4 ms·

You have to consider more than the upfront cost. These machines are incredibly expensive to run and consume a tremendous amount of energy. The long term environ

You have to consider more than the upfront cost. These machines are incredibly expensive to run and consume a tremendous amount of energy. The long term environmental cost needs to be factored in as well.

whatshisface 8y ago
That's still pretty minor compared to the energy and environmental costs of anything else.
- Analog24 8y ago
  No it's not. The LHC uses as much power as a small to medium sized city [0]. The next generation collider will obviously require a lot more energy. What's your point anyways? We should only consider the cost and environmental impact of something if it's comparable to the most costly and impactful endeavors out there? [0] https://home.cern/science/engineering/powering-cern https://home.cern/science/engineering/powering-cern
  - ravedave5 8y ago
    How much energy do you think the US military goes through in a day? LHC is probably .1% of that.
    - Analog24 8y ago
      So why do we bother doing anything? Why recycle at all? Let's just give up everything since the US military blows us all away in terms of scale.
- BentFranklin 8y ago
  To first order, environmental impacts are roughly proportional to the amount of energy used, which is proportional to the amount of money spent. To first order.