[jacknews]

It's never going to be useful.

D-T fusion is not as clean as is touted, and the economics just aren't ever going to make it viable compared to ever-cheaper solar, wind, batteries/energy storage, etc.

Better fission designs OTOH are worth pursuing, and also deep geothermal, and maybe one or two of the CCS options though they seem a bit greenwashy.

[sdwr]

15 years ago, solar and wind looked stupid expensive compared to fossil fuels.

[palata]

Don't forget that solar and wind today are still heavily relying on fossil fuels. So they get better in a world where we have abundant fossil fuels. And still their contribution today to our energy needs is marginal.

[jacknews]

It's a tautological argument: The current energy mix is 90% fossil, it takes energy to make solar panels, therefore solar panels are made of 90% fossil.

[palata]

> It's a tautological argument

It is not at all what I meant.

What I meant is that there is a need to go past that, and it is not clear that we are capable of doing it. It's great to say "wooooow, photovoltaic increased 1000% last year, McKinsey estimates (with the dumb uninformed extrapolations they love to do) that in 10 years it will have replaced all energy", but if you are serious, you should acknowledge that it is still the easy part.

I am not saying "it is not possible", just "think about it: it may be harder than expected".

[thfuran]

But they didn't look like they were guaranteed to be that way forever.