AlanSE
I'm into deep future concepts, and have always dreamed about this sci-fi kind of open question. I will tell you that it is categorically not possible until the Opus or Sol level.
It took a few tries, but it has now returned to me a result that gives fuel cycle closure for this problem. That's a big deal to me.
What the heck is this problem? Imagine that the year is 2150 AD, and you are running out of Deuterium you harvest from the upper atmosphere of Saturn. Options like Helium-3 from the moon are far too small in abundance. If you can directly get energy from proton fusion, you are master of the Milky Way. The mechanism to do that is well-know, you fuse protons into Carbon, Nitrogen, Oxygen isotopes like how a star does it. But can you do it outside of a star? This idea (original AFAIK), is to use Deuterium mixed with other fluids in the fuel cycle (15N) to compress the target in a multi-stage thermonuclear detonation. There are a lot of problems, but the main that makes this "not impossible" is: can you do this and still produce surplus isotopes for the pusher fuel? On the speculative level, answer is "yes". This comes with a specific scale, which is a fuel ball <500 meters, blast chamber size of Earth. Room for improvement, but a great start.
This is a ferocious problem. It's a pleasure to be able to run the numbers on it.
Design of 1 TWe Fusion Power Plant
I don't know about that, because long-range transmission significantly reduces the intermittency, even for the same longitude. It's not just about smoothing out the curve of solar production, demand patterns (due to weather, industry, behavior) will also have variations from place-to-place and these allow opportunities for power export.
Some places will have more dispatchable and expensive power plants than others, which also creates an export opportunity so that power is exported so that one country can burn less fuel. However, I admit this argument is slightly undercut by the question "can't we just build solar panels in the country with dispatchable dirty power?" True, but there's also a connection to wind power which is super local and random.
I could still see this being something "new" but not a true superconductor. If you read the link, there seems to be some kind of discovery brewing, but the original discovers may not have understood what they found.
If these room-temp superconductors pan out, it will be dumping gasoline on the funding fire for new fusion attempts. Given less than a year from scientific verification, fusion will go red hot.
Imagine that my mind like a glider. Glider is connected to a Cessna by a tether, but it's a magical tether that can disappear. In fact, it takes me active work to keep it connected, like I'm holding on to the end of the rope with my hands. The plane takes off and I'm following in lockstep about the main subject matter... looking down at the landscape below, to the left, to the right. After a quick climb, and at velocity, I've forgotten about keeping tethered, holy crud, I'm in the air! I want to bank, dive, maybe loop! What's over here? I can catch a thermal and go on forever depending on the landscape, but still often see more appealing currents and need to switch over. Oh wait, where did the plane go?
The equations all seem to be matrix operations with a fixed number of rows / columns (you can take me as a real layman here). Unless you change that, I don't understand _how_ you can reduce memory needs. Granted, I'm probably putting my foot in my mouth not understanding transformers.
I am also operating on old information, perhaps the law changed and this it varies by state now.
I've been ready to buy a house for few years, but I've realized I'm no longer happy with the whole package. I want to realistically be able to walk or bike to get a dinner, coffee, or groceries. Yet, city centers (in the south for sure) tend to offer the most dangerous roads for doing this, and unhealthy environment, and poor social atmosphere.
I'm sensing that there are more people on the sidelines (who have remove jobs, after all) who are ready to buy into better neighborhoods. These people may not be willing to give up their cars, but there is negotiating space, and it is relevant that these are people who have economic clout to force the issue.
Depending on the conditions, if you're doing day-night energy storage, then you would like to fill up the H2 tank and then burn it when demand ramps up.
The only role I see for methane is when your H2 tank is already filled up but your solar panels are still producing. This is not just possible, but deterministically required whenever solar gets deployed enough for seasonal storage to be necessary.
Right now California is something like 35% solar + wind energy, and the "duck curve" is nearly maxing out. This was predicted in extreme specificity 20 years ago, as >30% and you get stuff like zeroed-out energy prices during the day. We have not solved the day-night (daily) energy storage problem, which only requires storing energy for a matter of hours.
When you go to something like 60% renewables, then even crazier stuff happens. Overproduction during sunny times goes bananas and (assuming daily storage is solved, which it isn't) seasonal issues start to arise. I don't think H2 will ever work for seasonal storage, although I think it's fine for multi-day storage scenarios. It's not theoretically impossible, I just compare to the equivalent that we have for natural gas and realize you would need MANY TIMES that level of investment to save the same amount of energy in H2. Plus, fossil fuel gas producers are mostly at a constant level, whereas solar production outright needs summer-to-winter storage.
What I don't buy is that these units will be disconnected from the grid and be economical by their gas products. No way, no how. What you want is to run the chemicals plant with low-voltage solar power locally, and trade-off with the grid as is economical.
Companies should market based on using "traditional" non-toxic materials (still modern and industrial, just not absurd), and consumers can respond by giving their business.
https://ncpfastnetwork.com/data
And that's what you're asking for, but for the state of NC. I presume a similar path can be taken for other states.
This allows basically going "I live in XYZ city, so my total PFAS is 50 ppt". What you do with that information is unclear. Share on Facebook?
> Why aren't we forcing the polluters to pay for the cleanup
Because then the manufacturing goes to China. It doesn't get cleaner, it might actually get worse. The pollution goes somewhere else. Economic anxiety (which is politically explosive, see 2016 election) goes up domestically.
What we need is effective regulation, not bureaucratic us-versus-them regulation. We need more engineering spending and less legal spending. And as a consequence, yes, we need fewer choices in consumer products and higher prices, and we need consumer safety laws that prevent offshoring from undermining all of that.
I laughed on the inside a bit when I considered the fact that a public library existed just a few blocks down from the library of a large public university. But this was my youthful ignorance. Anyone could walk in the university library and open a book (well, you could at that time, not so sure about anymore) but you had to have a school ID card to check out a book or access the computer system.
Before cell phones, I visited libraries traveling around the coast. The computers were 100% taken. There was a line to get one, and the librarian directed us to a scheduling system. These were people who needed to use a computer and the internet to apply to a job. Access was scarce, low-quality, and competency to use those tools were lacking.
Nowadays, cell phones have mostly taken away that niche of the past. I'm not sure if or why the people there still need the libraries.
CCTVs in cities are a big political topic. For corridors that people walk through often, this is much more effective for facial recognition and you don't have to power propellers or deal with crashes. The camera will operate for a decade without incident.
For overhead algorithmic surveillance, just use satellite photos. I fully expect that sat swarms in LEO surveillance will become a thing in my lifetime. Sure there are clouds, but the whole thing is imperfect, the goal isn't to track you 100% of the time and they don't need to anyway.
For persistent surveillance, drones are good for what exactly? Periodically peeking in windows? How many windows would a drone need to look in on a patrol? Can you fly them low enough to actually do this? On a regular route at that, my god.
I'm very worried about tracking with facial recognition and systematic location collecting based on cell signals and satellite car tracking. But this article was about a drone catching people smoking weed after a busybody called 911. The tech is a very marginal sideshow in that story.
While there is an abundance of creeping excesses with tech and policing, the slippery slope argument got completely lost here.