Working fusion power will change everything

File: KIKEYKIKE.png (26KB, 302x316px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 302x316px

>Why?

Bumping because this is actually a relevant thread and /pol/ is retarded.

>>128133378
even if there is no fuel costs or a infinite power source you need that energy to be transported and distributed for everyone which is something very complex that needs people 24h/7d and costs a lot of money energy will never be 0 dollar

>>128133378
Watch the documentary who killed the electric car and you will understand why the massive energy businesses will not let that thing be released.

If they could they would buy the blueprints for the first working one and sit on it like they have for every alternate energy invention.

>>128133378
Correct. And the Jews will never let modern, high end ones be built.

>>128134407
The irony is, with fusion you can cheaply catalyze hydrocarbon fuel from air and water. Oil companies could stay oil companies, they just wouldn't mine anymore. Instead, they would have fuel factories built around fusion reactors.

>>128133378
I thought Fusion was perpetually 20 years away

>>128133378
We've had this stuff for years but we don't get to see it because you it's difficult to control, regulate and tax near free energy.

>>128134103
the robot slaves will do it. they'll do everything.

>>128134103
>you need that energy to be transported
Last I checked, there can be power lines from the power plants - those power lines run to your house or to the car charging station.

The left will never let it happen

They want to rise and become Green Barons, with absolute control over renewables, enjoy having it be a crime to buy and set up your own solar panels, goy

>>128134814
Why would you end up putting together a fuel from electricity generated by fusion... and not just use electricity directly?

>>128133378
that technology allows a terrorist the ability to create a bomb from a blade of grass, they will never release such technology because of this

>>128135499
Because they can sell that synthetic oil for more money than the bulk electricity.
Gross margins man, they keep the stocks healthy.

>>128135379
yes, but you don't understand how complex is a power grid, its expensive and costs a lot of money to keep everything stable and with no harm to what's connected to it

>>128133378
>Why is fusion power not in the news more?
It's been 50 years away for 50 years. It would be fantastic to see. But doesn't seem to be happening any time soon.

>>128133378

You won't get any of it. The only thing you can do personally is get a solar roof, or wait for near-perfect panels. Wait for batteries to develop some more and make more than 100% of your own energy needs. Then you won't have to be connected to shit.

The goal should be self-sufficiency.

>>128133378
Never gonna happen. If that goes through my energy company cant charge you 100€ a month for elec +climate protection green energy tipp.

>>128135835
50 years ago it was 20 years away.
Now it's 50 years away

>>128135499
Because liquid fuels are still a lot more energy dense than batteries. Converting them into an easily transportable, easily measured, long lasting form is always good for supplying vehicles and portable generators around the world.

>>128133378
It's just 10 years away...

>>128135499
Because petroleum fuels are a better portable energy source than batteries, especially for size and weight limited applications where a large amount of power is required. Examples: jet aircraft, space flight, armored military vehicles, etc. Really anything that uses a gas turbine for power.

File: sneaky_jew_hands.gif (53KB, 132x140px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 132x140px

>>128133378
>Why is fusion power not in the news more?
Gee, I wonder

File: c65e907927d447027fe0cb7cb2c99a99.jpg (66KB, 500x488px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 500x488px

>>128133378
>Working fusion power will change everything
>Working

>>128133378
>Why is fusion power not in the news more?

Because fusion will never be net positive. Even our sun is powered externally, with fusion only being a side effect.

Research the "electric sun theory"

On the bright side, this means we can tap energy from free space.

File: energycontent.png (47KB, 850x518px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 850x518px

>>128135499
Fuel is more energy denser than expensive batteries. Even if we improve massively our battery tech I recon it will still be cheaper to just fill your fuel tank and go. And before you say my air pollution: the fuel factories next to the reactors will consume carbon form the air. If this thread is decent enough I can recommend a great video on the benefits of almost free energy from fusion.

>>128133378

>Russia bankrupt, Saudis bankrupt
>implying every country can afford electric cars

Fossil fuels are gonna stay for the next century.

>>128134103
>haha we can't have super effective energy plants because it costs too much to distribute the power haha
Durrrrrr

>>128133378
you realise oil is used for countless other products besides petrol right?

>>128133378
Look dude, you showed a tokamak reactor, that's for research. The design fundamentally cannot produce power.

