Aardvark Daily

Please visit the sponsor!

Forget fusion generators

It is interesting to note that China now outspends the USA in its investment into fusion reactor development.

As this WSJ story reports, China is spending around US$1.5b a year, roughly twice the amount the USA invests in the development of this technology.

However, we must now surely question the need for this investment or for the fusion-generated energy that success would allow.

Am I serious? Surely fusion-based energy is the holy grail of mankind?

Imagine -- almost unlimited power with virtually no toxic waste and from a fuel source that is significantly cheaper than any other we've found to date.

Well guess what?

As I've mentioned in previous columns, we already have a very nice fusion reactor that's been continuously delivering energy from way before mankind even crawled from the primordal ooze.

Yes, I'm talking about our closest star -- the sun.

It has so many benefits when compared to man-made fusion energy.

It's safe (the effects of excessive UV radiation and global warming notwithstanding), it requires no maintenance or fueling by us, its projected livespan likely well exceeds that of mankind and it's effectively free.

I'm sure however, that many readers will be thinking -- yeah, but... but... but, as the struggle to come up with counter-points to this argument.

The reality, right here and now, is that the sun is already providing more fusion-generated energy than we can use.

I wrote a column a month or so ago about the way Australia is effectively taxing those who have excess solar generation due to an over-supply into their power grid. Well they're not alone.

In the USA, California has taken a similar stance and removed its subsidies for solar systems because they've already got excess supply and no way to store it or use it.

It strikes me therefore, that instead of spending billions of dollars a year on trying to reinvent the fusion wheel that we'd be far better off investing that money in coming up with better ways to store excess solar energy for use when the sun isn't shining but the demand is high.

At no time in the forseeable future will fusion reactors be cheap and plentiful but effective energy storage technology could be -- if we invest sufficient money in funding its development.

I have to wonder whether the reason governments would rather spend billions on fusion reactors that would result in a very centralised energy system with everyone highly dependent on whoever owned and operated those generators because it gives them control. You can imagine the effect of every household and business becoming energy-independent and how that would deprive governments and corporations of the power, control and profits they currently enjoy.

Although investing in energy storage solutions would be the logical and obvious solution to the problem, it's not the most commercially or politically expedient way to keep the rich rich and the poor poor is it?

Or maybe I'm just old and jaded when it comes to the motives of politicians and large corporations. At least my mind is open enough to consider that very real possibility.

Carpe Diem folks!

Please visit the sponsor!

PERMALINK to this column

Rank This Aardvark Page

Change Font