3 ms·
Do you really believe fusion research is the least useful thing the usgov spends $1b a year on? My issue here comes down to "why is fusion the thing you pick on
by stormbrew 4y ago
Do you really believe fusion research is the least useful thing the usgov spends $1b a year on? My issue here comes down to "why is fusion the thing you pick on"? They're both energy projects but so are thousands of other more expensive, more dangerous to the climate things.
Anyways I suspect $1b of 2022 dollars wouldn't go nearly as far in 1980 or 1990 in terms of advancing solar tech. It's not like all that happened in a vacuum, semiconductor tech likely had to get to a certain point before this explosion could meaningfully happen, and there's never been a shortage of investment into semiconductors.
In this whole thread you've provided no evidence or reason to believe fusion research was in any way inhibiting solar research. You just seem to have a feeling it's true, but what, specifically, would those dollars have done for solar, and why are they somehow uniquely suited to being repurposed towards solar? If it's so glaringly obvious you should be able to explain more deeply.
- ncmncm 4y agoI don't see any problem with doing the research involved in trying to get fusion working. There are plenty of practical problems that provoke creative attempts at solutions, which are at least educational and might actually advance the state of this or that art. The problem is promoting the work as if it might ever lead to practical power generation. The first is the same as all other research. The other is just lying. I don't like lying. That is all. It is worse when they claim yet another "breakthrough".