Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment That's always an expensive option (Score 1) 516

It requires a decent battery, and an inverter with the ability to run off-grid. Lead acids are cheap but short lived. Lithium phosphates are still expensive. The inverter/charger combo is much higher priced than plain grid-tying.

It only makes sense if you aren't already on the grid, since paying for a new line to the property has it's own hefty price tag.

Comment Fusion hasn't warranted the spend (Score 1) 608

Because it's such a big undertaking, nobody, until recently, has ever even tried to get fusion to work at the scale required to prove it.

The cost meant it was easier just to put off till later.

Fission's got a number of issues but the biggest by far is stupidity of designing and building inherently unstably reactors. And then continuing to use them without fixing the problem!

Again, it comes back to the bean counters. When the spend is warranted, then they'll act. If the cost of disposing of the old fission reactors/fuel and rebuilding with new inherently stable designs can be shown to be cheaper than leaving the existing ones in place then it'll happen. This situation is a good example of why to get it right first time around.

For the time being, sadly, fossil fuels are cheaper. Hence the drive to start accounting for the cost of pumping so much carbon into the atmosphere.

Slashdot Top Deals

DEC diagnostics would run on a dead whale. -- Mel Ferentz

Working...