440
submitted 2 months ago by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/science@mander.xyz
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] evujumenuk@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

IIUC the end goal, for any fusion reactor, is to heat up water and drive a steam turbine.

Imagine you could drive a steam turbine at zero cost. What happens if just keeping that turbine running costs more in upkeep than e.g. solar panels do overall?

Is there really much of an economic case for infinite energy on demand (and that is if fusion can be made to work in not just the base load case) if we have infinite energy at home already?

[-] nekbardrun@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

I really feel the urge to correct the "infinite power part" because it hurts my soul as a (wannabe) physicist.

There exist no thing like infinite energy generator because energy is always conserved (well, there are some weird corner cases this isn't true, but that is another lesson).

There are massive "transformators" of energy known as stars (like our Sun)which expel radiation in massive quantities thanks to its humongous size and will take billions of years until it grows into a giant red star and more billions of years until it explodes into a white dwarf (If I recall it correctly).

Billions or even "measly" millions of years is basically "infinite" for human lifespan, I agree.

But it still is finite.

Fusion won't be "infinite" (billions nor even millions of years) because it will be basically a "microscopic sun"

We'd need something a bit bigger than Jupiter to get something closer to a "infinite-red-dwarf-energy-generator".

And Jupiter's diameter is around 10 or 11 Earths diameter, so it is something that is already a big massive for humans to do.

I'd say that photovoltaic cells for solar energy would be easier to make "infinite energy" becuse we are copying what the best "infinite energy users" (also known as plants) have been doing for millions of years.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/SolarSystem_OrdersOfMagnitude_Sun-Jupiter-Earth-Moon.jpg

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Meh, net gain is the point, long cycles well be useful for production. Useful, eventually. Cart before the horse, otherwise.

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago

0 theoretical hope for fusion energy to ever provide electricity under 30c/kwh. These are hot plasma experiments, which could be used to produce mass HHO from water vapour at just 2200C-3000C, even if endothermic. Can get energy from concentrated solar mirrors or just PV solar if plasma is used. Cooling magnets is a huge energy drain. HHO provide the highest turbine energy gain, though a net gain pathway is just slightly more in reach than fusion.

[-] ByteJunk@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Yes but do you concur?

[-] x00z@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Maybe they miss the sun because of all the smog in the air.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2025
440 points (100.0% liked)

Science

4165 readers
42 users here now

General discussions about "science" itself

Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:

https://lemmy.ml/c/science

https://beehaw.org/c/science

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS