undefined | Better HN

0 pointsncmncm4y ago0 comments

Since power from a fusion plant would cost 100x+ what solar and wind cost, no.

But every cent diverted to fusion from solar brings climate disaster closer.

0 comments

Do you have a reason to believe capital deployed to fusion would have been deployed to solar? And if so, why do you think it would make a difference, given the market feedback loop going on with solar driving down costs?

Edit: also, your comments seem to be incredibly negative on fusion, would you mind disclosing if you have any solar or wind connected conflicts of interest?

ncmncmOP4y ago

I have no money invested in solar, wind, or storage enterprises. To my shame.

My beef with fusion is about long-term hucksterism and wholly-legal corruption. STS, SLS, F-35, Big Dig, 2nd Ave, Cal bullet train, fission, fusion.

Dollars are fungible. Would fusion dollars otherwise go to renewables build-out? They might be more likely to go to battery, solar panel, superconducting power transmission, or carbon reclamation research. All of those would be welcome alternatives.

Even FRC fusion would be a better use of funding.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse