|
Cranappleberry posted:H- isn't real, it's just a concept that is statistically likely!!! Is there a serious reason there would be one inch more than there has been for any other competition to fossil fuels? I'm not saying the people with money in the status quo will like it but that's a what else is new thing.
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 03:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 18:23 |
|
|
I mean, we could solve both global warming and the energy crisis with a lot of fusion reactions today
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 03:39
|
|
|
It's also gotten picked up by WaPo as well, sounds like at least something interesting has happend. As another poster pointed out though, is it net gain from the total system or just the laser/containment piece? https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/12/11/fusion-nuclear-energy-breakthrough/ quote:The Department of Energy plans to announce Tuesday that scientists have been able for the first time to produce a fusion reaction that creates a net energy gain — a major milestone in the decades-long, multibillion dollar quest to develop a technology that provides unlimited, cheap, clean power.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 04:15
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:if only there was a significant amount of construction of wind and solar plants that disproved this edgy 1990s-era idea I'm sorry, are you somehow under the impression that the fossil fuel industry didn't fight against wind and solar (and aren't still fighting against them to this day)? How does this disprove anything? The mere existence of solar plants doesn't mean that there was no opposition to them. How is it in any way "edgy" to point out that fossil fuel companies have an incentive to try to prevent another energy source that would directly compete with them?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 06:16
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:I'm sorry, are you somehow under the impression that the fossil fuel industry didn't fight against wind and solar (and aren't still fighting against them to this day)? How does this disprove anything? The mere existence of solar plants doesn't mean that there was no opposition to them. How is it in any way "edgy" to point out that fossil fuel companies have an incentive to try to prevent another energy source that would directly compete with them? The installation of wind power is basically limited by the manufacturing, transportation and installation of wind power. It’s own supply chain considerations, not anything to do with oil companies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 06:46
|
|
|
Well someone should tell the fossil fuel companies that the billions of dollars they spend on lobbying is completely useless then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 07:12
|
|
|
(Low slow ominous tone starts) they tell you that fusion power is going to be cheap... reliable ... safe for your children. But what aren't THEY telling you? They tried to HIDE that fusion power uses hydrogen, an explosive gas that's BAD for the environment .. and your health. They COVERED UP that fusion energy uses temperatures so hot ... it could give you third degree burns in seconds. What else aren't THEY telling you about fusion energy? ThismessagepaidforbyAmericansForAProsperousPetrochemicalFutureLLC (Repeat 72x during prime time boomer tv)
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 07:55
|
|
|
Fusion still requires lithium to make more tritium. It won't last long.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 09:27
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:I'm sorry, are you somehow under the impression that the fossil fuel industry didn't fight against wind and solar (and aren't still fighting against them to this day)? How does this disprove anything? The mere existence of solar plants doesn't mean that there was no opposition to them. How is it in any way "edgy" to point out that fossil fuel companies have an incentive to try to prevent another energy source that would directly compete with them? They fought it and they lost. Renewable energy is going to pass coal as the world's largest source of energy in the next two years https://mobile.twitter.com/mzjacobson/status/1600546542573613056
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 10:01
|
|
|
It's a shame USPol doesn't have the equivalent to the clancychat rule of the Ukraine war thread, it's pretty loving wild to read goon fanfic about how fusion plants are basically H-bombs waiting to go off. Fission power plants, which are in use today, are sort of similar to fission weapons in that the fission "pile" has a chain reaction going on, which is moderated by neutron absorbers and kept from going super-critical (which is a nuclear bomb). Nuclear fission is a process where very heavy elements (typically uranium) undergo spontaneous fission, which means that the nuclei of the heavy stuff split up, which releases energy. This energy is then typically used as the driving force of a steam engine of some description, where the heat captured from the fission pile is used to, well, heat stuff up and that is then converted into electricity by means of some mechanical apparatus. This process has