Garrett
Advanced Member
Last edited by a moderator:
Unlimited clean energy in 20 years?
- Thread starter Garrett
- Start date
Hồng Thất Công
Đả Cẩu Bổng Pháp
Pyra must use this fusion power! 
But then you need a huge amount of energy to heat something up to millions of degree first
Like hydrogen fuel, it's clean and "cheap". But then you have to spend way more energy you would use now to extract the hydrogen. That's why you don't see hydrogen-fueled cars around too many.
But then you need a huge amount of energy to heat something up to millions of degree first
Like hydrogen fuel, it's clean and "cheap". But then you have to spend way more energy you would use now to extract the hydrogen. That's why you don't see hydrogen-fueled cars around too many.
Last edited by a moderator:
Null
Snug
ElPoco
Hardcore Member
Many small and big companies and institutions are working on fusion power.
It's always 20 years away, but I hope we'll eventually get it to work the way we want, that would be truly amazing.
It's always 20 years away, but I hope we'll eventually get it to work the way we want, that would be truly amazing.
Linux-SWAT
Forum Addict!
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2010
- Messages
- 9,187
Unlimited energy means unlimited weapons. I'm not sure any government is about to give that.
Hồng Thất Công
Đả Cẩu Bổng Pháp
Unlimited energy means unlimited Pyraing. Yeah!
thatgui
Advanced Member
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 3,048
Damn, these americans are fast - now they are even faster as themselves : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER, forget plasma experiments by 2020 when we can have fusion powered planes already five years later !
I wonder what that guy thought when he spoke that nonsense into the camera.
The last sentence makes me also wonder wether "they" have given up the old dogma " a good offense is the best defense":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=lncARrPO8Qo#t=163
I wonder what that guy thought when he spoke that nonsense into the camera.
The last sentence makes me also wonder wether "they" have given up the old dogma " a good offense is the best defense":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=lncARrPO8Qo#t=163
erico
Advanced Member
Exactly.
ekianjo
Hardcore Member
Wtf are you talking about. We already have enough nuclear warheads to blow up the planet ten times. It has nothing to do with unlimited energy.
Last edited by a moderator:
The latest news is right there on the website: http://ecat.com/news/ecat-test-report-2014-validates-rossi-effect
Abundant clean energy would be nice. Germany is torturing her landscape with "wind parks", often in the most scenic areas.
FaeMinx
Rainbow Liberation Instigation
I'm sure Linux-SWAT was referring to the potential of 'ordinary citizens' to empower and or weaponize themselves and generally make it more difficult for government to control and suppress them.
=~. O =
ekianjo
Hardcore Member
Because you think that in the US, for example where there's more guns in circulation than inhabitants, there is currently a strong limit to arming yourself ? Yet the US is far from being a place when they actually fight violently against their government's power...
Unlimited energy, if achievable, will on the contrary help reduce poverty, not stem further violence. We have way more energy than we had before and yet the society is much less violent than earlier in times as well. I'm not even sure why people are arguing it's a bad thing, especially here where most members actually use a lot of energy for their computers in the first place and not to make weapons or kill people. Seriously, you guys should think a second before posting.
Last edited by a moderator:
Foxgod
Active Member
Can i use it as a toilet?
I would use the energy to create a nuke resistant force field, to counter all the nukes the neighbours would have.
As somebody born in northern Germany I think that wind parks fit perfectly into scenic areas like Nordfriesland. And even Fehmarn has become less dull since something is at least sometimes moving on it Honestly there really is no significant aesthetic difference between trees swaying in the wind and a generator. The problem seems to be more some misguided esoteric retro sentiment in middle and upper class Germans.
However, the relevant question with wind energy is not whether the generators are beautiful, but whether it is economically viable. And possibly it isn't, because extraction of carbon based fossil fuel from shales and deep sea deposits may still be cheaper. Which would be a bad thing.
