Unfortunately we are still decades away at minimum from ever using it. Maybe if the governments of the world dumped as much money into researching fusion as it does into dog tech like wind and solar we could have it in a reasonable time and have basically limitless free energy. That’s probably why it will never happen, no palms to grease. Only real costs would be maintenance and wages. No more large fuel costs since it uses basically free fuel.Sub $4 bacon and on a lighter note they finally made nuclear fusion pay. Meaning the newest experiment made more power than it used. https://www.sciencenews.org/article/nuclear-fusion-breakthrough-energy
View attachment 242049
I’d be happy to pay 100$ a month for unlimited energy. They would still make a profit and I’d still save a good chunk of change, especially in the summer. Heck if it was unlimited I could probably be convinced to go to electric heat too.I’m sure end user prices wouldn’t drop much if any, there for A big ole pocketbook of mega billions will be available for skimming and quite possibly the only way to make enough joules for that pipe dream of electric scooters and gliders. Starting tomorrow I’m going to sell my gold and silver and invest in copper. Gold and silver is over valued anyway. When the time comes a pound of beans will be worth more than gold and tastier.
If that is $3.99 per pound then it should read $11.97Sub $4 bacon and on a lighter note they finally made nuclear fusion pay. Meaning the newest experiment made more power than it used. https://www.sciencenews.org/article/nuclear-fusion-breakthrough-energy
View attachment 242049
Just pull the Mr. Fusion unit off your DeLorean and connect it to your house. Easy peasy.I’d be happy to pay 100$ a month for unlimited energy. They would still make a profit and I’d still save a good chunk of change, especially in the summer. Heck if it was unlimited I could probably be convinced to go to electric heat too.
But why do that when they could still meter it and charge what they do now? Who needs to help take a bit of the squeeze off the little guy when they can buy champagne and cocaine? woooooooooo!
Unfortunately we are still decades away at minimum from ever using it. Maybe if the governments of the world dumped as much money into researching fusion as it does into dog tech like wind and solar we could have it in a reasonable time and have basically limitless free energy. That’s probably why it will never happen, no palms to grease. Only real costs would be maintenance and wages. No more large fuel costs since it uses basically free fuel.
I'm all for figuring out an energy solution... we need one, but we can't destroy the planet mining for lithium and pretend it's not damaging the environment as bad as fossil fuels ..If they would just scrap the wind and solar garbage and just use nuclear until the fusion plants are up and running, we'd be okay.
I'm all for figuring out an energy solution... we need one, but we can't destroy the planet mining for lithium and pretend it's not damaging the environment as bad as fossil fuels ..
I agree. There are plenty of ways to produce energy. It's a matter of being smart about it. Wind and solar have their place, but they have been bogged down by govt subsidies. And the oil industry has a firm grasp on the energy market as a whole.Possibly true, but wind and solar are not viable solutions. Nuclear on the other hand is a more viable energy technology.
Not just chernobyl... even things as simple as The Simpsons give nuclear a bad rap. Not to mention the constant threat of nuclear war.This is a dear friend of mine .... Dave Aumiller.
He's a PhD. in Nuclear Physics, and has worked at the Naval Nuclear Lab for 26 years.
(he designs and maps nuclear submarine engines)
Yes, as WT has expressed, nuclear energy is our best hope for the immediate future.
The technology has matured, and is viable, but ever since the disaster at Chernobyl, people are reluctant to implement it. It's a damn shame to base our fears on the failure of Russian technology !
View attachment 242093
Not just chernobyl... even things as simple as The Simpsons give nuclear a bad rap. Not to mention the constant threat of nuclear war.
Chernobyl was a self induced failure by over stressing the system during load testing and ignoring engineers advice. 3 mile only had 1 phone in the CR and the one guy who knew how to address the issues could not get through.This is a dear friend of mine .... Dave Aumiller.
He's a PhD. in Nuclear Physics, and has worked at the Naval Nuclear Lab for 26 years.
(he designs and maps nuclear submarine engines)
Yes, as WT has expressed, nuclear energy is our best hope for the immediate future.
The technology has matured, and is viable, but ever since the disaster at Chernobyl, people are reluctant to implement it. It's a damn shame to base our fears on the failure of Russian technology !
View attachment 242093
Chernobyl was a self induced failure by over stressing the system during load testing and ignoring engineers advice. 3 mile only had 1 phone in the CR and the one guy who knew how to address the issues could not get through.
Agree. Not aware of the whole design, but I recall it was significantly different in specific areas than nukes in the U.S.The Soviet design was inherently substandard IMHO, much like everything else that garbage rod of a country has ever produced, the AZ-5 kill switch would have never worked.