3 ms·
Well yes that would be great, fusion is the holy grail, but it is always 50 years away.
by JohnJamesRambo 7y ago
Well yes that would be great, fusion is the holy grail, but it is always 50 years away.
- aalleavitch 7y agoThis attitude probably doesn’t help it in securing funding. Not everything can be solved with more money, obviously, but if we were putting a fraction of the money into basic research that we are putting into the petroleum industry I’m pretty confident we would see that timeline jump very suddenly.
- The_rationalist 7y agoIt is not proven, even informally that stable nuclear fusion is possible on human scale. Unlike sufficiently great solutions such as thorium fission.
- aalleavitch 7y agoBasic research is never a loss. Even if we weren’t to find a workable solution for nuclear fusion the technology developed as part of the search would almost certainly push forward many areas of physics and energy research.
- raverbashing 7y agoCheck how much the fusion projects got in financing like ITER, Wendelstein 7-X and others received The National Ignition Facility also got a lot of funding but it has goals beyond the study of fusion
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- aalleavitch 7y agoIt’s a lot of money, I’ll admit, but compared to the military budget it’s chump change.
- beokop 7y agoSure but the military... works.
- aalleavitch 7y agoFor certain definitions of “works”
- lrem 7y agoYup, that would be about the time fusion research received funding not sufficient to keep progress at zero.