← Back to context

Comment by hallgrim

7 hours ago

Not really? How do you define efficiency here?

Thermonuclear bombs literally create lots of heat, and don’t tend to drive anything that produces work. It’s the opposite of efficient.

Just like lighting gasoline on fire and claiming that that’s more efficient than a combustion energy…

I’m talking about net energy. Harnessing it is a whole different story.

  • Not really making nukes take a ridiculous amount of energy and you only get to use it once where the energy to create ITER gets split across its operating lifespan.

    Further fission here requires a fission first stage which represents a huge additional energy input.

    • GPT pro says 3 to 30x energy release compared to the entire supply chain input for a megaton class weapon.

      I trust the argument. You can look into it yourself. Long story short, it is massively energy positive compared to controlled fusion.

      1 reply →