I don't think technology has anything to do with it... it's all about fear and politics, and potential customer base.
Technology lags well behind because of politics and fear have held it back in this country for decades. I’m saying it’d be nice if someone took it on despite these overblown fears and rabid politics.
The technology lags behind where it could be, but it's nearly moot because the public fear won't let us implement the advancements we've already made. The real leap will be when we have a fusion power plant, but God knows when that will come.
Technically, its already been done. Its just extremely expensive and inefficient. The tokamak reactors can generate a fusion reaction for a period of time, but they take a ton of energy to only output about as much power as a car engine. The problem probably lies in funding. Most of the general public probably couldnt tell you the difference between fusion and fission if you put a gun to their head and think it will be akin to making a nuclear bomb. But hey, coal.
https://www.sciencealert.com/spacex...yload-designed-last-millions-years-tesla-arch Hopefully they left out all the movies in which we whoop alien ass. That'd be just asking for a fight, if aliens happen upon the Arch.
Even then, though... who would buy it? As a business, where's the market? Everything else he's done has an end-consumer benefit to it... even SpaceX. As much as he wants to go to Mars, he's still got the individual consumer in mind: https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/4/15539934/spacex-satellite-internet-launch-2019 But with nuclear power, who's the customer? Where's the pay day? Where's the business plan? He's putting his money into individual power grids with the PowerWall and the Solar Roof... he's putting that power into the hands of consumers, not having them rely on the grid or politicians. As much as it's cool tech, I just don't see nuclear power really going anywhere. Safe nuclear power has been available for decades... https://cna.ca/technology/energy/candu-technology/ We're using it heavily here in Ontario with the Bruce power plant. There are just too many stupid people out there who don't understand nuclear power as something that is safe... I don't think it's the technology that is holding it back.
Where’s the end user market for safe clean energy? That’s light years ahead of renewables as far as efficiency? What am I missing here? My original point is that it’d be nice if someone like him breaking with convention (in this case convention being the public at large’s unfounded fears of the technology in the first place).
By that I mean a net-positive fusion reactor of commercial scale. We have the technology to control a fusion reaction (see: tokamak, other examples) We have the technology to create a net-positive fusion reaction (see: Tsar Bomba, other cold war dick waving) The hard part is getting a net-positive reaction under control.
It’s the word. The word “nuclear” still scares a lot of people who don’t know much about the power generation aspect. When they hear nuclear they think Chernobyl, they think thee mile Island, they picture the atomic bomb scene in T2: Judgement Day. But Three Mile Island didn’t actually happen, and Chernobyl was a cavalcade of incompetence coming together in a perfect storm. That, and they won’t look into using CANDU generators. You’re right about Bruce. I know people who work there and it’s a highly successful place with a great track record. They all make insane salaries sans hard work to boot. You would think more would read into CANDU reactors but hey, who needs safety with low cost that you can refuel without shutting down?
What is the status of the spent fuel from the CANDU reactors? Is it safe to bury in the ground or is it something that needs to be stored somewhere safe for 10,000 years? A nuclear reactor is only one part of the safe energy problem.
Kind of cool...using a normal camera...a photo of a single atom. (The tiny dot....for scale, the two electrodes are 2mm apart.
What an incredible milestone... and not even a blip on most news stations... only some sensationalist "OH MY GOD THE TESLA HE LAUNCHED COULD CONTAMINATE MARS WITH A VIRUS!" and "HE'S LAUNCHING TOO MANY SATELLITES AND IT'LL CAUSE SPACE JUNK PROBLEMS!" What the fuck is wrong with people?
Due to weather, they didn't send the drone ship out or recover the first stage. But, they did do the re-entry and landing burns for the first stage. Meaning . . . did they just splash it into the Atlantic? Does it float and they recover it later? Or, does it just sink to the bottom?
From what I saw last time, they tried to basically splash it "gently" into the ocean, and then they have a tug that will tow it back to port. They also have a "catcher mit" of a boat that they're trying to use to catch pieces that are re-entering. https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/22/17039860/spacex-falcon-9-payload-fairing-mr-steven-net-catch https://www.instagram.com/p/BfgHKDNAplx/?utm_source=ig_embed
Not sure if you've heard yet, but Elon showed up at SXSW this year. Turns out he's friends with the creators of Westworld, so they teamed up and did a trailer for the Falcon Heavy mission: He also did a quick interview:
First time I had seen a clip of the main rocket missing the drone ship. Gotta imagine they still consider that a success given that they were **this** close to the target.
I remember reading that this was the first time they released that footage. Apparently it was nudged just out of the way of the barge at the last minute after the retro failed to fire... it's "still under investigation" by SpaceX. It was very cool to see what a full-on "plummet from space" entry into the ocean looks like.