It only sustains it for milliseconds and even if it lasted longer, the tiles on the inside only last for about a half second and that's made of tungsten with all kinds of protective coating.
Since it's inception we've only made it a few percent more efficient despite tens of billions in funding.

Tokamaks are at big universities because it helps physics students write prestigious papers but the concept does not scale as we do not have stronger materials to do so.

A farnsworth fusor, on the other hand, is small, has the potential to be even smaller, can self sustain for over 45 seconds after input has stopped. It's still far from efficient but it's mostly private low funding labs and Lockheed driving this. Since it's inception we've made it 7000% more efficient. The hardest part is building coils around the thing in an efficient manner to capture energy. They scale well and are relatively cheap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R693BqhtW60

When it works, it's going to be something that can be done anywhere and safely and cheap. That's why big companies don't want to invest in the small fusor usually. They want a big power plant and they think they can make a Tokamak do that.

>>128133378
havent people been saying this for like 30 years?

we JUST got to the point where it ALMOST doesnt cost money to run.

daily reminder nuclear was also supposed to be cheap as fuck, "too cheap to meter" they said.

>>128136632
0/10

It's ok lads we'll just get Helium-3 on the Moon or even better we'll just create space docks to harvest meteorits.

Haha.

>>128133378
>Chernobyl
>Fukushima

Why is dangerous power tech not more viable, I wonder.

Does anyone in ppl understand history asides their lopsided view of ww2?

>>128133378
http://www.greenpeace.org/luxembourg/fr/campaigns/nucleaire/fusion-nucl-eacute-aire/
(((Greenpeace))) is against nuclear fusion. I wonder why

Fusion power right now is a net loss of energy to run, so it is useless. I am sure there is research and work being done to make it viable, but until then its not really newsworthy.

>>128134407
Great movie I agree. Cant believe they just fucking crushed all of those brand new cars because of the threat to oil companies.

>>128134103
>wew, laying down all those miles of steel just so a carriage can roll along it once an hour is mighty expensive and requires loads of people 24/7 and loads of money, will never be cheap
>wew, erecting all these miles of copper wire on thousands of wooden poles just so a mong can transfer electric impulses along it requires loads of people 24/7 and loads of money, will never be cheap
>wew, erecting all these thousands of towers with a good 10 or so gigantic wires and transformers just so we can transfer electricity from one city to another requires loads of people 24/7 and loads of money, will never be cheap
And yours:
>wew, transferring electricity from a different source will require a completely new grid that is something very complex and costs a lot of money, will never be cheap
>can't use the grid we've already got, nooooo

Do you see the flaw I'm presenting here?

>>128136927
At least do some research anon, the electric universe theory makes a lot of sense.

>>128137122
>fusion is as risky as fission
Leafland education.

>>128133378

Because they are barely figuring out the magnetic field needed to contain it. Plus even then batteries need a massive jump in size cost and efficiency.

Oil is useful as fuck because it is evolved tech with years of experience behind it plus its relatively portable.

>>128135835
>It's been 50 years away for 50 years.

It is a bit like commercial, intercontinental airliners.

In the late 1800s, they had zeppelins and gliders. Of course they dreamt of intercontinental airliners. It still took until the 1950s to actually get real airliners. And it took until the 1980s/1990s for air travel to become affordable to the masses.

>>128133378
If you actually knew anything about power you would know 5 megawatts is a joke amount of capacity. The largest wind turbines have 10 megawatt nameplate capacities now.

>>128137122
>a fissile material that melts through concrete and steel when not contained behaves exactly like fusion materials that are only fusing because they're forced to
>a malfunction in fusion reactors wouldn't shut down the reaction by default without human failsafe design features

Not even all fissile material behaves the same. If Chernobyl and Fukushima were Molten Salt Thorium Reactors, they wouldn't have gone splody and in the case of Fukushima there wouldn't be cooling water leaking into the ocean because THERE IS NO COOLING WATER TO GO SPLODY OR LEAKY IN THE FIRST PLACE.

And we don't even have that. Really makes you think.

>>128133378
Too bad Trump hates science

>>128133378
will never happen, if we get too close the oil companies will just kill a few major scientists

>>128133378
I say this every thread I see.

Look at energy distribution costs. They make a large part of energy costs. They're non-trivial and fusion power is going to make jack shit "0 dollar cost", unless you stick things right at the exit. Transporting electric energy isn't free, the infrastructure is expensive and there are plenty of places to lose energy.

