Hacker News Reader

Comment by JumpCrisscross | Hacker News Reader

> real problem with fusion power is that even if they figure it out, it still won't be cost competitive with solar and wind

This is difficult to say when comparing an emerging technology with an established technology in an emerging economy.

Based on every historical prior, it would be surprising if there weren't diminishing returns to solar and wind. And I wouldn't underestimate the degree to which power is, in part, fashion. Today we value emissions. Tomorrow it may be preserving and expanding wild spaces.

On a practical level, fusion research doesn't compete with solar and wind deployment. Pursuing both is optimal.

View on HN

PV Panel production acts more like typical mass production and has therefore much higher cost benefits compared to every other way of producing power.

For every other way of producing energy you need separate land for PV you don't. You can put them on rooftops, over parking lots or even vertical in a field. The last one increases the crop yield. Crops get less harsh sun, lose less water and the evaporation cools down the panels, which increases their production.

Today we value costs of energy production and tomorrow we will to. Especially if it results in energy independence. You don't need to buy fuel for PV and wind. As with nuclear fuel only a few countries are probably going to manufacturing the fuel needed for fusion reactors. Producing enough of it and in a sufficient purity needs specialized facilities and they will only be profitable if they produce a lot of it.

> PV Panel production acts more like typical mass production and has therefore much higher cost benefits compared to every other way of producing power

Turbines are also mass manufactured. (Albeit less than PVs.)

> You can put them on rooftops, over parking lots or even vertical in a field

The first power plant burned coal in Manhattan [1]. You can put turbines on top of buildings. We don’t because we don’t want to.

I think wind turbines are pretty. But lots of people don’t, and many wouldn’t want their rooftops to be shaded by panels, or wide open fields and natural expanses turned into something that looks more industrial. (I personally think looking down on rooftop gardens is far prettier than panels.)

Maybe there is a perfect power source out there, one which justifies a monoculture. I haven't seen it. I don't believe it's solar or wind.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Street_Station

Additionally, the total amount of solar and wind is limited. Surely more than we need now, don't get me wrong, but how much more? Factor 2? 10? I could see a future that is extremely energy hungry, and not just because of AI.

> the total amount of solar and wind is limited

I'd be shocked if we max out on insolation before area we're willing to cover with solar panels and windmills.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com