some unwanted side effects, such as the released neutrons "activating", i.e. making radioactive, materials around the fission pile. A fusion power plant works like the Sun does, or at least that's the idea. Light elements, or their nuclei, fuse together to form heavier elements, and this also releases energy due to marvels of nuclear physics and specifically how atomic binding energies work out. The trouble from an engineering perspective is that the core of the Sun, or any working star for that matter, is what we in the sciences like to call "extremely hot". In the temperatures we're talking about here, matter exists in a form called plasma, which basically means that it's hot enough that the electrons that in normal matter go 'round the atomic nuclei are in fact split off from the nuclei. This means that the atomic nuclei, which have a positive electric charge, and the now-free electrons, who have a negative electric charge, move around independently, and once this electrified soup becomes hot enough, the nuclei start interacting with one another which causes the fusion reaction we're after. Now, it's somewhat of a good thing that plasma is composed of electrically charged particles, because we can use https://i.imgur.com/nB7z6a1.mp4 to (try to) contain the plasma of our fusion reactor. A fairly popular idea, that is utilized in ITER for example, is to force the plasma into a donut shape with magnetic fields. This is also where the big engineering problems show up. First of all, to make the magnetic fields required to contain the plasma donut takes up a lot of electricity. And the containment process cannot be perfect, we will always have plasma escaping its magnetic cage and smashing into the walls of our reactor, which understandably slowly destroys every material known to man, and figuring out what kind of stuff to use for building the walls of our reactor is a Big Question in materials science. And our bright idea of using magnetic fields only really works for charged particles, but when we're talking about nuclear physics, there's always those drat pesky neutrons around, and as per their name they're electrically neutral, and our magnetic fields don't exert a (lot of) force on them. So they will mash into our reactor walls, too, activating stuff and making nuclear waste. Oh, and as mentioned earlier, the plasma has to be hot hot hot, and heating it up to Sun-level temperatures also requires a lot of electricity. All of this is to say that a nuclear fission pile will merrily fission all by itself, hence the idea of a critical mass, where the chain reaction of nuclei splitting up releases enough neutrons that they in turn cause other nearby nuclei to fission, releasing more neutrons, and you can see where the moniker chain reaction comes into play here. A nuclear fusion reactor, in contrast, is very much an artificial, engineered thing that is forced into its configuration by a lot of expended energy. If anything should fail in a fusion reactor, the fusion process will just stop, either because the magnetic bottle fails and our plasma dissipates and smashes into the surrounding walls, or our plasma cools down from the required insane temperatures and there's not enough energy around for our nuclei to fusion. The entire problem with fusion reactors is that we have such trouble creating a macroscopic volume of space where plasma can exist in the first place! It's insane to suggest that the fail condition of any terrestrial fusion plant would be "turning the surroundings into a crater".
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 10:48
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:It's a shame USPol doesn't have the equivalent to the clancychat rule of the Ukraine war thread, it's pretty loving wild to read goon fanfic about how fusion plants are basically H-bombs waiting to go off. I blame Spider-Man 2.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 11:30
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:The entire problem with fusion reactors is that we have such trouble creating a macroscopic volume of space where plasma can exist in the first place! It's insane to suggest that the fail condition of any terrestrial fusion plant would be "turning the surroundings into a crater". If you'll note, the point wasn't that it was a likelihood now but instead that with time and advances in the field of fusion (Likely in ease of creating and sustaining the plasma, so a long way off.) some moron would eventually find a way to gently caress things up to an absurd degree. Staluigi posted:(Low slow ominous tone starts) they tell you that fusion power is going to be cheap... reliable ... safe for your children. But what aren't THEY telling you? They tried to HIDE that fusion power uses hydrogen, an explosive gas that's BAD for the environment .. and your health. They COVERED UP that fusion energy uses temperatures so hot ... it could give you third degree burns in seconds. What else aren't THEY telling you about fusion energy? ThismessagepaidforbyAmericansForAProsperousPetrochemicalFutureLLC You forgot the part where Fox News and the Republicans suddenly get deeply concerned about the safety of fusion power and running dozens of committees and TV spots on it to depress any possible eventual vote and set themselves up to slander anyone who votes for using fusion power. A GIANT PARSNIP posted:Any time we make progress in fusion it’s a good thing but I’d like to know more about duration and equipment wear and tear before celebrating the death of fossil fuels. If they achieved these results for hours (or minutes!) and the whole thing needs to be rebuilt from the ground up now they’re not exactly close to commercial power. This is the real issue that i'm curious about. Some of the stuff around this seems to suggest that there was at least some damage given remarks about the diagnostic equipment. Archonex fucked around with this message at 11:55 on Dec 12, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 11:46