File: Graphs_FUELS_EUROPE__2015_8.jpg (46KB, 668x481px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 668x481px

>>128136852
>you realise oil is used for countless other products besides petrol right?
Yes, I realize that. But guess what, pic related is the breakdown of how much of the oil is used for applications other than transportation. It is not as much as you think.

>>128137122
You just listed both fatal civilian nuclear accidents.

>>128137522
No it's not.

Concorde was the ALPHA plane of all planes.

Hypersonic flights.

Now? Generation easy bolshevik.

>>128134407
>the massive energy businesses will not let that thing be released.
Lol what? They'd be tripping over themselves to run these plants since it's steady, cheap power. No utility is going to suppress this tech since it means they can get rid of their most costly expense, manpower & fuel. Like imagine a company can now sell something for the same price but their profit margin goes from 2% to 70%. No one with half a brain believes this shit.

>taking oil and gas money away from (((them)))

Yeah, that's why it's not a thing yet and never will.

File: mn_bb_2013_f1.png (8KB, 857x734px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 857x734px

>>128137752
>Look at energy distribution costs. They make a large part of energy costs.

The grid costs for base power plants such as fission or fusion power plants is extremely small.

You are right, for things like solar or wind you have a shitton of grid power costs due to the fluctuations in power generation.

>>128136904
The last I heard about it, Lockheed was building yet another semi-compact fusion reactor as a demonstration device to show off in the next couple of years. The idea for the final full-scale model was something that could replace a Naval vessel's power plant 1:1, so a device that fits in a standard shipping container.
If lockheed is as far along as they claim, they could be producing a production model producing in the 100s of Megawatts range before 2020.

File: First_Flight.jpg (24KB, 675x443px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 675x443px

>>128137408
>your plane is shit and barely works how can you expect to travel around the world with it lol it goes maybe like 5mph cars are faster who is going to push start this thing how can you even imagine transporting more than 2 people it can barely carry you alone lol do you think people can afford enough planks and ropes to make their own plane just give up retard you are wasting your time

>>128137961
>Concorde was the ALPHA plane of all planes.
>Hypersonic flights.

Concorde was pretty much like the Moon landing or the Space Shuttle. A solid proposal which works technically and is more advanced than other methods... but just not economically.

If you can produce and fly supersonic aircrafts at costs only twice or three times as high as subsonic aircrafts, you have a massive market.

>>128138102
Got a link for that? Going to dig up the EU report on the same thing, transport costs (for the user) are between 30 and 70% of energy costs in various countries in the EU, which doesn't seem to be taken in account in your graph.

File: Concorde.jpg (113KB, 1600x962px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 1600x962px

>>128138227
Have a look at this beauty.

*snif*

O R B I T A L R I N G W H E N
R
B
I
T
A
L

R
I
N
G

W
H
E
N

>>128138227
I know it's NASA, but take a look at this
https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-begins-work-to-build-a-quieter-supersonic-passenger-jet

One of the reasons Concorde failed financially was the high fuel costs, a significant part of which is down to the health and safety standards. NASA's proposed design would mean mechanics need to 'climb a 30ft ladder' just to get to the engine, which is dangerous. The aerodynamic efficiency gained from it however would make a massive difference in the fuel bill, thus affordability.

>>128137783
So, imagine that instead of having to replace 100% of our fossil fuel vehicles and equipment, we could just stop mining for fuel and create it cheaply and 100% carbon-neutral. This technology can also be used to produce the precursor materials used to make plastics and composites, so there's another avenue for outright carbon sequestration into useful industrial and consumer products.

>>128138288
Here you go.

http://www.theenergycollective.com/barrybrook/201991/counting-hidden-costs-energy

File: 1477865251639.jpg (67KB, 517x650px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 517x650px

>>128137122

>>128138783
In that case we would still have the negative health effects from artificial fuel combustion in our cities.

I don't see the real benefits for doing that. Battery tech and e-motors are getting cheaper and cheaper and once their prices as a system are below the ones for ICEs, I do not see why we should take the losses that come with generating artificial fuel from electricity, rather than using electricity directly.

File: energgyprices.pngal.png (41KB, 1249x511px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 1249x511px

>>128138832
Alright, meanwhile I've dug up (a) EU report. Most relevant are black and dark grey (I had a better one, but I can't find it right now, that didn't have this color issue - going to keep looking at post it if I find it)

>>128139006

Goddamn, I knew Malta's energy prices were sky high, I didn't realize how bad they were.

>>128133378
There have been a bunch of basically infinite energy systems, even energy synthesis (based of Nikola Tesla's work) but they all get snubbed because of (((them)))

File: 1475257090727.png (186KB, 853x1432px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 853x1432px

>>128133378
We could be harvesting energy wirelessly from the atmosphere for free right now too, but (((they))) paid someone to burn a lab down so they could make money instead. Anyone who gets even close to developing free energy will pressured or murdered if they won't comply, guaranteed.

>>128138964
Have fun flying internationally in a plane that's 70% batteries by volume, and violently heats to 1000+ degrees in seconds if it suffers damage.

File: iter-coil.jpg (25KB, 460x345px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 460x345px

>>128133378
> Why is fusion power not in the news more?

You're just reading wrong news, bro
http://world-nuclear-news.org/NN-European-consortium-completes-first-Iter-magnet-2205177.html

>>128139442
ITER is a meme, a false flag to keep real fusion power out of reality.

File: scared merchant.png (129KB, 354x504px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 354x504px

>>128133378
>0 dollar cost electricity.

File: 1481758719898.jpg (108KB, 1229x692px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 1229x692px

>>128139329
>not carrying a Thorium power plant instead of all those batteries

hawhawhaw this is gay, i know

i am dutch

>>128139711
insightful comment

>>128139711
Don't you just want to fuse your dick with Kelly's ass?
Like just, fuse it together, create some high energy?
And then turn around so she can fuse her dick with your ass?
Even more high energy?
Just imagine what it would yield if you fuse your dick with Kelly's dick
You'd be Australian

How is electricity generated from fusion? In the form of heat?

>>128134103

This is correct, the power grid needs constant monitoring and maintenance. It won't be expensive but it won't be 100% free either as consumption will also explode

>>128137993
now imagine you have something you can now still sell for profit and then change to the product with the massive profit margin.

>>128139909
>How is electricity generated from fusion? In the form of heat?
Yes. Essentially your cooling fluid double-functions as a heating fluid which then heats up water in a heat exchanger or is directly used as steam to power generators.

Essentially how any other power plant, coal, gas, fission etc. works.

>>128133378

My friend, if we move to fusion, how will we be able to have a monopoly on energy?
My friend, why are you so stupid?

>>128140305
Thank you.

>>128133378
>Working fusion power will change everything
The most RETARDED waste of money EVER. Tokamac fusion DOES NOT WORK. We already know this. We are pissing our money away on yet another stupid liberal myth.

>>128133378
Too bad the UK is taking its reactors and leaving the EU.

File: Strompreis-zusammensetzung_2017.jpg (176KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1000x750px

>>128139006
WTF is this diagram? It can't be correct.

Here's the electricity cost composition in Germany, currently the second-highest in Europe after Denmark
Translation:

23.6% EEG-Umlage - tax to cover the renewable production subsidies
2.8% Sonst. Umlagen - other taxes to cover renewable-related subsidies (efficient heating plants, biogas, offshore windpower)
5.7% Konzessionsabgabe - concession levy (use of third party property for electric installation/transport)
25.6% Netzentgelte, Messung, Abrechnung - grid costs, measurement and billing
19.3% Stromerzeugung, Vertrieb - electricity production and sales costs
7% Stromsteuer - electricity tax
16% Umsatzsteuer - VAT

Average household price (~3500 kWh/year) : 29.16 ct/kWh
Taxes and levies : 55% of total price

Every time fusion is brought up or some "breakthrough" happens it's a bunch of bullshit. Even going back to the 80s - anyone remember this fucking embarrassment?

http://archive.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2009/03/dayintech_0323

>>128134042
Lol. But are Slavs white?

>>128140704
Good goy, keep spending your shekels on coal and oil

File: Fluid.jpg (94KB, 681x599px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 681x599px

Why can't WE harvest power from gravity?

Newton and the apple.

Enough bullshit naow!

File: 1492698594656.jpg (11KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 400x300px

>>128133378

>working fusion power

Sure thing, Hanz. I bet we'll put it right next to our Unicorn Fart refinery...

>>128133378
because they gave up on the dream of cold fusion?

>>128133378
Energy will never be 'free', it's a simple law of the universe.

However, yes, fusion power would likely have the biggest impact on our planet in terms of industry, technology, progress and wellbeing.

File: Brutter.jpg (179KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1920x1080px

>>128141206

>>128133378
>tokamax

>not stellarator

>>128135245
Once the robots do everything, what else is there to even do?

>>128134103
Yeah, energy bill would be more like internet services. Everyone pays a flat rate to pay for the infrastructure. Well, until (((they))) figure out a way to start charging for usage again. The thing would still burn hydrogen right? Maybe a water shortage would do it. Idk I'm part jewish

>>128141120

That's what they are doing in CERN

>>128133378
Never going to happen, it's no closer than it was 50 years ago despite the billions thrown at it.

>>128137268
i just said it wont be free it will be cheaper and when it is, the power peaks will be bigger, i suggest you go study about power grids and how everything as to be perfect and what are the consequences if not. If you understand about it you will say then that im right

File: CskyVvaWAAAT3Kj.png (232KB, 450x500px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 450x500px

>Liberals think there is going to be free power now

>>128141387
Play war games?
Who doesn't wants to kill each others for no reason other than pride and laughing at your enemies as they cry, their women raped and children killed?

File: Angry pope.jpg (35KB, 460x259px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 460x259px

>>128141771
I'm not cerntain of this.

>>128138551
Fuck NASA, this HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE. Research "Quiet Boom" demonstration aircraft. Boeing and Lockmart both have demos I think

More pesudeoscientists shilling completely unviable tech they don't understand

>>128143975
>completely unviable

That's where you're wrong kiddo.

>>128133378
Fusion doesn't work.

So it's coal, fission, and gas.

>>128142106
That we can have practically free electricity doesn't mean we'll see 14KW computers and consoles, or 10KW stoves and ovens. There's still the matter of heat. I doubt that the grid will become overburdened, but another thing to consider is that with practically free electricity we can start making the grid superconductive, which should eliminate most of the transfer problems.

File: lockheed-compact-fusion.jpg (704KB, 3500x2333px) Image search: [Google]

704KB, 3500x2333px

>>128138196
>>128139544
>http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/compact-fusion.html
Lockheed

S K Y P A L A C E

K

Y

P

A

L

A

C

E

>>128135499
>Why would you end up putting together a fuel from electricity generated by fusion... and not just use electricity directly?
Get to keep every internal combustion engine in existence. Get to keep all the distribution equipment and infrastructure. Get better energy density and fast refills.

>>128142106
i'm gonna go ahead and guess you're the typical 1st/2nd year electrical engineer student who thinks he knows shit because he had a class on circuit analysis.

there are literally less problems in the managing of a power grid if you get a stable power injection in the grid like fusion would be, yes it's very complex, offer must match demand all the times otherwise frequency goes out of the nominal area, that's why pretty much every non baseload plant has a governor system, and all these things are planned ahead with UC methods the day before or more, every problem that might exist with modern power systems is due to intermittent sources like renewables, an increase of power demand for traditional adjustable power synch generator supplies, would really only mean more lines or higher rated equipment overall...

>>128136904
How do you talk about a fusor while ignoring polywell?

>>128144243
"Superconductivity is a phenomenon of exactly zero electrical resistance and expulsion of magnetic flux fields occurring in certain materials, called superconductors, when cooled below a characteristic critical temperature. It was discovered by Dutch physicist Heike Kamerlingh Onnes on April 8, 1911, in Leiden. Like ferromagnetism and atomic spectral lines, superconductivity is a quantum mechanical phenomenon. It is characterized by the Meissner effect, the complete ejection of magnetic field lines from the interior of the superconductor as it transitions into the superconducting state. The occurrence of the Meissner effect indicates that superconductivity cannot be understood simply as the idealization of perfect conductivity in classical physics."

H-heike-Sama?

>>128144243
>grid superconductive

jesus... yearly losses in a decently operated system never go above 10%...

>>128138964
>In that case we would still have the negative health effects from artificial fuel combustion in our cities.
Synthetic fuel would have no sulfur so it would create no sulfur dioxide, which would make no acid rain.

This is why the Chinese are going to the moon. Make America number 2 again.

>>128144632
I was thinking more along the line of preventing the wires from melting

>>128133378
>Jewish ran society
>free

>>128144800
that's why you build more lines, a normal power line conductor is made to operate at a normal temp of about 80ºC with no loss of tensile strenght, while being able to support 100-120ºC for overloads for reduced periods of time, and going to about 200ºC for fault currents

aluminium melts at 600ºC, all these things are operated in a very conservative manner, in Portugal for example, in <60 kV lines are always super oversized by orders of 2 or 3 in magnitude for current carrying capacity

>>128144800
>>128145103

the only time lines might temperature problems is with repeating short-circuits and never on the lines that leave generating plants at the higher voltage levels, like a fusion plant would be, because they have massive sections, even a fault current barely heats them

File: IMG_7905.png (17KB, 626x624px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 626x624px

>>128133378
>assuming fusion will ever work outside of the lab.

>>128135379
Congrats on never paying your own power bill. No transmission fee line in Germany I guess.

>>128145474
Fusion is already possible retard, what is not (yet) is generating more energy than the energy needed to maintain the whole process.

>>128137122
Fusion and fission are two different things. And fission reactors are the only realistic solution to (((climate change))), but that will never happen because retarded hippies won't allow the construction of safer, more efficient nuclear power plants. Modern reactor designs have failsafes against the shit that happened at Fukushima, but instead we have to hold on to shitty reactors from the 50s and 60s thanks to faggots and leafs.

File: U.S._historical_fusion_budget_vs._1976_ERDA_plan.png (359KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 1280x960px

>>128146014
Pic related makes me rage. Went to a guy's seminar on fusion related researched and asked if it was true that it was less funded than in the 70's or if that was a myth. He confirmed it is true. If they'd gone balls out I could have just about had fusion start up the year I was born.

>>128140305
What is being cooled?
The whole point of the magnets is to contain the plasma and isolate it from its environment. Is the thermal radiation used while the plasma is uninterruptedly kept in the containment?
At some point you have to exchange the fuel. How do you regain the energey from powering up and down the magnetic field?

Oil is already BTFO.

Fusion will change everything, but in 50 years solar is probably going to be ridiculously cheap too.
The thing about solar is that because it is a technology, not a resource, it is constantly being improved and made cheaper.

File: Arghrghnnhn.jpg (42KB, 1080x675px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 1080x675px

>>128146756
Nothing new. No big project.

Who will finance your project?
Not reasonable. Pay your 30 years loan.

>>128134814

This, with cheap abudant energy we could make carbon fuel a neutral source, so it no longer adds to the atmosphere because we use fusion energy to harvest it back into fuel.

>>128135499

Batteries will never be as energy dense and efficient as a liquid chemical and combustion.

>>128133378
Fusion will likely use Deuterium as fuel and will require heavy water tanks to use for cooling. It will still be more expensive than coal because Deuterium is fucking rare.

File: 1377259180082.jpg (47KB, 600x615px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 600x615px

>>128138227
Nobody took it and built on it. It was literally a prototype. If you're not a planefag I guess you might not realise, as soon as an aircraft goes into service there will be modifications made (there were some over the years on Concorde but minor) and you'll soon have the -100, -200, -300 versions etc, a lot of them with very different airframes and engines.

Concorde got the odd upgrade but we didn't see new improved versions appear and then whole new SSTs appear as we should have done. Think of the progression from 707, to 727, 727 and so on, with all the variants of each. If in SST terms Concorde was the equivalent of the 707 then over the same period we went from the efficiency of 707s to the efficiency of late 777s in subsonic aircraft, we stayed at the equivalent of early version 707s into the early 2000s.

Obviously supersonic will always be less efficient until we get something really exotic working, but it didn't have to stay at Concorde level.

http://flibe-energy.com/

thorium atomic is already here

fusion doesnt work
thorium does
LFTR!!

dont try n misdirect u jew

nuke israel

>>128139442
What the fuck, I thought they did this years ago.

This shit is never going to be completed at this rate.

>>128146014
>not generating power
>working

>>128146756
Is this just the US alone? Because I know that tens of billions is being dumped into ITER as a total

>>128147137
This is the same with wind turbines. New electric turbine technology is making wind turbines larger and more efficient. It's almost profitable with the 10 megawatt turbines they build now. In an offshore environment where there are no obstacles to slow wind, these massive turbines are extremely efficient.

>>128134103
True, it costs money to transport the power and it will never be free. However, is there anything about this method that makes the transportation or maintenance more of an issue than any other method?

>>128148895
Thats possible, tbf he could have misunderstood me, he's a pretty weird lad.

