Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be

Re:Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be by sfifs on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @01:39PM (#14205179)

The danger is political risk, not necessarily theft or vandalism. Any dependency on territory not under your own societal control can be used to hold you hostage and cannot be depended upon.

Forget the solar farm, easiest is to cut power lines. (explosives?)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be by lucaspiller on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @04:01PM (#14206449)

Europe imports around 30% of its oil and gas from Russia. The pipelines between the east and west were originally setup during Soviet times.

Given how stable that has been it seems unlikely that a small African country, who will be getting a big chunk of cash from Europe, would do anything stupid.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be by gsnedders on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @05:56PM (#14207407)

They haven't been perfectly stable, though. We've seen since 2005 a few cases of oil and gas prices surging upwards as part of the Russia-Ukraine dispute (in 2005, 80% of all gas from Russia to the EU went through Ukraine).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be by theptip on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @07:22PM (#14207917)

Europe is currently highly dependent on Russia's natural gas for their electricity; I don't see this as worse. Indeed, better to diversify your power imports.

(Better still to generate locally, but not every country has the land available to do so).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_in_the_European_energy_...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be by ekun on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @06:29PM (#14207622)

So we resolve all regional conflicts and unify the world under one country. It's not hard.

[ Parent | on HN ]