Comments by "Primmakin Sofis" (@primmakinsofis614) on "Lotuseaters Dot Com" channel.

@AoLIronmaiden That's why weapons exist. They're an equalizer (if used well, of course).
8
@SunShine-xc6dh Didn't know radioactive waste is clean... It's not clean, but it is far less of a danger than commonly thought. The biggest issue with radioactive waste is ensuring it does not seep into ground water, which is why the precautions for storing it are as they are.
3
The sun delivers more energy to the Earth in a day than all of humanity uses in a year. The problem is harnessing that energy. You can do it from the surface of the planet, but this is not particularly efficient. It is far better to locate the solar panels in space. Gerrard K. O'Neill was writing about this in detail in the 1970s. As long as humanity has this myopic view that we are stuck on the surface of the Earth forever, most of our potential for advancement is being wasted.
1
or Solar which unless you are in the Mojave it's pretty inefficient. Solar is excellent --- if you locate the panels in space. Then you can harness the energy 24 hours a day, and with no atmosphere getting in the way. The problems are (1) the lack of existing supporting infrastructure for such large-scale space development, and (2) getting that energy back down to the Earth. Neither problem is insurmountable, but they are a challenge.
1
@ReformedSauron However if we can replace our current nuclear reactors with FUSION ones my last hesitation about nuclear power would be gone. Sadly, fusion is probably a pipe dream. Splitting atoms is easy compared to fusing them, as the latter requires temperatures and pressures far in excess of anything seen outside the core of a star. Fission is something we know how to do, and have been doing it successfully for many decades.
1
@ReformedSauron Fusion will always be superior to fission and it looks like we're getting very close. We're not. Dig deeper into the recent announcement. When you factor everything in, the energy returned from the fusion was about 1% of the total energy put in. And it was a one-off, since it takes hours to recharge the lasers used in the experiment. For a commercial reactor, those lasers would have to fire multiple times per second, not once in many hours. Fusion is in all likelihood a pipe dream. A very enticing one, to be sure, but a pipe dream nonetheless. Splitting atoms is vastly easier than fusing them, and we already know how to do it well. All the money put into fusion is money not being spent on advancing fission reactor technology.
1