a fun fact: for the most efficient mass energy conversion, you need a huge spin black hole (preferably naked). Then you can get about 42% conversion. (there was a minute physics video about it i think)
The mass-energy conversion from chemical processes is extremely small compared to nuclear processes, you can’t really compare the in any meaningful way
What do you think fusion research is?
Just a fancier way to spin turbines with steam
Fancier or more efficient?
Studies in how to make a more efficient kettle.
I mean, you’re not wrong… XD
There’s a possibility of using the plasma directly for inducing electrical current, actually.
But then yeah, probably steam with whatever’s left.
now that would be revolutionary!
15 years away from a useful result
a fun fact: for the most efficient mass energy conversion, you need a huge spin black hole (preferably naked). Then you can get about 42% conversion. (there was a minute physics video about it i think)
Existing nuclear energy, too.
No where near perfect mass conversion…
Max theoretical mass-energy conversion efficiency is under 1%
that’s still waaayyyy more efficient than coal
That is a different level entirely.
The mass-energy conversion from chemical processes is extremely small compared to nuclear processes, you can’t really compare the in any meaningful way
yes you can. coal costs ~32 cent per kWh, and uranium ~$0.0015 per kWh
We were talking about the mass-energy conversion, for nuclear fusion.
Not really sure how nuclear fission Vs coal cost/kWh is relevant.