I'm pretty convinced that nuclear energy is one of the best

>>8249329
Nuclear waste sucks, but the over all amount of suck is substantially less than other forms of non-renewable energy pollution. I think we really need to go nuclear+solar for the majority of our energy needs. Supplement with hydro and wind where available.

>>8249331
When you say "our", what/where are you referring to?

CAN WE PLEASE FUCKING DISCERN FISSION AND FUSION

OP is a huge faggot for not knowing the difference

SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN SUN

Smog power cells.

>>8249329
Fusion energy is the way forward.

Thorium, etc, or don't bother. Still dealing with high pressure systems and the associated massive construction costs to cover material, space, and myriad failsafes, is nonsensical.

That we're still boiling water to spin a turbine is a disgrace.

>>8250950
>That we're still boiling water to spin a turbine is a disgrace.

Aren't fusion reactors doing that that too? Also how else are you going to transform heat into electricity?

>>8251035
You can actually directly capture the charged particles coming off of the reaction to directly drive current. It's only really efficient for the lower-neutronicity reactions which put out more energy in charged particles; proton-boron would be extremely efficient, but p-B is basically a pipe dream even by fusion standards.

>>8251035
I don't really know a viable alternative approach that could be readily deployed man, I just want it to be better and feel it can be. It's a Dirac-esque "it's ugly and subpar so it must be wrong" deal.

>>8250399
Hey faggot, I said short term. Hundreds of millions of people are going to be introduced to high-energy lives in the next few decades, and nuclear fusion isnt going to power them. Nice "discussion", are you for fusion but against fission?

>>8249329
Fusion isn't here any time soon.
Fission is also hard. Uranium reserves will last 200 years, or 20 if various countries start building reactors as they have talked about. Then we will have uranium shortage and prices will go sky high.
fast breeders seem to have a lot of problems.
Thorium is not mature, more words than results.
Fuel recycling is a mess and involves very high radioactivity.

At the end the reactor cores will be highly radioactive and decomissioning will be very costly. This is one of the reasons many countries have used their reactors well beyond the designed life time.

>>8250403
> Solar Roadways

I have fairly high level pessimism, so I wouldn't put me in charge of such innovations, but even so trying to be objective, fusion seems quite a lot of impossible.

But who the fuck knows, maybe ITER will run to schedule, and not go so far over budget the big funders like the US pull out entirely. And maybe we will figure out the engineering solutions to how you actually extract energy from this madness... But even to the most optimistic schedules we won't even know if it is possible to cultivate energy for many many decades.

>>8249329
Sun farm energy in 24 h sun position or at least most effective.

Thermal option in someplaces is good 2.

Wind is not that great i think we will pass this one... birds and wind conflict...

Nuclear... Ah fallout.
chemical energy is 2 costly but have some potential to be hybrid...