Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
I repeat one major point--if we aren't using the carbon-based fuels then all
Rick Tarara wrote:
In the end--once we either decide to stop using fossil
fuels or run out--we had better have something like
fusion working ...
What means "something like" fusion? There are precisely
zero fusion-based power plants right now. Thirty years
ago they said it would be about 20 years before the first
such plant would be built. Now they say it will be about
20 years before the first such plant will be built. That's
pretty slow progress. And the US applied an 80% budget cut
to fusion research a few years ago, so progress might get
even slower.
... or we may have to go to exotic things like space-based
solar collection satellites which will run to really big bucks.
How big?
If you could meet the US electricity demand with something
costing a trillion dollars, that would be reasonably attractive.
At current prices the cells alone would cost you a trillion
dollars, but prices have come down by a factor of three in
the last ten years, and presumably there would be economies
of scale to be had. Still, the budget is tight. On the
third hand, it wouldn't take much of a tightening in the
non-renewable carbon-fuels market to tip the scales.