Recent comments in /f/dataisbeautiful

ahxes t1_j09fiet wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in [OC] Cost of Carbon Zero - Historical Look At U.S. Funding of Fusion Energy by Metalytiq

You might have used perpetual motion to avoid the interjection but its not a fair comparison. The math says perpetual motion will always remain energy neutral. On the flip side, the math says fusion yields an energy positive.

Im just pointing out the difference between spending money on something we know can’t work vs something that we know can work given enough time and resources.

5

J3N0991 OP t1_j096c1k wrote

Reply to comment by SunnyDayInPoland in Relative Humidity readings from my basement after carrying out remedial works - love that trend [OC] by J3N0991

I’d always been aware that we had a humidity issue down there and we’d had spots of mildew appear behind picture frames and the like… I’d been wilfully ignoring it until recent high profile news stories around mould lung. With people sleeping down there it seemed sensible to throw the kitchen sink at it and get to the bottom of the issues - it had been tanked around 8 years ago so I was confident the issue wasn’t rising damp.

1

pdinc t1_j095hbx wrote

Reply to comment by brandontaylor1 in [OC] Cost of Carbon Zero - Historical Look At U.S. Funding of Fusion Energy by Metalytiq

Yeah this is what happens when not enough people are science literate.

There are literally dams used to store energy by pumping up water and converting to energy back on the way down.

Perpetual motion is theoretically impossible (as in violates all the laws of physics). Fusion is practically impossible - the same way nuclear fission was until we solved the engineering problems. They're not comparable.

4