Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> I remain skeptical that fusion will ever be a commercially viable energy source. I'd love to be wrong.

I’m also skeptical, but I think the emphasis of my skepticism is on “commercially viable” as opposed to an available energy source. That is, I think fusion development will (and should) proceed anyway.

There’s a good argument that nuclear fission is not really commercially viable in its current form. Yet it provides quite a lot of commercially available electricity. And it also powers aircraft carriers and submarines. And similar technology produces plutonium for weapons. In other words, I don’t think fission’s continued availability as a power source is a strictly commercial decision.

I think there’s a quite a lot of technology that is not directly commercially viable, like high energy physics, or the space program. But they remain popular and funded. And they throw off a lot of commercial side benefits.

The growth of solar for domestic consumer power will certainly continue and that is a good thing. But I bet we’ll have fusion too in the long run. There’s no lack of ideas for interesting things to do with extreme amounts of heat and power. For example I’m hopeful that humanity eventually figures out space propulsion powered by fusion.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: