Fusion Energy Breakthroughs: Are We Close to Unlimited Clean Power?

[u/Economy-Title4694]

For decades, nuclear fusion, the same process that powers the Sun, has been seen as the holy grail of clean energy. Recent breakthroughs claim we’re closer than ever, but is fusion finally ready to power the world?

With companies like ITER, Commonwealth Fusion, and Helion Energy racing to commercialize fusion, could we see fusion power in our lifetime, or is it always "30 years away"? What do you think?

[u/2000TWLV]

1) You're wrong. The externalities of renewables are vastly preferable over those of fossil fuels. Millions of pollution-related deaths every year plus global warming is a bit of a problem.

2) Technology progresses and impacts change. For instance, solar has become much more efficient, which means lower impacts for the same output.

3) Nobody says you have to power the whole world exclusively with solar, so you can put that straw man away.

4) Good to hear you're an expert. What are your solutions?

[u/roleplayingarmadillo → u/2000TWLV]

No, I'm not. Look into actual information on it, not the propaganda pushed by eco nuts. It's pretty obvious.

"Renewables" are anything but clean. Solar takes massive amounts of land, completely destroying the ecosystem it was built on. The storage for the generated power requires a ridiculous amount of resources, none of which can be obtained in environmentally friendly ways. Then, at the end of life, the equipment is ridiculously toxic and requires a lot of specialized decommissioning.

Wind is very similar and the maintenance on wind products is dirty as hell.

Damming Rivers to generate power is relatively clean except for the entire riparian system is destroyed.

Geothermal requires massive amounts of upkeep.

It just goes on. I have no qualms with developing this tech... In fact, I encourage it. However, thinking that renewables are viable for the near future is misguided, at best

Truthfully, nuclear energy gives the smallest footprint from start finish with the least amount of environmental problems. Nuclear waste is a thing, sure, but developments have made it less and less of an issue.

Nat gas is actually relatively clean and newer tech makes it cleaner every day. There needs to be more investment in making it more efficient, along with oil and coal.

As to global warming, leave the 90s behind. There are many, many reasons for changes in temperature. Which is why most of the eco scammers switched to "climate change"

It's fear mongering at its finest.

If you really want to know what the biggest environmental issue is for us, I'll tell you:

Clean water

Do some homework on it. If you really want to protect the environment, that is where the focus needs to be. We are much closer to screwing up our fresh water sources than melting the ice caps

[u/2000TWLV → u/roleplayingarmadillo]

Come on, man. Climate denial disqualifies you from serious discussion. It's not that there's a conspiracy afoot against you, it's that the science is settled. So you're clearly arguing in bad faith, or you don't know what you're talking about. I've got no time for either.

[u/roleplayingarmadillo → u/2000TWLV]

Lol look into the literature. The science is only "settled" in liberal circles.

And if you were honest with yourself, you'd understand that most "ecologists" that harp about climate change are doing so for fake and/or grant money.

There is no money/fame in saying "we aren't destroying the world"

And let's be very clear, I didn't say that we don't have an effect on the environment. We absolutely do. However, it is not the effect that most of those on the news are claiming.

The real reason you aren't answering is because everything I said is true and you can't deny any of it.

If you read everything I'm saying, you'll realize that I'm being rather moderate. But you are letting your preconceived notions blind you

[u/2000TWLV → u/roleplayingarmadillo]

The science is settled in science circles. Have a nice day.