• axo@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    11 months ago

    Fusion is so dump. Were at least a couple decades away from brake even in the fusion reaction, but still people believe it will help solve the climate crisis.

    Atm we put about 10 times nore energy into the whole system than we get out. And it generates nuclear waste because the wall materials absorb neutrons and get radioactive. And so many other unsolved problems… this technology is a nice research peoject, but none of us will ever see a commercial reactor in action, because it is so far away, if even possible.

      • axo@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        11 months ago

        No. Renewables are available and super cheap.

        • faintwhenfree@lemmus.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          They are, and they are good solution but they are not good all and end all solutions, both wind and solar cannot meet baseload and when you start talking about battery storage as solution, scaling it up requires more metal mining than will ever be sustainable, so pursuit of fusion, pursuit of tidal energy, pursuit of better nuclear, pursuit of better geothermal are viable exploration options as we need baseload generation substitute.

          • AnarchistsForDemocracy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            You do not need batteries to store potential energy. You can pump water up a hill into a reservoir and then harvest the energy when you need it using hydroelectric energy.

            • faintwhenfree@lemmus.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Dams are a whole another story ecologically but even leaving that aside, we are talking 200-300GW capacity currently in the world for PHES, even if you construct damns on every possible lakes, estimates are around 1000GW that world can build. World currently consumes close to 8000GW on baseload. We won’t even cover 15% of baseload with PHES.

              If you’re trolling with your storage as magical solution keep trolling.

              • AnarchistsForDemocracy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                Not sure if you are being willfully obtuse, I’m going to assume good faith.

                A dam is a hydroelectric plant. you need a river a ravine and a lot more conditions to be met.

                This is what I was talking about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity

                and technically speaking potential energy could be stored by lifting bolders and then harvest the released energy when they are allowed to come down. There are many ways to device systems like such. You could even go underground and use drilled wells with two reservoirs at different levels for this.

                You are mistaken to dismiss this outright without at least looking at the wiki i linked.

                • faintwhenfree@lemmus.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  I’m not saying storing potential energy doesn’t work, it works and even though we lose some energy in conversion it’s still better than chemical batteries. No question there, my point is simple, we don’t have enough infrastructure to cover the world’s baseload demand by releasing stored energy. We need something that can produce baseload power 24x7. Geothermal and tidal(debatable but close enough) are the only viable renewable energy sources we have that run 24x7 and they’re not enough to cover the world’s energy demands. Adding PSEH doesn’t cover it either. We need something more and nuclear (fission or fusion) are the only other options that don’t emit CO2.

                  • AnarchistsForDemocracy@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    we don’t have enough infrastructure to cover the world’s baseload demand by releasing stored energy.

                    Here is where my disagreement lies. There is multitude of ways to store potential energy. I understand your point that only 16% of the world’s energy usage can be covered by natural sites that lend themselves to this. There are other ways to do this though, for one there is old coal mines that may be repurposed for this. There is also already existing systems like the sewers that can be outfitted to also allow stormdrains to double for this after repurposing them. There is many more way to store potential energy physically than just pumping water up a hill or between different levels of underground ravines…

                    You could use electrolysis, I am not sure how feasible that would be, however the assertion that this simply won’t work I do not buy. You could simply wind a large number of springs or other such maybe natural systems to create the same effect.

                    All of our energy comes either from the sun or from other stars that ceased. The amount of energy that hits the earth in the form of sunlight is massive and is imho the only presently available energy source we could use today on a large scale. This of course would require a massive engineering effort, but to outright dismiss this sounds like trolling to me.

          • AnarchistsForDemocracy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Imagine not explaining your position instead only using derision.

            El Barto if you are who you say you are, you will explain to us WHY the aforementioned is worthy of derision.

            • El Barto@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Because a technology community is usually filled with people interested in advancements in technology.

              So, say, you’re interested in space telescopes, come to this community to read about the latest advancements and you’re hit with someone saying “pffftt, stick to ground telescopes, people!”

              (I didn’t downvote you, by the way.)

    • TheMurphy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Society grows strong when men plant trees in which shadow they will never sit.

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      Max Planck plans on building an actual power plant in the 2030s. A stellerator (just like Wendelstein 7X) which, unlike Tokmaks, don’t have scaling issues. They will still need to nail down tritium breeding (ITER not getting anywhere, it should have provided that data) and there’s also some headaches about divertor panels which get (deliberately) hit by plasma and wear down quite a bit quicker than they would’ve hoped but a failure there would only get into the way of being price-competetive with other energy sources (lots of spare parts needed), not achieving net power output. Including cooling and everything, not just plasma heating.

      As to it solving the climate crisis: Certainly not on its own, but possibly on the tail end of the transition. We don’t only need to fix the climate issue but also switch to a circular economy and having plenty of cheap energy makes that way, way easier to achieve.