4 ms·
I guess the question would be that assuming the US was to dominate the technology, is that more profitable than a steady stream of revenue from oil exports? Bu
by esskay 2y ago
I guess the question would be that assuming the US was to dominate the technology, is that more profitable than a steady stream of revenue from oil exports?
Building fusion plants would be a massive money maker initially as everyone races to adopt it, but is it a long term money maker when no doubt other nations will be trying to cash in on it themselves.
- adastra22 2y agoThe US doesn’t have nationalized oil companies. The US government doesn’t have skin in the game here. In fact, fusion would make a lot of military stuff cheaper, so if anything they have incentive to adopt it.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> US government doesn’t have skin in the game here It absolutely does, just in the opposite direction from OP’s hypothesis. Washington likes cheap oil. It wants high production levels from its producers to keep prices low; producers want high and stable prices.