3 ms·
Fusion can’t be done now so construction costs are unknown at this stage. Graphene is the first of many wonders we can expect from materials science this centur
by DrNuke 8y ago
Fusion can’t be done now so construction costs are unknown at this stage. Graphene is the first of many wonders we can expect from materials science this century imho and it is extremely cheap.
- pfdietz 8y agoIn what fantasy scenario does a much larger, much more complex, made from much more advanced materials, system end up CHEAPER than the smaller, simpler, low tech one?
- DrNuke 8y agoFusion output would be unlimited (almost), you would then have solved any other problem apart of obsolescence of materials. Any other tech would be finite or more wasteful in comparison.
- pfdietz 8y agoI'm sorry, but that argument makes no sense whatsoever. "Finite"? What matters for decisions we make now is availability within relatively short term planning horizons. "Wasteful"? WTF? Something MORE expensive would be LESS wasteful?! What sort of doublethink is this?
- foota 8y agoI'm not a super believer in the possibility of fusion, but you can imagine that there might be benefits from doubling the size of a reactor in terms of decreased operational costs or even decreased construction costs (less need to duplicate infrastructure). I'm by no means an expert though.
- pfdietz 8y agoBut here I'm talking about size for a given power output, not increasing size and power output together. The size/power of a fusion reactor is much larger than the size/power of a fission reactor, for fundamental reasons.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]