68
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
68 points (82.7% liked)
Asklemmy
43941 readers
668 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Fusion won't be the silver bullet people tout it as for much of the same reasons as fission isn't (mostly politics). No politician wants to spend billions of dollars on something that is going to take a decade to even be functional and another decade to break even. It would get cheaper with scale, but so would fission, we just never let it get there. It also still produces radioactive waste, despite what proponents claim, and it even produces more radioactive waste than a fission reactor by volume. But it isn't as long-lived.
These are the same tired arguments we hear about fission. If your country isn't actively building fission, it's probably not going to build fusion, aside from demonstrations.