this post was submitted on 12 May 2025
32 points (100.0% liked)
GenZedong
4560 readers
74 users here now
This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
- No bigotry, anti-communism, pro-imperialism or ultra-leftism (anti-AES)
- We support indigenous liberation as the primary contradiction in settler colonies like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel
- If you post an archived link (excluding archive.org), include the URL of the original article as well
- Unless it's an obvious shitpost, include relevant sources
- For articles behind paywalls, try to include the text in the post
- Mark all posts containing NSFW images as NSFW (including things like Nazi imagery)
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Isn't that what was said about nuclear power in general?
And I find it extremely hard to believe, that millions of moving actors/parts, scientists, and companies all over the world would be investing in something specifically for power generation, if it wasn't viable.
The fact that the only serious investment comes from governments implies quiet the opposite, that it's really only useful for scientific research.
I think it's still incredibly useful for research! But that's it.
I wonder if it's just so far outside the scope of what capitalists know to risk model that it's not a compelling bet. The "it's 20-50 years on" timelines are also a hard sell.
If you win by delivering a reactor, you unlock so many knock-on effects.
Does your business immediately get subsumed on national security grounds? Does a massive reshape of the energy market cut off your current gravy trains? How do you monetize "too cheap to meter"?
Researchers don't care. They're in it for the cool project.
Oh, this one is easy.
You make it illegal for anyone else to do fusion and charge rents because you own the patent.
The same can be done with solar and places where you attempt to set up panels being blocked by local government. The amount of solar needed to actually steadily run a household is pretty huge. Manufacturing/industrial-wise it's not exactly feasible compared to nuclear.
So? My point was that fusion can be monetized. The fact that solar can also be monetized is obvious, I think.