By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Rath on 16 September 2011
Edit Thread
Silver-Tiger said:
Rath said:
Silver-Tiger said:
Marks said:
Cool but I'd rather never get to the point where this is necessary. Enough sunlight hits the Sahara desert to power all of Europe. We should be getting more into renewable energy to stop burning gases.

Also I want to see Hydrogen fuel cell cars like the Honda Clarity (as seen on Top Gear)


...or we could just build 2 or 3 cold fusion reactors to power the whole earth. Sadly, we probably won't see these kind of reactors until 2030 at the earliest.


Cold fusion is non-existant at the moment and most scientists don't believe it is even possible.

Normal fusion reactors on the other hand are famously always fifty years away from being commercial.

heck, I would be satisfied if they even manage to build normal fusion reactors. Both are very similar anyways. Both produce unbelievable masses of energy with very little danger involved.


Cold fusion would have the unbelievable advantage of not taking the energy of several nuclear bombs to get started. They've built fusion reactors but they take a certain amount of energy to get started and they can only run for a certain amount of time (because magnets cannot perfectly contain the plasma) - up until now the energy to start the reaction has been greater than the energy collected from the reaction. ITER should be the first energy positive reactor, hugely expensive though. ITER will probably cost twice what the LHC did.