perceptions. Even if you know your project is just a wild experiment that probably won’t work, journalists won’t.

        • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You mean like exactly what they did to Nuclear power when Solar and wind were those experimental and untested at scale technologies?

    • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well seeing how you almost need the output of a Dyson swarm to make a Dyson swarm, cool glowy rock power and explodey gas power can and will work just as good. Especially for places that are far away from the ideal conditions to exploit solar energy terrestrially. Where I’m at we have to use literal piles of garbage to be able to get high enough above the trees to achieve sustainable output.