96vette

96vette t1_ixr38u3 wrote

Nuclear fission reactors should have been replacing coal fired power plants 30 years ago. Instead we got “no nukes” and global warming. Currently billions of dollars are being invested in fusion development by private equity and wealthy individuals. This is a good sign that fusion power is going to happen, sooner than you think. In the meantime, solar and wind are a good stepping stone to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

1

96vette t1_ixnfkfs wrote

Fission reactors would have had a great positive impact on climate change. The anti nuke crowd bears some responsibility for the climate problems we now face.

Small fusion reactors will be developed that can safely power heavy equipment, trains, trucks and possible aircraft. Larger fusion reactors will provide clean, reliable power for cities. Wind and solar are a good stepping stone to this future. Lead, follow or get out of the way.

5

96vette t1_ixmmxrc wrote

You’re right! I skipped over the subheading stating wind, solar and hydro power are the renewables they are talking about. Ethanol is considered a renewable by the government. It is blended with gasoline to reduce dependence on oil. Ethanol is a less efficient fuel than gas and is corrosive, so not a great ICE fuel.

Our conversion away from fossil fuels encouraging. There is more than just changing fuel sources though. For example, the small manufacturing plant where I worked had four gas fired heat treating furnaces with a cost of $5 million each. These will need to be replaced with electric furnaces, a significant capital investment.

3