Will fusion deprecate Climate Change politics?

File: s.jpg (8KB, 310x163px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 310x163px

>>134532005
fusion is still in its fairitale stage, sure we will probably get it to work but who knows what unknown negative scenarios building small suns in easily bombed areas will cause.

Those who think the paris accord would do anything to stop global warming are just bad at math, just like the californians who blocked clean energy plants in the US, the funded the dirtiest coal power plants a mile south of the border to create the energy they needed.

>>134532673
This. Leftards can't get into maths. But love (((science))) because they have a gender studies major.

File: temps_two_studies.jpg (73KB, 563x302px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 563x302px

>muh always showing just the last 100 years of data to scare the brainwashed zombies

global warming/climate change is an industry unto itself and they want worldwide "carbon taxes" on top of that. it is an insidious thing far beyond that even.

you won't understand wtf i'm talking about unless you look into these things for yourself. so, you can do that (takes effort)... or blindly continue to go along with their agenda. whatever.

did you know having ice cap is an anomaly? did you know that the earth has been ice cap free for ~90% of its existence? did you know by definition ice caps only exist during ice ages? did you know we are at the tail end of a CURRENT ice age now? did you know the caps extended as far down as missouri/kentucky just 20,000 years ago and have been receding ever since that peak? did you know the caps are going bye-bye even if every person on the planet disappeared 20,000 years ago?

THE OCEAN'S RELEASE *ALL ON ITS OWN* IS FAR LARGER AND MORE IMPORTANTLY *OUT ACCELERATING* MANS CONTRIBUTION

THE OCEAN IS RELEASING MORE DUE TO WARMER TEMPS (WARMER WATER = IT'S A FAR LESS EFFECTIVE C02 SINK)

IF HUMANS NEVER AROSE CO2 WOULD BE INCREASING AT ALMOST THE EXACT SAME RATE AS IT IS RIGHT NOW

THIS HAPPENS AT THE END OF EVERY ICE AGE

STOP BEING SO FUCKING GULLIBLE AND LAZY

LOOK INTO THINGS FOR YOURSELF AND STOP TAKING WHAT THE MSM, EPA.GOV AND NASA.GOV ETC. TELL YOU AT FACE VALUE, YOU LAZY SHITS. IT IS ABOUT POWER AND CONTROL.

ICE AGES AND PERMANENT ICE *ARE AN ANOMALY*

BY DEFINITION AN "ICE AGE" IS WHEN THE EARTH HAS PERMANENT ICE SHELVES

WE HAD ICE A MILE THINK IN CINCINNATI JUST 20,000 YEARS AGO

THE PLANET IS WARMING AND THE CAPS ARE METLING

THAT MEANS = MORE CO2, SEA RISE AND WEATHER PATTERN CHANGES

WE CAN'T STOP OR ALTER IT, WE WILL ADAPT JUST FINE

STOP BEING SCARED INTO TAX SCHEMES AND GLOBALIST POWER PLAYS YOU DUMBED DOWN ZOMBIES

its air pollution not ((global warming)) chemtrails are also real but are only implemented to manipualte block out the sunlight and cause cancers

>>134532673
The fusion would be magnetically contained. It requires a lot of energy to sustain fusion, and without active priming the fusion would die away naturally. Fusion is passively safe unlike most nuclear fission plants.

File: IMG_0095.png (364KB, 620x569px) Image search: [Google]

364KB, 620x569px

>>134532005
If Trump was able to articulate why fusion would be good, at least independents and some libs would be on board. Also, what is this meme about liberal not wanting nuclear? Yes there's a large portion of liberals (maybe even most) who would prefer renewable energy, but plenty that fine with modern nuclear plants.
Trump is simply bad at convincing the general public that nuclear is good. I'm willing to bet she thinks nuclear is bad because the word "nuclear", until someone in his staff tells him it's a good thing.

>>134532673
>we will probably get it to work but who knows what unknown negative scenarios building small suns in easily bombed areas will cause.
i'd rather have a coal plant than a nuclear wasteland , more jobs too

>>134533467
Like I mentioned, fusion is passively safe. The only reason it's sustained in the sun is because of its massive gravity.

File: LHD_VV_2.jpg (341KB, 1160x640px) Image search: [Google]

341KB, 1160x640px

>>134533599
>time travel is safe

FUSION? YOU MEAN LIKE NUCLEARS?!

>>134533928
Look here if you don't believe. If a camera is safe inside one, why wouldn't anything else?

https://youtu.be/X2v3CNKFF_o

File: 1484658705193.gif (2MB, 202x360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 202x360px

>>134533928
>Let's cease to do what Whites are best at, which is proficiency in hard science and technological innovation

>>134534168
More info on fusion: https://av.voanews.com/Videoroot/Pangeavideo/2016/04/4/42/42c9d0ed-a5c4-406a-8629-8ae2575ffcac_hq.mp4?download=1

So it looks like by 2028 we'll have working experiments with a huge reactor. This one may be related to the one that produced net positive energy, I'm unsure. Either way that's a good opportunity to be ready for fusion, much ahead of 2050.

>>134535310
Sorry, non download link: https://av.voanews.com/Videoroot/Pangeavideo/2016/04/4/42/42c9d0ed-a5c4-406a-8629-8ae2575ffcac_hq.mp4

Fusion is all very good, but the field of LENR looking more promising.

The ECCO reactor with a supposed gain of 8 over input is going to undergo some testing by the MFMP soon. Could be a game changer.

Anyway - keep an eye on LENR research.

>>134537021
Cold fusion, eh? Well if you don't want to be a laughing stock and be supported by technology that can definitively put an end to climate debate, then standard fusion is the way to go. I'd much rather see progress in development of hot fusion if it promises to dispel climate change 'science' for what it is. I'll still keep an eye on LENR to see wtf is going on but don't have high hopes for it.

>>134537866
LENR is different from cold fusion, but I do agree with your point. Cold fusion got a bad name, and really gives the LENR field a tough time breaking through.
I think both could work well together - hot fusion stations acting as hubs, and LENR facilities on the spokes / community generation.
LENR would be ideal for transport such as shipping. Let's see how it goes I guess...

>>134533048
Best Post