Yeah that’s not how it works

Now that’s what I call seasonality

There are literally actively used methods for material confinement. Most common are magnetic confinements like tokamak and Stellarator reactors. New methods using beryllium blankets by ITER are shown to be effective. Their two problems are they currently need to be actively cooled which eats away at the energy input/output ratio and they contain natural amounts of Uranium, some of which is U-234 and radioactive requiring hazardous disposal at their end of life. Not as serious as.apent nuclear material disposal from fission reactors, but still a major drawback.

There are also companies with successful experiments fusing deuterium and H-3 in lieu of tritium as tritium is costly to produce. Allegedly, this method doesn't require confinement. Since the products are ionized, it actually uses the reactive expansion to power magnetic generators in lieu of heating steam turbines.

But the NIF that just released their announcement doesn't even use magnetic confinements, rather an inertial confinement (ICF) reactor. This means the confinement times can be improved linearly with density of the fuel and it only requires about 10% of the mass of the fuel to reach temperature sufficient for plasma, which also allows for longer reactions. ICF research is way more immature than MCF so it has always been assumed that MCF would be the breakthrough. That's what makes this such an event is that ICF beat MCF to the finish line creating more energy output than input.

Lastly, they didn't just have an experiment with miniscule energy that could only be detected with instruments. They created 3.15 mega joules. That's 875 watt hours. That's enough to power a TV for a day and well beyond enough to prove their confinement technology works

They were a member of the Rio Treaty until 2002 when they withdrew over the looming Iraq War.

Worth.

You can solve literally every problem with unlimited energy. (Except your ex being a slut.)

Oy. $35 billion. imagine that had been invested in solar research.

Now imagine it in the context of the Keystone pipeline leak in Kansas this week. In the context of the sabotage on the NordStream gas pipeline. In the context of the power grid issues in Texas in a successive winter and summer. In the context of the grid sabotage in N.Carolina last week, and of suspected sabotage attempts elsewhere in this nation over the past couple weeks. In the context of Russia destroying Ukraine’s power infrastructure.

Fusion remains decades out from a practical perspective, and is not local. You’re not gonna have a fusion reactor on your roof.

On the other hand, you could be collecting and storing the energy created by the fusion reactor called the Sun.

Kinda counterintuitive coloring with red being positive and green negative.

As well, at this point, us is a good defense ally with the Brit’s and other Western European countries, but generally defense and intelligence wise, the US is closest with the aussies.

How is Mexico not a US ally?

[removed]

True. I have no idea as I don’t speak Arabic but maybe you’re correct. I remember Mitsubishi launched the Pajero in Spain and they didn’t sell any because it’s not a very nice word in Spanish.

Multi-brand companies usually focus group that choice at a minimum, because of the many bad stories of clueless multi-nationals in the 1960s and 1970s. The most famous example is probably when Chevrolet tried to sell its “Nova” model in Mexico, which failed badly because “no va” in Spanish means “(you) do not go.”

Is there a potentially similar sounding word in Arabic to “Carl’s” that they might want to avoid associating with?

I want to try it so bad 😩

Yep, I live in Minnesota and we have Hardee’s everywhere.

OP doesn't acknowledge half of Africa's existence.

Border of Utah holding out Chick Fil A like it’s the plague.

There's really no comparison. Fusion reactors have to withstand 100x the heat and 1,000,000x the neutron Flux as fission reactors. No materials exist which can actually withstand that and there's no clear path forward given the laws of physics. Fission is actually laughably easy. You literally just put enough uranium together in the right geometry and it gets hot. I could make a fission reactor in my basement if you gave me some enriched uranium to fuel it.

How old is this data? Because I know in this post and other we have some of the restaurants in question but I don't even see a faint dot in my area.

Not at the contemporary levels of technology. How difficult fusion is today is honestly a sixth grade science project compared to how difficult fission was in 1940's.

The Manhattan Project cost was estimated to be $3.3 Trillion. That's $55 Trillion today. Trillion, with a T.

The inflation adjusted fusion investment to date according to OP has been $38 Billion, with a B.

Had no idea the eastern seaboard had never had Jack in the box tacos at 2am. Damn shame, that.

Fission is still on the border of being economically viable despite being 70+ years seasoned.

​

Anyone who has delusionals about fusion just coming in as "free green energy" any time within this century are completely delusional.

It's pretty cool how clearly you can see the front range in these pictures.

Well yes, but with a specific energy about three times the one of gasoline and a specific density of about 1/4 of gasoline the reduction in energy per unit of volume isn’t so massive and the benefits on the reduction of negative externalities is very very significant. Please correct me if I am wrong but in theory we would need deposits that are 33% bigger in volume, correct?, the problem is the temperature necessary to keep it liquid of course. And as important volume is, weight may be an even bigger factor for some transport systems, like airplanes.

In any case the point, as you mention, is that with more and cheaper energy we could sintetice the fuel.

Keep in mind that the Pentagon gets close to $800 b a year. Just for sense of perspective.

Many "small European countries" have conscription. Every fifth person in my country (that has generous welfare policies) is in the army reserves and has completed at least 6 months of military service. It's just a different way to contribute.

The US has the money but most of its citizens don't have to go to the army.