[dale_glass]

But there's far easier solutions to that than fusion.

For example, HVDC. Interconnect and buy power from somebody with more sun. Or just overbuild solar by a lot. It's cheap, so chances are having too much of it still works out economically.

[Tuna-Fish]

> HVDC

Sorry, no. Our recent experiences during the energy crisis caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine showed us that we cannot trust energy sources outside our own borders.

> overbuild solar

The effective sunlight in November in Finland is measured in single-digit hours per month. That's not a joke, or an exaggeration. Solar is completely out of the question.

Right now, the only carbon-free solution is fission. Fusion potentially adds another, but that's far off still.

[dale_glass]

> Sorry, no. Our recent experiences during the energy crisis caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine showed us that we cannot trust energy sources outside our own borders.

You could trust Sweden, Estonia, etc. since they're all in the EU. Also Norway. But overall good point.

> Right now, the only carbon-free solution is fission. Fusion potentially adds another, but that's far off still.

I've never been to Finland, but I'm sure there's some wind there too.

But on the subject of war, fission turns out to be a huge vulnerability for Ukraine. Fusion would be better but it'd still be extremely expensive infrastructure that could be very easily disabled. So from the war standpoint what's probably most beneficial is a very distributed usage of wind/solar.

[Dylan16807]

> You could trust Sweden, Estonia, etc. since they're all in the EU. Also Norway. But overall good point.

Your neighbors have winter at the same time as you. HVDC only solves this problem if it goes very far.

[Tuna-Fish]

> You could trust Sweden, Estonia, etc. since they're all in the EU. Also Norway. But overall good point.

No. I wasn't just referring to loss of supply from Russia. What I was referring to was that when supply from Russia was lost, every country in the EU scrambled to secure their own supply, essentially competing on who could fuck over their neighbors the most. (It was Germany. Germany wins that prize.) No supply outside our borders can be trusted.

> I've never been to Finland, but I'm sure there's some wind there too.

Finland is subject to a weather phenomena where a stable anticyclone forms over the country, resulting in a high-pressure system that's essentially still. In winter, this can result in weeks of dead calm during the coldest temperatures experienced in the country. We already have a lot of wind capacity, and whenever this happens the electricity prices spike sky high.

> But on the subject of war, fission turns out to be a huge vulnerability for Ukraine. Fusion would be better but it'd still be extremely expensive infrastructure that could be very easily disabled.

We are a NATO member, and we have our own long range strike capability. If Russia directly attacks, Moscow will burn, which is why they likely won't. But Putin likes to play these hybrid games, where he tries his best to fuck over everyone without directly attacking.

[AnthonyMouse]

> For example, HVDC. Interconnect and buy power from somebody with more sun.

Who is Japan interconnecting with, or any other country that doesn't trust its neighbors? What is Canada supposed to do when it's ~6000 km from the equator and might not want to rely on the US for electricity regardless?

> Or just overbuild solar by a lot. It's cheap, so chances are having too much of it still works out economically.

Solar is cheap per kWh but those kWh come disproportionately in the sunnier months of the year at any non-equatorial latitude. To build enough for January you'd then have oversupply and a price of zero for the nine months out of the year when you have the most output, requiring you to make back the entire cost in the three months when solar output is lowest. Then you're only getting paid anything for e.g. 12.5% of the kWh you generate (the 25% of the months that have 50% of the average output) which means you need the price during those months to be 8x the average price you need to break even, but then you're not cheaper than existing alternatives. And that's before you even deal with nights or cloudy winter days.

It obviously makes sense to use solar to reduce the need for natural gas plants during hot summer days with a lot of air conditioning demand, or for charging electric cars that can hold off a couple days if it's cloudy. It equally obviously doesn't make sense to try to generate 100% of electricity from the same intermittent source whose output is regionally correlated by season and weather systems.

[laurencerowe]

> What is Canada supposed to do when it's ~6000 km from the equator and might not want to rely on the US for electricity regardless?

Most Canadians live quite far south. Toronto is on the same latitude as France’s Mediterranean coast and they of course have plentiful hydropower. Solar is surprisingly useful even in more northerly places like the UK or Denmark since it is anti-correlated with wind power.

[AnthonyMouse]

> Most Canadians live quite far south.

"South" in Canada is still north. Calgary (third largest city) is almost 6000 km from the equator. Toronto is the major city furthest south and it's still almost 5000 km.

> Toronto is on the same latitude as France’s Mediterranean coast

Europe is also quite far north. The Mediterranean has warmer temperatures because of ocean currents carrying warm water from the south, not because of its latitude. Toronto is at the same latitude as Wisconsin.

> and they of course have plentiful hydropower.

They get a little over half from that. You still need something to do the other half.

[LargoLasskhyfv]

> Who is Japan interconnecting with, or any other country that doesn't trust its neighbors? What is Canada supposed to do when it's ~6000 km from the equator and might not want to rely on the US for electricity regardless?

With space. By space-based solar power instead of HVDC.

[leonidasrup]

I would really love to see your per kwh costs estimates. It currently costs about ~$2,700 to launch 1 kg of mass into orbit.

https://spacenexus.us/guide/space-launch-cost-comparison

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power#Launch...

[LargoLasskhyfv]

Your link has 100 to 500$ per kg to LEO for Starship as target.

How much is one mile of HVDC?

Err, and where? Chinese HVDC? Canadian? US? Yurop?

Think of all the needed metal and area vs. a few fields of 'rectennas' to reinject the beamed down microwaves as energy into the already existing grid?

[leonidasrup]

We have currently only one long term, scalable, low-carbon, low material requirements energy storage technology: nuclear fission power plants.

In 50-100 year we will have another energy storage technology: nuclear fusion power plants.

[willis936]

Let's be fair here, we're trading one megaproject for another.

[dale_glass]

Yes, but we're trading a research megaproject that might not ever live up to its promises when it's done in 30 years, for a boring megaproject we can start right now and that will very quickly start producing power.