Futurology

1801 readers

56 users here now

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

A new NASA study seems to pull the plug on space solar power, by saying its vastly more expensive than Earth based solar. (www.thespacereview.com)

submitted 9 months ago by Lugh to c/futurology

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You probably want a comparison to something other than fusion, which is and seemingly will forever be 20 years away.

It can make sense also, for example, in parts of the world that aren't a good fit for solar power. I'd argue for more nuclear before space solar, but it's not like there's zero sense in it.

[–] Windex007@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Despite being perpetually "20 years away", I still think we'll crack it before we run out of room on the planet for more solar panels.

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It can make sense also, for example, in parts of the world that aren’t a good fit for solar power. I’d argue for more nuclear before space solar, but it’s not like there’s zero sense in it.

wild how people literally can't read more than one sentence before replying.

[–] Windex007@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I thought based on your first sentence which implied fusion was a pipe dream, that the second paragraph suggesting "more nuclear" would be referring to fission. "More" implies some already exists, and as you've already noted, there is no fusion in use.

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

before we run out of room on the planet for more solar panels

I'm responding to this, there's potential uses outside of "we ran out of room on earth"

It can make sense also, for example, in parts of the world that aren’t a good fit for solar power.