r/fusion • u/Sun_In_A_Bottle • 14d ago

Why fusion, over everything else?

$15.2 billion in private investment over the past 5 years!

For an industry that is projected to need 1 million workers by 2040, how is the global private workforce roughly ONLY 4,000?!

40 Upvotes

88% Upvoted

67 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

8

u/Sad_Dimension423 14d ago

As for why $15B in the last five years? Because we’re close. (We think.)

My theory is that the fusion people look at the drop in price of renewables and know it's now or never. If there's no tomorrow, they can promise the world and it doesn't matter. They either win big now or change careers.

7

u/3z3ki3l 14d ago

Perhaps. But there’s still scenarios where fusion would pay off a hundredfold, even if everything on earth was powered by renewables.

Like I said, they’re betting on more than just the energy consumption of the planet. They’re betting on what happens when we put one on the moon, and further. That’s why all these billionaires have space agencies.

It’s a high-risk high-reward bet for sure, but if they’re right then the benefit is astronomical. Because there actually are a number of engineering problems that we can basically throw energy at to solve. Provided we have it available in a dense enough form.

4

u/Chrontius 13d ago

Places where power density is a constraint, or where it makes sense to give a bigass customer a dedicated power supply, for example.

4

u/Sad_Dimension423 13d ago

Why would fission not be workable for such customers? For example, on ships, fission reactors are probably much more practical, given power density differences.

5

u/ZorbaTHut 13d ago edited 13d ago

Fission has a lot of legitimate ecological issues that make it (coincidentally) kinda politically toxic. We use it on military ships anyway because the military doesn't give a shit, but it's effectively offlimits for commercial ships, even though switching over oil tankers, cargo ships, and cruise liners to fission would be an absolutely gargantuan environmental improvement.

I would love for us to accept the tradeoff here - it's a great tradeoff - but it's unlikely to happen for political reasons.

 

I could write a multi-paragraph rant about my feelings about the historical environmentalist movement. It would get me banned from many subreddits.

2

u/andyfrance 10d ago edited 10d ago

There have been a handful of nuclear powered cargo ships. None were a commercial success and one was even converted to diesel.

There are however a few nuclear powered icebreakers that are very successful.

2

u/ZorbaTHut 10d ago

If you really try, enough regulations and bureaucracy can make anything impractical.

1

u/andyfrance 10d ago

True. And a great source of income for the lawyers too. Both sides of the legal proceedings make money out of it. The judge too if it needs deciding in court, or judges when the appeal process gets triggered.

1

u/ZorbaTHut 10d ago

Yeah. It's an unfortunate situation overall.