|
|
|
Archonex posted:If you'll note, the point wasn't that it was a likelihood now but instead that with time and advances in the field of fusion (Likely in ease of creating and sustaining the plasma, so a long way off.) some moron would eventually find a way to gently caress things up to an absurd degree. That was my point though, there is no reason to expect this kind of outcome. We know how to make a run-away fusion reaction already, just ignite the lighter-element stuff with a really hot explosion, which is the fission part of a thermo-nuclear bomb. There is no reason whatsoever to suggest that a fusion reactor, intended to run for extended periods of time, should or even could have the properties which would enable a fusion bomb type scenario. These are two engineering problems that are so vastly separated that I'm failing to find the words here. It's like saying some moron would find a way to turn their toaster into a space rocket.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 11:53
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:That was my point though, there is no reason to expect this kind of outcome. We know how to make a run-away fusion reaction already, just ignite the lighter-element stuff with a really hot explosion, which is the fission part of a thermo-nuclear bomb. There is no reason whatsoever to suggest that a fusion reactor, intended to run for extended periods of time, should or even could have the properties which would enable a fusion bomb type scenario. These are two engineering problems that are so vastly separated that I'm failing to find the words here. It's like saying some moron would find a way to turn their toaster into a space rocket. I feel you aren't really understanding anything i've posted. In fact, we're agreeing. I'm not saying that it's a likelihood now (I have in fact said that it's loving impossible and that only god would know how to do something so absurdly impossible. Something I feel you're missing here in the large effort posts to try and rebut me that...completely missed that point.). It's just that once we finally hit the break-even on energy generation and go to commercial usage future advances might end up doing something to cause a catastrophic breakdown that we literally cannot foresee now. TL;DR: I was being glib while also pointing out that human stupidity and greed is about as great as human ingenuity and aspiration, and if at some point in the future it can happen due to currently impossible to know variables someone looking to cut corners will face fault their way into doing it. If this hasn't somehow made it clear to you: It is decidedly not possible for a fusion reactor, Tokamak or otherwise, to explode now. Nor is it likely to in the span of any foreseeable future. Doesn't mean i'm not going to snark about fusion when we've got basically gently caress all to say that this new breakthrough is reliable until it gets reproduced by other scientists that can verify that it's a real thing that doesn't gently caress the reactor up for future sustained usage. Archonex fucked around with this message at 12:09 on Dec 12, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 12:04
|
|
|
Archonex posted:I feel you aren't really understanding anything i've posted. That's fair, but whose fault is it that you wrote a few posts about how, maybe, somehow, fusion reactors could turn places into craters? There is plenty to criticize about the discourse around fusion power plants and their supposed salvific properties for mankind's current life-style choices, but making the conversation about A.C.M.E. fusion plants that just blow up for no particular reason isn't helpful nor is it germane.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 12:18
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:That's fair, but whose fault is it that you wrote a few posts about how, maybe, somehow, fusion reactors could turn places into craters? Oh my loving god what forum do you think you're on? This is not somethingpedantic.com. Edit: And this is coming from someone who will happily do long effort posts. You're not even disagreeing with me, you're just angrily stanning for a currently unworkable system of mass energy generation that no one has figured out yet! Archonex fucked around with this message at 12:25 on Dec 12, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 12:22
|
|
|
