From the information I've seen so far, it looks like this thing is larger in size to Jupiter, but not nearly as massive, and orbiting at a phenomenal speed. How is it, then, that it stays intact? That is, why is it still a discrete planet-type-thing that can block sunlight instead of flattening out into a ring or just dissipating altogether? I don't really know much about planetary physics, but it seems to me that something that insubstantial moving that fast has got to have some serious drag on it, even in a near vacuum.
Or, conversely, is it possible that these values indicate an error in measurement or assumption?
It seems to me that the problem of energy usage will not be solved by "cleaner, cheaper power" alone. Far more important, IMO, is the reduction of power usage across the board. Increased efficiency helps at all levels -- what's the point in having a brand-spanking-new fusion plant down the street if I'm still paying an arm and a leg for all the power my equipment draws?
No matter what, power needs will increase -- it's a function more of increasing population than of technology. Thus, an emphasis on reduced power consumption is a very important parallel to research into new power sources. Besides taking some of the pressure off, this approach will be far more useful to those people who won't be able to afford fusion plants even when they are possible.
The second problem that occurs to me is the increasing centrality inherent in these plants. Building fusion plants means that one facility can power maybe millions of homes. Which means that one technical glitch or terrorist attack can knock out power to more people.
I've always been a fan of more distributed systems. Combinations of technologies -- wind turbines, solar power, natural gas, gerbil wheels -- can be arranged very skilfully for a system with greater redundancy and reduced complexity that can greatly alleviate the need for fusion power.
It's easy to sound like a nut when suggesting courses of action like this, but it's really pure practicality. Expertise in more distributed forms of power production will be applicable to a wider range of situations. Further, there is no such thing as "clean" power. Right now we've decided that coal power is too polluting to continue to use much longer. When fusion power becomes a reality, then more people will consider fission plants to be too polluting to continue using. What happens when the consensus is that the smaller radiation from fusion is too much? Will there be another expensive search for new technology? Or will we have a mature back-up plan?
Slashdot Mirror
Or, conversely, is it possible that these values indicate an error in measurement or assumption?
No matter what, power needs will increase -- it's a function more of increasing population than of technology. Thus, an emphasis on reduced power consumption is a very important parallel to research into new power sources. Besides taking some of the pressure off, this approach will be far more useful to those people who won't be able to afford fusion plants even when they are possible.
The second problem that occurs to me is the increasing centrality inherent in these plants. Building fusion plants means that one facility can power maybe millions of homes. Which means that one technical glitch or terrorist attack can knock out power to more people.
I've always been a fan of more distributed systems. Combinations of technologies -- wind turbines, solar power, natural gas, gerbil wheels -- can be arranged very skilfully for a system with greater redundancy and reduced complexity that can greatly alleviate the need for fusion power.
It's easy to sound like a nut when suggesting courses of action like this, but it's really pure practicality. Expertise in more distributed forms of power production will be applicable to a wider range of situations. Further, there is no such thing as "clean" power. Right now we've decided that coal power is too polluting to continue to use much longer. When fusion power becomes a reality, then more people will consider fission plants to be too polluting to continue using. What happens when the consensus is that the smaller radiation from fusion is too much? Will there be another expensive search for new technology? Or will we have a mature back-up plan?