• SmokeyDope@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 hours ago

    “Dyson Spheres? Look, playing with sunlight and mirrors was a fun side project, but you want to know a much more advanced method of generating power?”

    “Please dont…”

    “Thats right! By hurling entire water worlds into a star, we then capture the released steam which powers our gravitationally locked dynamo network.”

  • Bluewing@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Reading the comments, it would seem most everyone here thinks that the usefulness of the steam is done when it gets used to turn a turbine at high pressure.

    The steam can be used for much more than once. In the 1800’s and early 1900s when steam ran trains and ships, they built double and triple expansion engines that took the energy of the steam two and three times before it was done. It doesn’t need to be one and done. And when the energy is done being harvested for power generation, it can used for other things. Engineers today aren’t dumber than the ones in the 1800s.

    I can remember a small rural Minnesota town that had their own coal fired electric plant. (Built back before the REA was a thing). They took the left over steam from power generation and then piped it to around 200 homes in the town and heated them with the leftover steam. While a bit costly to install, it was dirt cheap to run. Those homes lost all that when the power plant was shut down and they had to switch to either natural gas, fuel oil, LP, or electricity.

    So don’t get hung up on just the power generation. Think what could be beyond that point.

  • gmtom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    3 hours ago

    There are actually versions of fusion reactors that use the magnetic fields generated by the plasma in order to make electricity directly.

  • ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    I mean we’re all ugly bags of mostly water running around on a rock planet inhabited by living water beings of various construction, all ingesting and excreting water, and we’ve figured out how to use water (usually with fire) to make rocks do interesting things.

    So every time we figure out a new interesting thing for rocks to do, we’ll either do it with water or do it to water.

    Of course here in a bit we might make rocks smart enough to start doing stuff to/with rocks and fire, which might make all us water beings obsolete.

  • Prepping Energy Lab@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Fusion power will probably go the boring “heat → turbine” route for giant power plants.

    Ironically, the things that are most useful in real life tend to be much simpler — basic chemistry, easy to use, and they don’t care if the grid is down.

  • Spaceballstheusername@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 hours ago

    This isn’t necessarily true they could use the brayton cycle at the higher temps a fusion reactor operates at. So instead of making steam it would just be hot air. This is more efficient but might not be used or whatever reason.

  • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    5 hours ago

    There’s only 3 major ways to transform different forms of energy into electricity, which are:

    • solar panels (light -> electricity)
    • mechanical engines/generators (mechanical movement -> electricity)
    • electrochemical battery (chemical dipole -> electricity)

    there’s a whole lot more, such as thermoelectric generator and piezoelectricity but these are the three significant ones.

    note that i distinguish these categories by their core essence, such as whether they’re using changes in magnetic flux (like a mechanical generator) or transferring 1 photon on each electron (like solar panels), instead of looking at what source type of energy they transform.

    because there’s many ways to transform e.g. light energy into electricity. you could also heat water with the sunlight and then drive a steam engine with it. but that’s not what i care about. i care about the fundamental connection between different types of energy, and how they can be directly transformed to one another.

    • Test_Tickles@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 hours ago

      As if CO2 wasn’t bad enough already? Now I have to deal with it making snarky comments about what I wore to work today?

  • saarth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    8 hours ago

    With rising sea levels and general water shortages, why don’t we also use them as desalination plants?

    Surely there has to be a way to deal with brine, it’s just salt and water after all?

    • biggeoff@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Salt is absolutely terrible for any equipment involved in power generation. You’re better off with a power plant and a separate desalination plant than trying to use one for both

      But you’re right, cheap energy will help immensely with this

  • woodenghost [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    In Germany, funding for research is being cut alot. The solar cut happened a long time ago and fifty thousand jobs where lost at the time. Last year, they basically cancelled almost all battery research (needed for electric cars and stuff). Now, many more important stuff is being defunded. Except for fusion. Fusion is receiving a big boost in funding. Everyone and their dog are doing fusion research now

    I think, that’s not despite the famous “fusion constant” (fusion being always “only” thirty years away), but because of it. Unlike solar or batteries or anything else that actually works, fusion does not threaten to disrupt the oligopolies of the power companies, or the car companies or anyone else’s. It enables a wealth transfer (accumulation through dispossession) to companies involved in the research, without contributing to the crisis of overaccumulation, because no use value exists, so no value ever needs to be realized. It’s like building a pyramid in the desert.

    • KeenFlame@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Ofc a new fully renewable insanely powerful source of energy will disrupt the oligopolicies of the power companies. It will disrupt nearly every inch of society.

      • woodenghost [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        31 minutes ago

        Bombs are insanely powerful too and yet useless as an energy source. What matters is cost in cent per kWh. Fusion showes every sign of becoming very very expensive, even in the best case scenarios.

        Laser based fusion for example literally uses gold coated diamond pellets, hundreds of which have to be shot into the reaction chamber per second to even break even energyweise in theory. At that point, no energy is produced at all and costs per kWh are still infinit. And the lenses get destroyed so fast you constantly have to exchange them.

        Meanwhile both renewables and energy storage technologies continue to get cheaper and cheaper. Fusion faces barriers in engineering, fundamental physics and even in mathematics (modeling plasma is critical). Some of which might be insurmountable in principle. But in the end the one barrier that matters is the economic one. And no one even has a plan on how to tackle it expect for shoveling an insane amount of tax money into the fire indefinitely.