Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
Kevin Karhan :verified:

@karolherbst @empressEvora @ShadowJonathan well, it'll certainly increase the amount of heat energy...

Furthermore the entire concept of nucpear power is unsustainable and the very finite supply of it should rather be used for the few yet critical applications one needs nurlcear material for...

9 comments
karolherbst 🐧 🦀 replied to Kevin Karhan :verified:

@kkarhan @empressEvora @ShadowJonathan yeah.. I think the question is rather how long it takes.

I think there are great innovations on the nuclear front trying to make it all more safe and more fuel efficient.

And I could even see that some amount of energy production might stay nuclear. E.g. only using current nuclear waste as fuel to reduce the time we have to keep it stored securely.

The problem just is, if we add energy, we also have to remove it and get to a negative balance. That's all.

Kevin Karhan :verified: replied to karolherbst 🐧 🦀

@karolherbst @empressEvora @ShadowJonathan I soncerely doubt we'll see that hapoen at all - not even talking about our lifetimes.

Now Nuclear Fusion might ne a totally new level, cuz the first to master this technology will basically be able to make as much energy as they want as cheap as they want, thus control the world...
youtube.com/watch?v=oIKc_9YKBs

karolherbst 🐧 🦀 replied to Kevin Karhan :verified:

@kkarhan @empressEvora @ShadowJonathan nuclear fusion has the same problem in terms of energy balance.

It converts energy stored in atoms into thermal and kinetic energy (directly or indirectly through electricity consumers)

It's all fine to use it, but we also have to make sure our energy balance stays below 0 until we manage to cool down earth enough.

Kevin Karhan :verified: replied to karolherbst 🐧 🦀

@karolherbst @empressEvora @ShadowJonathan OFC that is ture, which is why I propose to harness the amount of energy that is inefitably hitting the planet instead of excess thermal output.

Cuz that'll be more efficient and get us close to that desired amount...
mstdn.social/@kkarhan/11079257

Evora (sad girl hours) replied to Kevin Karhan :verified:

@kkarhan @karolherbst @ShadowJonathan

To be honest it’s unlikely that any current model fission designs could support true power generation. Nearly all of them are entirely focused on maintaining the fission reaction.

It’s far more likely that the state would fully fund any power generation rather then a private company. That’s not even getting into the politics of actually distributing power which is a whole mother can of worms.

My point being, the situation is Crisis is highly unlikely, the most likely solution is that a state that is able to harness fission energy would mostly prioritize implementation of it on a state scale and selling it to other, non-fission capable nations.

Not to mention, it’s far more likely a state would exert control over the enterprise or nationalize it rather than let it completely control its energy production to prevent that exact scenario. No state wants to lose control over its energy production especially to a private enterprise.

@kkarhan @karolherbst @ShadowJonathan

To be honest it’s unlikely that any current model fission designs could support true power generation. Nearly all of them are entirely focused on maintaining the fission reaction.

It’s far more likely that the state would fully fund any power generation rather then a private company. That’s not even getting into the politics of actually distributing power which is a whole mother can of worms.

Kevin Karhan :verified: replied to Evora (sad girl hours)

@empressEvora @karolherbst @ShadowJonathan that assumes state and corporations are completely seperate entities and not run by people - if not the same people.

THAT WAS NEVER THE CASE!

Far from it...
youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_I

Kevin Karhan :verified: replied to Kevin Karhan :verified:

@empressEvora @karolherbst @ShadowJonathan

The @EU_Commission doesn't even try to exert control over the 's ...
youtube.com/watch?v=duaYLW7LQv
Much less of it's production...

I do agree in that like , and grids should be owned by the public, and whether that's a state-owned enterprise, a ministry, a cooperative or whatever is more of a tool discussion.

Kevin Karhan :verified: replied to Kevin Karhan :verified:

@empressEvora @karolherbst @ShadowJonathan needless to say, cannot be generated, only transformed and converted from one form to another.

At least that's how physics says so.
tech.lgbt/@empressEvora/110792

And thus I think it's more reasonable to harness tue ~ 175W / m² global average (at ground pole-to-pole 24/7) of energy the sun shoves onto earch, because by the time that star will have burned out, we'd have more pressing issues - if we as a specoes will still exist at that point in time...

@empressEvora @karolherbst @ShadowJonathan needless to say, cannot be generated, only transformed and converted from one form to another.

At least that's how physics says so.
tech.lgbt/@empressEvora/110792

And thus I think it's more reasonable to harness tue ~ 175W / m² global average (at ground pole-to-pole 24/7) of energy the sun shoves onto earch, because by the time that star will have burned out, we'd have more pressing issues - if we as a specoes will still exist...

Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: replied to Kevin Karhan :verified:
@kkarhan @karolherbst @ShadowJonathan harvesting sun rays leaves a lot on the table to never be recovered though. I would argue that allowing the sun to feed plants which can then be used to produce biofuels is a way to improve power density and reduce loss/waste. Plus a real farm is a lot nicer to look at then a solar farm.
Go Up