5 ms·
If we were to work with an assumption that fusion happens soon (<20 years) and power is now cheap, what would we now be able to achieve that was previously proh
by rikkus 9y ago
If we were to work with an assumption that fusion happens soon (<20 years) and power is now cheap, what would we now be able to achieve that was previously prohibitively difficult / expensive?
- throwawayqdhd 9y agoIf energy is basically free, how will it impact crypto prices?
- cycrutchfield 9y agoVariable costs are eliminated so the amortized fixed cost of hardware is the only ingredient for price. Basically the price (demand) for hardware goes up and should equilibriate when it reaches the previous cost of energy.
- alex_hitchins 9y agoWill the concept of money still mater as much if at all if all energy is free?
- aoeusnth1 9y agoLet me rephrase - “will anything be scarce if electrity is free?” The answer to that is obvious: yes. So why wouldn’t we need money?
- alex_hitchins 9y agoAgreed, hence "as much". My thoughts were that the main cost of 'stuff' is the energy used in mining or preparing it. If you have free (cheaper) electricity, you don't need oil, metal production has it's biggest cost removed, etc.
- incompatible 9y agoI believe the proof-of-work calculations automatically become more difficult as more computing power is dedicated to solving them. The net result is that the amount of energy consumed will probably increase inversely proportionally to any reduction in power prices.
- asteli 9y agoTo name a couple, you enable mass desalination and cracking of water. Solve humanity's access to clean water, enable replacement of fossil fuels for vehicles, solve anthropogenic climate change. Just those two are huge.
- alex_duf 9y agoIsn't it the promise of renewables already? Prices dropping by double digits every year, exponential growth in every market. Coupled with emerging energy storage it seems like cheap energy is due to come long before fusion
- zaarn 9y agoRenewable energy doesn't have the same amount of energy density. Fission already beats renewable by a good margin and Fusion puts some on top of that. The fuel for fusion is incredibly cheap; hydrogen and helium, the most common elements in the universe. Easily obtained from solar wind if we find the amount on earth is lacking. Additionally, Fusion does not produce any dangerous waste. Any byproducts that are radioactive decay quickly. Fusion is also a lot safer than Fission since the reaction cannot exist outside reactor conditions while a uranium rod will happily go prompt critical if it gets the chance. Fusion is cheap energy.
- alex_duf 9y ago>Fission already beats renewable by a good margin and Fusion puts some on top of that. This is not true, I don't think people realise how much the renewable prices are currently dropping: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/nils-pratley-on-finance/2017/sep/11/hinkley-nuclear-power-no-match-for-renewables https://www.theguardian.com/environment/nils-pratley-on-fina... I can see the benefit of fusion though I'm not very convinced by the density argument (we do have space to put solar on our roofs, wind on our shores, batteries in our basements and distribution points, and plenty of spots to pump geothermal)
- zaarn 9y ago