Archonex posted:Oh my loving god what forum do you think you're on? This is not somethingpedantic.com. You have robbed me of my sole weapon here by calling me a pedant and then making an accusation which I can only refute by being pedantic  I am not "stanning" for fusion reactors, I am trying to ground the conversation to things which are, at least in theory, plausible, instead of writing Nick Cage action film scripts. If you feel that it's unfair to point out glaring errors in your train of thought vis a vis the physics of fusion, well, OK I guess?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 12:29
|
|
|
Archonex posted:Oh my loving god what forum do you think you're on? This is not somethingpedantic.com. You also claimed such an explosion could reach 150 million Celsius. Come on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 13:05
|
|
|
Archonex posted:Oh my loving god what forum do you think you're on? This is not somethingpedantic.com. Uhhh ... Anyways, we already HAVE miracle energy production technology. We split the atom 75 years ago but we've let the oil industry control the narrative on them, and the end result is that we're decommissioning existing, functional nuclear fission plants today in favor of fossil fuel power plants.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 13:09
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:You also claimed such an explosion could reach 150 million Celsius. Come on. No, that is not what I said. Fusion requires extremely hot temperatures that are extremely difficult to maintain for a variety of reasons. Also, we have absolutely have ran reactors for limited amounts of time that reached temps over a 100 million degrees. The hottest to date that I know of was around 150 million Celsius. Obviously there's no material on earth that can handle touching anything that hot, so the solution is to suspend it in some way. If the suspension mechanism fails (Which is possible, though given that these aren't day to day commercially used reactors unlikely.) then you may or may not end up having an extremely hot ball of plasma slagging a part the reactor before it can finish terminating. This is also literally basic information you could just google for too. So this isn't the brilliant own you think it is. https://theprint.in/science/nuclear-fusion-reactor-reaches-100-million-c-for-30-secs-heres-what-it-means-for-the-future/1123779/ quote:The study was published in Nature on 7 September. Although the paper claims that the researchers only experienced temperatures of 100 million degrees Celsius for 20 seconds, the study’s author, Yong-Su Na of Seoul National University, later told New Scientist that they had actually experienced the reaction for 30 seconds. https://phys.org/news/2022-09-fusion-million-kelvin-seconds.html quote:A team of researchers affiliated with multiple institutions in South Korea working with two colleagues from Princeton University and one from Columbia University has achieved a new milestone in the development of fusion as an energy source—they generated a reaction that produced temperatures of 100 million Kelvin and lasted for 20 seconds. In their paper published in journal Nature, the group describes their work and where they plan to take it in the next few years. Archonex fucked around with this message at 13:28 on Dec 12, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 13:12
|
|
|
Honestly I hope this story doesn't get pushed. Not at all looking forward to encountering "actually we got closer to this thing we might someday be able to do, thus our way of life is saved full steam ahead!" To be clear, I'd be stoked if we developed sustainable energy technology. Until then though, anything that allows us to feel better about the damage we cause to this world just upsets me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 13:20
|
|
|
Archonex posted:No, that is not what I said. Fusion requires extremely hot temperatures. Also, we have absolutely have ran reactors for limited amounts of time that reached temps over a 100 million degrees. The hottest to date that I know of was around 150 million Celsius. Obviously there's no material on earth that can handle touching anything that hot, so the solution is to suspend it in some way in most cases. If the suspension mechanism fails then you have an extremely hot ball of plasma slagging a large part of the hull of the reactor before terminating. Again, this is missing the forest for the trees. You stated, and let's quote it here to be clear, Archonex posted:I apologize if i'm wrong but the problem that I sort of recall reading is that containing a reaction slowly (and sometimes in at times very bad situations not so slowly) slags whatever containment they have and if the shutdown sequence or certain parts of the reactor experience a total failure then oops now you basically have a superb bomb that can and absolutely will immediately vaporize the building along with everything in the locality of the power plant due to potentially as much as 150 million Celsius temperatures (depending on the scale of failure or Chernobyl style mismanagement and intentionally bad design.) and equivalent pressure rapidly expanding outwards if it it isn't shut down. And now you are citing a paper that says that within a very, very small volume of space did a team of scientists manage a temperature of 150 million degrees Celsius. This does not amount to anything resembling "vaporizing buildings along with everything in the locality". Here's an example that might be instructive. What's the temperature of planet Earth? Where I'm sitting, it's literally freezing outside, and the streets are full of ice and snow. Not fun! But, the Earth, as a whole, sits at around 15 degrees Celsius year round. The local temperature is a meaningful measurement when one is considering what to wear outside that day, and we look at the global temperature when we're trying to figure out if the globe is on fire. (Spoiler alert: It is.) We have all sorts of particle accelerators and other scientific instrumentation of the sort where you can, locally, in a very small volume, create exotic environments. This does not, again, translate into somehow magically turning whole blocks of streets into 150 million degrees Celsius weather.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 13:26
