/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #11122054

40KiB, 800x450, 3123123131.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Wed 06 Nov 13:32:19 2019 No.11122054 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>11123052 >>11123852 >>11124891 >>11124902 >>11124904 >>11124913 >>11125115

>nuclear fusion is safe
>everyone would support it
>technology exists - just need to test it and have china manufacture the parts on a massive scale
>/sci/tards keep shilling nuclear fission even though getting nuclear fusion to work is much easier than changing people's minds on fission.

I'll never understand you guys..

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 Nov 2019 14:02:17 No.11122126 Report

Quoted By: >>11125383 >>11125395

We need to reduce carbon emissions now, right now fission is carbon free and the second cheapest per kwh behind hydro which is restricted by geography.
I'm all for fusions but it hasn't made a net gain yet, let alone a cheap net gain.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 Nov 2019 20:53:47 No.11123052 Report

Quoted By: >>11124917 >>11125169

>>11122054
>technology exists

JET hasn't even come close to breakeven. ITER won't be finished for years, and given the extent to which we've been underestimating the complexity of engineering a fusion reactor for the past 50+ years, nobody can say for certain whether it will even break even, let alone prove to be a viable energy source.
Fission would be the most sensible option, but normalfags are scared shitless by it and now reactors are regularly going out of commission without being replaced.
So for now I'm just gonna shill wind and tidal power cause they're proven to be viable power sources and don't have a crippling social stigma associated with them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 01:51:40 No.11123852 Report

Quoted By:

>>11122054
>>technology exists - just need to test it
So it doesn't exist

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 11:41:37 No.11124891 Report

Quoted By:

>>11122054
too lazy to deal with radioactive waste

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 11:52:47 No.11124902 Report

Quoted By:

>>11122054
what is there to understand? Someone gets paid to lobby for an industry's interest. They don't care about your interests.
Same reason some fucks keep pushing oil and "clean coal" in 2019

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 11:53:09 No.11124904 Report

Quoted By: >>11124915

>>11122054
Fusion is a meme. It will never work.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 11:56:13 No.11124907 Report

Quoted By:

Anyone who is pro-fusion is manufacturing-illiterate

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1572214132399.gif, 1MiB, 352x176

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 12:05:16 No.11124913 Report

Quoted By: >>11125120

>>11122054

Fission works right now. However, fusion won't be commercially available for another decade or two, even if we are 5 years away from figuring out. Projects stuff like these take time and take even more time to commercialise it. In any case, I suspect that even after having figured out fusion, we'll keep using fission power for a long time, as it is more compact and better understood. Fusion reactors are likely to be huge expensive things.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 12:06:18 No.11124915 Report

Quoted By:

>>11124904

What is the hydrogen bomb?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 12:07:30 No.11124917 Report

Quoted By:

>>11123052

Actually, fusion has gone faster than many other techs. It took a full century for solar panels to become commercially viable. The first understanding of extracting electricity from solar power was in the freaking 19th century.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 14:34:45 No.11125115 Report

Quoted By:

>>11122054
Its a year or two from proof of concept, maybe 4 or 5 from a pilot plant. Remain vigilant.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 14:38:27 No.11125120 Report

Quoted By:

>>11124913
Thankfully no. They wont even need superconductors and will have much lower capital costs that fission reactors. You will see them in ships within a decade or so. All thanks to the field reversed configuration. Tokamaks a SHIT

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 14:58:39 No.11125169 Report

Quoted By:

>>11123052
At this point I won't be surprised if ITER ends up failing to break even - the presentations from ITER groups at DPP this year were almost universally themed around lowering expectations.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 15:13:13 No.11125199 Report

Quoted By:

>Solar and wind thriving, but surviving almost exclusively due to government subsidization.
>Meanwhile fission is getting taxed and regulated to death - almost 20 nuclear plants closing in the US over a 10 year period
Get ready for the energy bubble, guys. Another 10, 15, 20 years from now it'll pop and everything will crash.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 16:41:51 No.11125383 Report

Quoted By:

>>11122126
>We need to reduce carbon emissions now
citation needed
We gotta reduce it as quickly as possible to reduce the risk of catastrophies, but ultimately no one knows if there is such a thing as runaway climate change, and especially not when exactly it will happen. Figures like "we have 12 years to fix climate" or "we have to reduce all our emissions to zero before 2050" are made up bullshit by politicians and have been around for a while, and wont cease to exist until either the public becomes a lot more affine to how actual science works, or until democracy is abolished... I am definitely in favor of fission, just cause its actually there already unlike fusion which still has a good chunk of unsolved problems, and because we do need to surb emissions at some point rather sooner than later.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 Nov 2019 16:50:54 No.11125395 Report

Quoted By:

>>11122126
Oh and also please dont be dishonest about fission. Its not carbon free (~12gCO2eq/kWh from mining and construction, which is very good but not zero), its not the second cheapest (Gas, wind and PV are all between nuclear and hydro) and its also restricted by geography, since you need lots and lots of water so either a lake, the sea or a large river is needed close by.
Nuclear has lots of advantages but inventing even more is not what will make people use it longterm. As a matter of fact I would argue that dishonest corporations and governments are to blame for the decline of fission in the west when they were cheating at safety tests and and opaquely running their profit oriented businesses instead of being upfront with things, highlighting the real benefits, fixing the downsides transparently and adhering to the safetly standards set by themselves or their respective governments.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches