Why are Liberals/Green-Nuts to terrified about the prospect of fusion power?

Why are Liberals/Green-Nuts to terrified about the prospect of fusion power?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=KkpqA8yG9T4&t=3861s
archive.4plebs.org/_/search/subject/knowledge bomb/username/anonymous5/tripcode/!!9O2tecpDHQ6/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

They are?

sweetie, liberals just care a lot about the environment. yes, it doesn't leave as much of a footprint, but then you got the nuclear waste, Chernobyl, Fukushima. and we don't want christian terrorists blowing up reactors, snookums.

Fukushima?

It made an entire state of Japan unlivable.

Because they're afraid of actual progess

Those are nuclear powerplants, not fusion power

>Fusion
>Fission

tfw those incidents were only caused by human ineptitude

Okay flufferkins so how much nuclear waste is produced from fusion butternuts and how many christcuck terrorizer attacks have you seen compared to mudslime ones candynipples?

Fusion involves fusing two hydrogen atoms into 1 helium atom. Nuclear radioactivity comes from Uranium splitting into a radioactive isotope. There are no radioactive Helium isotopes.

it'd put the chinese green-power industry out of business. can't have that.

Why don't people know the difference between fussion and fission. Fucking Mongs

>Doesn't know the difference between fusion and fission products.
This is why you lost.

Fission is radioactive, not fusion.

/thread

Fusion fission its all the same nuclear waste!

It's almost like you shouldn't build reactors in places where there are earthquakes and tsunamis.

None of those were nuclear accidents?

In fact, I don't think there has ever been a nuclear power plant that has gone critical?

Fusion would be awesome, but it's still too expensive.

See

I don't know. I am a liberal green nut and I love fusion power. It would be clean, cheap, limitless - it would be a solution to pretty much everything on Earth, from lowering the high birth rates in Africa to better air in cities to stopping climate change.

youtube.com/watch?v=KkpqA8yG9T4&t=3861s

This is a superb discussion on the tokamak work done at MIT with breakthrough magnetic field coils - stronger magnetic fields means smaller tokamak designs which means faster development at lower costs... and eventually hopefully commercially viable power plants.

...

>This is why you lost
umm sweetie no. we won. by 3 million votes.

Because the general lefty mind thinks nuclear = bad.
This means that when you try to talk about nuclear fusion they automatically think it's bad, without even understand what it is and how it works.
So yeah, ignorance.

chernobyl did.

Nah, that was a pressure explosion. Sure, it plumed radioactive material into the stratosphere, but that's not nearly the same thing as a nuclear core meltdown.

People are so stupid when approaching nuclear energy.

1. Fission plants HAS always been a cover up to weapons production. Its correlation is 1:1. Japan was starting their own from zero in Fukushima.
2. Fission is expensive to take it as commercial energy.
3. Fission waste storage will cost +10^100 GDP because their decay takes centuries (depending on material most will still be radioactive when sun makes earth atmosphere gone).
4. Investigation on fission and new models should can be taken in a fraction scale of what a regular plant is, just to test the schemes.

5. Fussion havent improve in decades. Its funding is small. Doesnt have small scale experiments to improve models.
6. Fussion COP up to this day is so low that for you to use then exclusively will pay x40 what you already do in your energy bill.

7. Nuclear energy WILL never replace the oil explotation. Oil does more than giving heat, its used in tonnes every minute to produce plastics, CO2, roads, composites, chems.

Liberals don't want to make the world a better place, they want to talk about making the world a better place.

If the world's problems were actually solved, then all these profession activists on the left are out of a job.

Okay sweetpoo,thanks for the information babeheart, but how does this all play into the drumpf narrative niggernookums?

Pic related you and your coal burning wife

Never heard a single liberal/green-nut oppose fusion.

It's always the right-wing nuts who think it will create a black hole or some retarded shit like that.

If you're talking about nuclear meltdowns, the Fukushima disasters was 3 nuclear cores that went into meltdown.

>Even though my king is in checkmate, I still should've won because I have more pieces than you

there were two explosions. the first was steam pressure, the second was when the core went critical.

>fusion power?
It has been twenty years into the future for 50 years. Liberals and greens simply are not stupid enough to believe in fairytales.

Alpha particles are literally helium ions. I appreciate the enthusiasm for fusion power but it still generates secondary waste man.

>Fussion havent improve in decades. Its funding is small.

Maybe not on your side of the Atlantic....

Don't you think it's more important that we provide basic infrastructure like power, roads and running water to impoverished communities in African nations that we destroyed through imperialism and colonialism before we start worrying about building fucking fusion reactors in our own needlessly overdeveloped, rich, western cities?

wtf I don't even...

...

is this the one with the weird looking magnets that were designed by a supercomputer?

bull shit.

If there were a nuclear explosion there wouldn't be a building left.

Yes.

IIRC it's the most complex machine ever designed.
All segments are unique because it follows the natural flow of the plasma rather than trying to fit the plasma into a nice even donut.

I think automation is more important than fussion. the COP improved slightly and that model was done in the mid 60s.

With automation widespread, we can accelerate the planned reproduction question. Will regulated genetics and quantity, the energy demand will be reduced. Followed by AI widespread in design we can reduce resources lost as production waste to up +30%.

That gives earth another endless golden era and enviroment breath to focus time and production in "fussion" and other alternative energy

it's true. wasn't powerful (equivalent to a truck bomb), but the chernobyl core did explode in a criticality event.

No

Fusion still produces radiation, just on a smaller scale compared to fission.

Here's an image to illustrate the difference with the more common (and much simpler) Tokamak design.

They don't actually want clean energy, they want to tax the shit out of companies in the name of the environment.

because once the fusion reactors are up and running liberals/greens will lose any relevancy, same as their paymasters.
Oil economy will collapse, renewables will collapse.

At one end, the Republicans are Pro-oil and petrodollar economy . The Democrats, on the other hand, are Pro-renewable and climate economy. Nuclear and fission/fusion threatens their bottom line.

They're afraid of anything nuclear:
- nuclear fission
- nuclear fusion
- nuclear family

There's ways to reduce waste by replacing uranium with thorium, but once gen IV reactors start being commercially available, nuclear power will be a ridiculous resource capable of being built underground and drawn upon to charge power grids and stores on demand autonomously. We could always balance with manned fast reactors if waste is really an issue. No one talks about nuclear often because it is mostly R&D stuff that most lefties can't understand regardless

Oil will NEVER collapse. Holy shit you guys are clueless. Even if someone discovered tomorrow a groundbraking model, followed by a design reactor the next day, completed construction of 1000 of them the next week.

The demand for oil will grow. The less energetic use oil is given the more opportunity to companies to use them as chem, derivatives or new-locally produced plastics. Oil and chips are the base of modern era.

This. We will never again be divorced from industrial hydrocarbons.

Liberal Green Nut here. I dont mind Nuclear or Fusion. All i care about is that they are done safely without cutting corners.

If that can be accomplished, go for it. they produce way more power on much less land than solar or wind, which could be less environmentally destructive.

I thought MIT was lost to the SJW cancer?

*the price will go down, but the demand will only rise

Thorium? Cant be weaponized and provides all the benefits of nuclear.

Every nuclear power plant goes critical. The term you are looking for is super critical.

imagine tokamaks in cars, future = glorious

>us ecucation

If it cant be used to produce weapons grade Pu then the gov will not pay for expensive energy they already do in "green energy"

They wouldn't be able to siffon money for lousy projects with zero return rate, we would have working plants that the market could invest in, not the government.

>I can't into US-History due to feels.

(((They))) would never let that happen.

The Oil Moguls (who would fear losing their primary oil using product) and the Green Barons (who could no longer tax the shit out of the peons for a profit) would unite under sch a threat.

Because it proves them wrong and will allow actual human progress, which they want to avoid at all costs.

BS, oil is used for plastics, burning oil and gasoline like fuel is retarded. Oil should be used for plastics and lubrication.
I'd say coal producers should be more scared, cause coal's only usage is fuel.

>coal's only usage is fuel

you need coal if you want to make steel.

Cause it was invented by whites, it's been developed by whites and whites are the first to successfully launch tokamaks. Non-white countries like China, Mexico, Japan are developing tokamaks, but nobody is as far as the UK(ST40), Germany(Wendelstein X-7) and ITER.
Fusion power shows white superiority and liberal shitters hate that.

How many tonnes, though, I doubt it is even 1/100 of usage as fuel. I mean look at China.

FEM(Free Energy Machines) are better. Thousands of them are sitting in underground warehouses.

archive.4plebs.org/_/search/subject/knowledge bomb/username/anonymous5/tripcode/!!9O2tecpDHQ6/

Because they have mostly invested in solar and wind energy, not nuclear energy.

Fusion power doesn't make Al Gore any money; solar makes Al Gore lots of money.

Hmmmm...

Coal can be used as a petrochemical feedstock.

i have no idea how much tonnage of coking coal is needed for primary steelmaking but you're probably right. the fact remains that as long as we use steel we're going to have mine coal to produce it.

there just isn't any easy way to divorce ourselves from hydrocarbons even assuming we replace all fuel sources with green/renewable/alternative sources.

fuck off, frank.

>Nuclear energy WILL never replace the oil explotation
Nuclear energy will never replace oil, even after we run out of oil

Hi Frankie

Fukushina and three mile island went into meltdown.

That'll happen when u let the grave stones vote and they convinetly chose you.

Fusion reactors could be blown up and the only danger is shrapnel. There is no radioactive waste.

Sup Forums we must educate the masses on the difference between the two F words of the energy world.