|
|
|
Setting aside other issues already pointed out, I found this to be a very helpful video on problems in reporting about fusion power advances. Every step forward is great though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJ4W1g-6JiY
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 15:04
|
|
|
this is, in fact, the pedantry subforum supporting references and sources encouraged, shitposting discouraged
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 15:09
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:They fought it and they lost. Renewable energy is going to pass coal as the world's largest source of energy in the next two years OK? That still doesn't disprove my point. If they hadn't fought against renewable energy, then we could have transitioned away from fossil fuels much sooner. Please note that I did not say that the fossil fuel companies will make it impossible to switch to fusion energy, just that they will make it harder and take longer. I'm sorry for the incredulity, but I genuinely didn't think that "fossil fuel companies will fight to keep us dependent on fossil fuels" was at all a controversial opinion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 16:16
|
|
|
https://www.yahoo.com/news/thousands-youths-compelled-join-militarys-154348130.html article from the NYT (yahoo link to avoid potential paywall) about compulsory enrollment of high school students in JROTC, disproportionately affecting schools that are majority black and Latino. When challenged, some schools back off on the policy but others make it difficult or impossible to unenroll students from the program. Enrollment is being done without informed parental consent. The military claims JROTC is not part of recruitment but schools with such programs statistically have far more students that go on to join the military and the schools are incentivized to do it because the education arm of the military picks up the tab. This is happening during a time with sharply decreased military enrollment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 16:25
|
|
|
Cranappleberry posted:https://www.yahoo.com/news/thousands-youths-compelled-join-militarys-154348130.html Full article from the NYT: tl;dr version: - Some schools are making JROTC classes mandatory or requiring students to opt-out. - It has happened to several thousand students in the last few years (a very small amount overall, but happening a little bit across the entire country). - Schools are doing it for several reasons: 1) Research shows that JROTC students have higher graduation rates and lower disciplinary problems, so they are enrolling students in the hopes of pre-emptively avoiding those issues. 2) By making them mandatory, they can use those classes to boost low-performing students' GPA and help them graduate to boost their graduation rate. 3) Some schools use JROTC to qualify for health/physical education credits and save money by not having to hire a new health/PE teacher because the army pays JROTC instructors. quote:Thousands of Teens Are Being Pushed Into Military’s Junior R.O.T.C.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 16:32
|
|
|
Military training reduces discipline problems? Wow! We should apply it to all society and then have a perfectly disciplined society free from crime! Everyone will be committed to the same goal and be trained into the same mindset. We can call it all-ism, or maybe everybody-ism, whole-ism. Why hasn't this been tried!!?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 16:40
|
|
|
There some really cool and awesome countries that have compulsory conscription which is way more extreme than high school Mil larping
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 17:01
|
|
|
Yeah, I don't think this is because these random schools want to become fascist recruitment centers. It seems like this is the latest creative method that schools have found to raise money/cut costs and fix attendance/discipline problems (and attendance rates also impact funding in some places, so this is itself just part of the overall effort to raise money/cut costs). The schools that do this are almost exclusively in low-income areas with student bodies that are over 80% POC.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 17:11
|
|
|
“While Pentagon officials have long insisted JROTC is not a recruiting tool” Cmon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 17:12
|
|
|
smackfu posted:“While Pentagon officials have long insisted JROTC is not a recruiting tool” loving  did they ask someone in PsyOps for this quote?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 17:15