And fusion won't be clean. It is ok when it's done in the sun, but I'm pretty sure you don't want it in your neighborhood. I'll grant you that tritium containment is different from fission product containment, but that just means it is a problem still waiting to be solved satisfyingly, because until now awfully little research is being done in this area (just like fission waste management was mostly ignored last century or rather full of wishful thinking; if you want to get governments to part with lots of G€ you just have to promise miracles). The fusion reaction will create quite a lot of it (not much can be done about that, it's part of the physics) and it contains large amounts of energy which it releases within a short timespan. Therefore tritium containment is one of the reasons why fusion is currently only viable as a large scale technology and cannot be shrunk to fit into more decentralized energy landscapes. But if it's done in large plants we'll again face the problem of transporting energy over large distances just like with any other large scale production technology. And - speaking of Germany - idiot citizens (see above) are currently blocking most attempts at modernizing the 100 year old infrastructure (that's been run into the ground following the privatization of the energy sector, but that is another topic).
Personally I think the theoretical and practical challenges of a larger scale fusion reaction itself are still enormous. It would be surprising if it can be developed into something rivaling current energy production technology within 20 years. We'll see.
Honestly there really is no significant aesthetic difference between trees swaying in the wind and a generator. The problem seems to be more some misguided esoteric retro sentiment in middle and upper class Germans.However, the relevant question with wind energy is not whether the generators are beautiful, but whether it is economically viable. And possibly it isn't, because extraction of carbon based fossil fuel from shales and deep sea deposits may still be cheaper. Which would be a bad thing.
And fusion won't be clean. It is ok when it's done in the sun, but I'm pretty sure you don't want it in your neighborhood. I'll grant you that tritium containment is different from fission product containment, but that just means it is a problem still waiting to be solved satisfyingly, because until now awfully little research is being done in this area (just like fission waste management was mostly ignored last century or rather full of wishful thinking; if you want to get governments to part with lots of G€ you just have to promise miracles). The fusion reaction will create quite a lot of it (not much can be done about that, it's part of the physics) and it contains large amounts of energy which it releases within a short timespan. Therefore tritium containment is one of the reasons why fusion is currently only viable as a large scale technology and cannot be shrunk to fit into more decentralized energy landscapes. But if it's done in large plants we'll again face the problem of transporting energy over large distances just like with any other large scale production technology. And - speaking of Germany - idiot citizens (see above) are currently blocking most attempts at modernizing the 100 year old infrastructure (that's been run into the ground following the privatization of the energy sector, but that is another topic).
Personally I think the theoretical and practical challenges of a larger scale fusion reaction itself are still enormous. It would be surprising if it can be developed into something rivaling current energy production technology within 20 years. We'll see.
Last edited by a moderator:
FaeMinx
Rainbow Liberation Instigation
From my observations, governments (or should I say those who control government) have absolutely no interest in alleviating poverty, eradicating disease, or bringing about peace and unity.
In spite of what is claimed for general public consumption, those in power:
Like to cultivate an atmosphere of fear and suspicion.
Seperate humanity into different classes of privilege, of which it is vitally important to maintain an elite upper class that can pretty much do as they like, and a lower class that have practically no rights or freedoms.
Encourage conflict and division.
Suppress, or infiltrate and corrupt any movement that has the potential to threaten government.
Tightly control any technology that would enable individuals and communities to liberate themselves from the systems they have put in place.
They don't do this perfectly (yet) as human beings still have too much freedom, but I guarantee their agenda is the tightening up of their control of humanity.
=~. O =
Granitehead
Advanced Member
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 3,011
Sounds just a tad paranoid, but I agree the governments don't have the goal of adding to the freedom of individual citizens and that this is bad.
The main problem with fusion power is that there is no efficient way to make use of all the energy you'd get. In the end it would still be used to just heat water to spin a wheel with a large dynamo attached to it. As far as I know you currently need more energy to keep the fusion reactor going (e.g. to power the containment fields) then what you get out of the puny dynamo at the other end of it.