>>128149149
no, he's a retard, if anything it would make it we wouldn't need intermittent sources like wind/solar, and as you can expect that ends up being much better for the power system operation

>>128149284
The intermittent nature of wind and solar can be reduced by large enough deployment across long distance and transmission.

Two wind farms just a few hundred miles apart will average to a near constant output. Add another to the transmission line and the stability is increased. Solar is different since it depends on daylight.

The Atlantic wind connection is one idea proposed to connect offshore wind farms along the United States Atlantic continental shelf. The United States has a massive untapped market for offshore wind because
1) we have a large, relatively shallow continental shelf on the east coast
2) the wind regime is extremely active offshore of the United States, especially in the north east.

>>128135499
Everyone's bitching about fuel density and whatnot but there's much more to oil than that, including (but not limited to)
>polymers: all commodity plastics and engineering polymers and most of their additives, synthetic rubber, artificial fibers, etc
>paints, pigments and inks
>pharmaceuticals precursors
>lubricants
>fertilizers
>household chemicals: detergents and surfactants, toothpaste, shaving foam, ...

And many, many more.
>t. materials engineer

>>128134103
You're forgetting that the fundamental physics of transporting electricity won't be altered, faggot, a lot of existing infrastructure can be used

>>128141387
invent more stuff

>>128135681
The infrastructure is already built, you don't have to do shit but plot the reactor where the old plant was.

>>128134103
>what is the power grid

>>128135835
Maybe they should scale funding with inflation for fuck sakes. The solar meme gets vastly more money.

>>128136632
>electron sun thery
kek, yes that krackpot.

>>128151007
You don't have to do shit?

Congrats on being retarded.

Why people keep falling for the "everything nuclear is bad" meme?
Hollywood and a-bombs?

File: Capturar.png (185KB, 964x575px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 964x575px

>>128150495
There's definitely times where wind production is low all over, in our system we can have days where wind production doesn't get to 1 GW, when we have close to 5 GW capacity, not only that high winds also probably entail higher likelihood of phase-phase faults which might not be very nice for the Fault Ride Through funcions of the wind generator, and proceed to disconnect a bunch of generators which are near to the fault, and you can easily have downward ramps like pic related, which was from a phase-phase fault.

Offshore wind sounds like a meme to me desu, i seriously doubt the cost of construction/maintenance is better than onshore

>>128150495
>>128152058

and not only that solar and wind are usually negatively correlated, at least for a grid of a small country like Portugal

>>128141120
That's called a hydro plant, anon. Although even they are more accurately described as running off nuclear fusion reactions.

>>128133378
Cold fusion was real.

>>128133378
>Implying fusion is even possible outside a star

The smallest stars are about 10^27 kg. It ain't ever gonna happen; the energy input to create the conditions for fusion will likely always be more than that you get out: and even still it's only 17MeV/decay. Say you could get 10MeV/ reaction out then you'd need over 10 million tonnes of hydrogen per year to meet earth's energy requirements (we could make synthetic oil etc, that is included). That's getting on for 100 million tonnes of seawater per year that needs to be processed; so even more seawater needed. Humanity has reached peak energy: it's fucking over.

>>128133378
>implying the kikes will allow this.

>>128153591
>half of those numbers are pulled out of your ass
convincing

>>128133378
> All oil countries and gas countries lose out massively, Saudis bankrupt, Libya bankrupt, Russia in troubles.
Yup. And seeming as money is just power they are invading and forcing Salafism on Europe and even killing/ Traumatizing women. Is this not a Russian design though?

Fusion is coming around 2030, the reason it's taken so long is because a lot of people wasted their time on meme designs when realistically the only viable structure is the tokamak. Also because high temp super conducting magnets were not available up until fairly recently which allow a net gain of energy, ITER will probably be the first mainstream reactor that will be hailed as a 'success'.

>>128141120
we do, it's called hydro-electric power.

>>128133378
>"Renewable energy" aka wind and solar BTFO massively.
the only people that thought wind and solar power was at all viable are libcuck retards

Check out spark plasma, I believe it's called direct ignition. Really interesting tech that only needed 2,000,000 to do their next trial run, (in 2008)... Still haven't gotten the money yet! Imagine what Kickstarter could do for such research.

>>128134103
FUCK OFF POORTUGAL YOU ARE NOT EVEN RELEVANT IN THIS SUBJECT

>>128133378
How long are they playing around with thier prototype? 15 years 20?
Its taking for ever man....