|
|
|
No final deal reached, but negotiators say they are close to agreeing to an outline to revive the expanded child tax credit that will get 10 Republicans + Manchin to support. Democrats would vote to extend some research and manufacturing tax credits for businesses that were implemented in the Trump Tax Cuts and Covid stimulus bills as part of the package. Republicans would vote for an entire year's budget with no continuing resolutions and the new child tax credit. The new version would be extended for "multiple years" and would be structured slightly differently than the previous one. The main differences from the previous expanded credit: - No monthly payments, you get it all in a bulk payment once per year with your tax refund. - Income cap will likely be lower than the previous $150,000 cap. - A "work requirement" that requires that you either have earned at least $1 in taxable income for the year, certify that you have applied to a job in the last year, or get an exemption by certifying that you are a full-time caretaker of the children or are exempt from the requirement for other reasons (the normal child tax credit already required you to have some income. The first expanded credit waived that. This one doesn't waive it, but does add several new exemptions to let you qualify even if you didn't earn at least $1 in the tax year). It still makes the credit fully refundable, so people who only get a partial payment or don't pay any taxes right now can now claim the full value of the credit. It is expected to cover roughly 19 million. None of these details are finalized and they are still hammering out the structure of the deal. This would be part of the full omnibus budget that needs to be passed by December 16th (unless they pass a continuing resolution to delay it). https://twitter.com/adamcancryn/status/1602302431425183744 Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 17:40 on Dec 12, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 17:34
|
|
|
smackfu posted:“While Pentagon officials have long insisted JROTC is not a recruiting tool” I like how "cmon" is more or less also the spokesperson's response to this
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 17:36
|
|
|
Indiana Senator Mike Braun plans to run for Governor of Indiana and resign his Senate seat after 2024. Seems very unlikely to make much of a difference in the Senate because a Democrat is unlikely to win and most potential Republican replacements will likely vote functionally the same. Former Governor Mitch Daniels is said to be considering a run and may be slightly open to certain bipartisan votes, but that is more of a tactical difference than an ideological one. The other likely candidates on the Republican side are Reps. Jim Banks and Victoria Spartz. https://twitter.com/burgessev/status/1602342659527524352 Louisiana Senator John Kennedy is also considering resigning his seat to run for Governor of Louisiana in 2023. He said he will make an announcement this month. This is also unlikely to result in a major change in the Senate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 17:47
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:- No monthly payments, you get it all in a bulk payment once per year with your tax refund. The ongoing payment would seem to fuel the economy all year long.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 18:07
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:1) Research shows that JROTC students have higher graduation rates and lower disciplinary problems, so they are enrolling students in the hopes of pre-emptively avoiding those issues. Kids who are adept at complying with institutional standards tend to be the same kids who enroll in JROTC, hmm. Obviously the only possible takeaway from that is "JROTC makes kids good" Cheesus posted:That seems so dumb. To give (probably too much) benefit of the doubt, I can see how the logistics of ongoing payments might add too much long-term costs vs. using the existing tax return process, as troubled as that is. Sir Lemming fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Dec 12, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 18:08
|
|
|
Assume it is just the optics of monthly payments to poor people, vs a “tax refund.”
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 18:43
|
|
|
Archonex posted:Oh my loving god what forum do you think you're on? This is not somethingpedantic.com. Pedantry is awful and thus falls under our purview.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 19:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 18:23 |
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:That sounds like very terrific and optimistic news but after over 50 years on this planet, sadly, my first reaction was "what's the catch?" The catch is that it will have to, from this prenatal stage, be able to compete with the dark PAC money and campaign donations, and all that other lobbying, to see the light of day in America. Especially if fusion turned out to be real and good and feasible. Maybe other countries, with politicians that aren't already sold out to the darkest powers, will be able to benefit from it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2022 19:28
|
|
