• zurohki@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    20 hours ago

    It seems like it’s probably too late.

    Even if we crack fusion power today, I can’t see it being deployed cheaply enough and quickly enough to compete with solar/wind+batteries. By the time we could get production fusion plants up and ready to feed power into the grid, it’d be 2050 and nobody would be interested in buying electricity from it.

    • bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Even in a world already powered 100% by renewables, fusion is attractive for high energy applications. For a current example see training of LLMs. However there are Industries with immense power requirements like Aluminium smelting that could use fusion power as well.

      So far humans have found applications for all energy they were able to produce.

    • booly@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I think if we figure out nuclear fusion there will be induced demand for energy, in applications that were previously infeasible: desalination via distillation instead of reverse osmosis, direct capture of CO2 from the atmosphere, large scale water transport, ice and snowmaking, indoor farming, synthesized organic compounds for things like carbon sequestration or fossil fuel replacement or even food, etc.

      Geoengineering might not be feasible today, but if energy becomes really cheap we might see something different.

        • booly@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 hours ago

          The specifics are a pipe dream but the general principle holds: if energy suddenly becomes more plentiful and cheaper by orders of magnitude, society will find a way to use that new plentiful resource in ways that we can scarcely imagine today. That’s always been true of new inventions, where much of the post-invention innovation comes in the form of finding new applications for a thing that has already been invented.

    • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Fusion would provide orders of magnitude more power than solar. There’s a limit on how much we can practically get from solar, fusion would allow us to exceed that.

      • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        There’s a limit on how much we can practically get from solar,

        Most residential buildings can self sustain from solar. Dense cities not, but there is dual use grazing and agriculture land, and small portions of desert that could power the world. Solar is enough for type 1 civilization. Nuclear plant energy density is overstated due to their + uranium mine exclusion zones, which could produce more solar power than the uranium content available in those mines.

      • zurohki@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Yeah, but there’s no prizes for producing way more power than we use. We’re not running out of space to put solar panels or batteries.

        • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          11 hours ago

          ‘Too much power’ has never been an issue, and will likely not be an issue ever with solar. There are multitudes of technologies, especially in industry, that are currently impractical because they would consume too much energy.

          • zurohki@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            18 minutes ago

            We can already massively increase generation to meet the needs of those industries whenever we want. They’re impractical due to the cost of meeting their energy requirements, not because it’s impossible.

    • sdfric88@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Long distance transmission creates enormous power wastage, and cities are rarely located in places ideal for large scale wind and solar. Fusion can help deliver power to urban centres, reducing the acreage needed for a solar farm.

      There are also inland places in northern latitudes that benefit little from solar. Wind and fusion would be a great energy mix for those places.

      • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Long distance transmission creates enormous power wastage, and cities are rarely located in places ideal for large scale wind and solar. Fusion can help deliver power to urban centres, reducing the acreage needed for a solar farm.

        A fusion plant will need either nearby solar or nearby fusion plant, with solar only ok if restarting it can wait until daytime. More likely than not, a fusion plant is needed to help regulate plasma temperature based on reaction rate, and cool magnets. But a 10gw fusion plant still is extremely unlikey to need its output overnight compared to day peak demand. A fusion plant needs to be located near a low property value power plant, instead of close to high property value customers.

    • monogram@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      With what infrastructure are we even going to use all this electricity?

      • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 hours ago

        There’s a ton of stuff in industry and manufacturing that aren’t practical because of energy. A lot of processes could be run cleaner too, leading to better environment practices.