MoreGull OP t1_ja8xo9y wrote
Reply to comment by spacetimeguy in The Case for Callisto by MoreGull
Solar energy would still work on Callisto, though, like you say, it would be weak. But all the hydrogen fuel you need is right there on the surface...
rksd t1_jab1zke wrote
In the form of water which you need to crack which takes energy.
bluestraveller42 t1_jabu7i0 wrote
Then to extract energy from the hydrogen you can either burn it ( just recombine with the oxygen you just dissociated from) or put it in a (fusion) reactor.
rksd t1_jabvua8 wrote
I forgot about the possibility of fusion but that seems like a later on mission since we haven't even cracked practical breakeven fusion here yet.
schnazzychase t1_jacow6y wrote
There actually have been successful experiments in fusion that result in a net gain. The news just doesn't talk about it.
spacetimeguy t1_jacs8y0 wrote
Sorry, I can't let this go unchallenged.
The "news" reports on net-gain fusion all the time.
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/nuclear-fusion-breakthrough-energy
https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/nuclear-fusion-reaction-us-announcement-12-13-22/index.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-60312633
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nuclear-fusion-60-minutes-2023-01-15/
​
What they don't report is that it's a false measure based on the energy of ignition while ignoring the energy of containment. Here's the best video I know of to explain it.
rksd t1_jad7x4c wrote
I'm aware which is why I used the word "practical". When we have a city of say, a million people getting most of their power from a fusion reactor then I might get chubby about the prospect of us operating a fusion reactor the better part of a billion kilometers from here.
MoreGull OP t1_jab2b0p wrote
Indeed. A self contained nuclear reactor.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments