4 ms·
Fusion is the sun. In the future we will be able to do what the sub does which is to create the raw materials we all do. Keep in mind fusion is not just anothe
by ThomPete 4y ago
Fusion is the sun. In the future we will be able to do what the sub does which is to create the raw materials we all do.
Keep in mind fusion is not just another way to power our lightbulbs, it's a different type of energy among others with the ability to get us to 10% of the speed of light.
Electrolyses uses mostly fossil fuel and will continue to do so. It's a simple question of physics.
- ben_w 4y agoThe sun only fuses up to carbon; bigger stars go up to iron; supernova and colliding neutron stars produce the heavier stuff we currently use. Trying to use this process artificially for various elements in current annual demand by our economy involves more than enough energy to boil the ocean in fairly short periods — I'd have to redo the calculations to see if that period was hours or years, but it's a simple question of physics. We might skip fusion rockets for antimatter (making that is painfully expensive, but it would get us up to 0.4c) or laser propulsion (needs massive infrastructure, but can arbitrarily approach c). > Electrolyses uses mostly fossil fuel and will continue to do so. It's a simple question of physics. Physics doesn't require that electrolysis uses fossil fuels, it requires only electricity. Electrolysis will use whatever electricity is cheapest. Right now, for new installations, that's PV. Ten years ago it was not. It's a simple question of economics.
- ThomPete 4y agoYou are agreeing with me.
- ben_w 4y agoHow? Are you counting PV as fusion? In which case I think you used the wrong tense earlier. I still claim you're wrong about fossil fuels being necessary for hydrogen, BTW.
- ThomPete 4y agoYou can claim that all you want. Let me know when we are creating hydrogen without fossil fuels and at scale.