| "green energy sector not making their minds up and flip flopping between solar/wind/fusion/etc" Since fusion does not work sustainable yet (or at all), I would not classify it as green energy. (Where is for example the tritium coming from?) But once it works - it likely will not magically supply all of humanity at once in a way, that is way cheaper than what we can have with wind, water and sun now. So why flip flopping? We use what works. If fusion really works soon, awesome. But honestly, I have to see, to believe. What I see is, that solar and co. are working now and do not require a fundamental breakthrough for very, very complex machinery under heavy fusion fire to work consistently. And desserts for solarfarming, we have enough. As well, as many, many roofes in the cities.
Solarfoils might be the next big thing to cover them big scale cheaply.
And stationary batteries can be made of cheap materials avaible in abundance.
Lots of other possibilities, too. Simple, reliable tech, compared to Fusion. So fusion would be nice to have, but I would not allocate more critical ressources to it, that might be better spend elsewhere. Sure, investing into the energy grid, sounds not as sexy and interesting as building a fusion reactor. But maybe that is, what is currently more needed, to make it more flexible for the fluctating renewable energy sources. And with the sun, we have already a big working fusion reactor. Why not focus on harvesting that energy more? |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tritium#Production