3 ms·
What do you think is less disruptive for the environment, a 1 GW fusion machine the size of a medium-sized warehouse, or 100 square kilometers of solar panels p
by avalys 1y ago
What do you think is less disruptive for the environment, a 1 GW fusion machine the size of a medium-sized warehouse, or 100 square kilometers of solar panels plus a battery installation?
Renewables are cheap at the margins, but they're not economically competitive if your goal is to support a massive growth of total electrical demand (either because you're a developing country that is growing rapidly, or first-world economy which is decarbonizing and electrifying industry and transportation).
- djdjhdjdjdxx 1y ago[flagged]
- marssaxman 1y agoIt's not about the environment, it's about the financing. Who's going to put up the money to build the most complicated machines humanity has ever dreamed up, each one a many-years-long construction project very likely to have schedule slippages and cost overruns, when they could get more megawatts for the dollar building easy, reliable, low-maintenance solar parks which start generating revenue within a year? Some governments will, sure, and perhaps a handful of large, wealthy cities in high latitudes or on small islands, but in general it's difficult to see why an investor would choose to invest in a fusion plant.
- peterlada 1y ago100 square kilometers of panels is the total energy consumption of the world now, two thirds of which is extracting, shipping refining and trucking around hydrocarbons which are stored sunlight.
- avalys 1y agoNope, not at all! That is a roughly correct number for the area of solar panels required to equal a 1 GW baseload power plant.