5 Comments
тна Return to thread

Consider the sun. Consider how dangerous it is even at 93 million miles away. And you want to reproduce a bit of that on the surface of the earth? Even the process of trying to hold a bit of that insanely hot plasma in place is absurd. Why do it, when we already have an efficient reactor which produces enough power for all our needs.

Expand full comment

The sun is the least efficient reactor imaginable. Approximately 0.00000005% of the Sun's output reaches Earth; the rest is entirely wasted.

Expand full comment

So? That would be relevant if we had to build or maintain the sun. But we don't. That tiny percentage that reaches Earth is enough for all our foreseeable needs. To forego using it for this reason would be inane; if that's not the argument, then the percentage is merely an irrelevant datum.

Expand full comment

You claimed the sun's efficiency was relevant, not me.

Expand full comment

From our point of view, it is efficient. Remember that we don't have to build or maintain it. That makes it remarkably efficient. It's already there; no effort needs to be expended to keep it running, it's fairly reliable,, and it will last for millions of years. We can't even use all of the power it gives us, let alone what goes elsewhere. The datum you presented is the smallest and least significant iota of a measure of its efficiency.

Expand full comment