Scientists Accidentally Discovered Quark Fusion, Could It Be the Future of Energy?

Looks like a case of 'back to the drawing board' then? Anyhoo, 'dunes' is where it's at these days . . .

"Pluto Has Dunes, but They’re Not Made of Sand"

Dunes not made of sand? Whatever next!

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/pluto-has-dunes-but-theyre-not-made-of-sand/

 

Actually, Titan (moon of Saturn) has amazing stretches of Plastic dunes near it's Methane/Ethane lakes.

 

The fine folks at Lockheed Martin's skunkworks have been working on a compact fusion reactor that they say will fit on a truck, and produce 10MW. They have applied for a patent associated with it as recently as February of this year, so it is an active project. When they are successful, it will be a game changer.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_Compact_Fusion_Reactor

 

Considering the amount of power we get from solar, having that many people employed means it's not very efficient.

 

That does not make sense.

 

General farming is also disastrous to the environment. It destroys natural habitats

 

It’s called, installation. Treat yourself to a little research. It will help your understanding....or not.

 

It is probably 50 years away at best if it ever actually works. You can't count on pie in the sky to save civilization.

 

You will never beat the ease of sucking oil out of a hole in the ground. The price for that energy was paid millions of years ago.

Solar and algae actively produce energy.

Petroleum is stored energy we are exploiting. Big difference.

 

If we didn't farm, we would all be dead from starvation. I call that a bigger negative.

Farming algae in the ocean is nothing like farming land. Algae can be grown on land but it makes it is far more efficient and cost effective to grow it in the ocean.

 

LOL I'm not disagreeing. Practically all Human modern(ish) techniques are disastrous to the environment so "artificial algae blooms" being disastrous is nothing different to most other human ways of life. The same argument has been used for many renewable energy farms but if you say that shale gas is also bad for the environment and then uproar

 

If you take the time to read what I said, we aren't talking about producing large open blooms.

You can't even produce useful quantities of fuel that way. It must be produced using closed systems.

 

You do realize that we are on the same page, don't you?

 

I know, I also know that few solar systems are worth the cost.

 

Math and economics, read up on it sometime.

 

Your comment has very little to do with either Mathematics or economics and seems to ignore the realities of technology and business. The employment in Solar is very diverse and so is the economics of the industry...it's nothing like coal. A large portion of jobs involve installation and maintaining systems vs. manufacturing. R&D is also important as the technology is always improving and efficiency increasing. My understanding of economic theories and real world dynamics is sufficient and deep enough to competently discuss the subjects and how they interact in this situation while it would seem yours is limited to pre-conceived talking point mentality.

 

Point taken. However, having so many involved in installation and maintenance raises the cost of the energy from solar. Instead of having a centralized source of power that doesn't cost too much to distribute to homes, you have a much higher cost system installed to each home. Also, I've read that the only way for solar to be much use is to have a bank of batteries to store energy to. Yet I also read that these batteries only have a life of 5-10 years and costs thousands to replace.

 

and we will never know how many ideas have been bought up by oil companies, people forced to sign nda's and then buried.....

 

battery technology is definitely lacking, but our desire to have phones that last days vs hours and doesn't pose a fire risk is pushing the investment into research to improve this

 

Years ago I recall supercapacitors were suppose to replace batteries. Haven't heard much about them in recent years, but they seem to be making progress. But might not be ideal for this application.
http://www.electronicdesign.com/power/can-supercapacitors-surpass-batteries-energy-storage

 

hopefully they come up with something, trick is it also has to be almost as cheap to mass produce as current technology

 

The accuracy of your commentary is lessened significantly when the costs of other energy sources are considered and tax subsidy taken into account. The environmental impacts left alone, just expenses involved in procuring, extracting, burning and processing coal so far exceed solar and other renewables comparison seems rather silly.

 

I was referring to monetary costs, environmental and societal costs can wait for another time.

 

So was I...I recommend you research or at least read this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

 

For sure......Though Discoveries by Corporations are very difficult to “hide” from the public over time and their research is often conducted in cooperation with institutes of higher learning and their scientists, we eventually know what they know. As a rule, they can function politically to prevent the passage of regulations and control patents. The truth does eventually get out. Oil companies knew about global warming in conjunction with the scientists they worked with long ago but behaved badly politically to maximize their profits. We knew that they knew, except for those who drink the coolaid that businesses are some how altruistic and not greedy.