where should I invest my money if I think fusion energy will be a thing in 10-20 years?boomer stocks seems to be the best place to go but I do not know which companies or etfs focus on fusion energy development
Fusion will never be a thing. The roadblocks are too big for it to ever be economical.
>>62298098>flight will never be a thing
This "nuclear engineer" is being pushed on all social media, I can't go a single day without seeing his face now. Now you are even posting it on MY /biz/.What did they mean by this?
>>62298032>where should I invest my money if I think fusion energy will be a thing in 10-20 years?You basically can't. All relevant companies are private.
>>62298032China leads global deployment via the Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics (SINAP). Their experimental TMSR-LF1 reactor in the Gobi Desert successfully demonstrated the world's first active addition of thorium to a running MSR. Scientists confirmed they successfully bred Uranium-233 from thorium in an active liquid loop. They are using these findings to build a larger commercial demonstration plant.Commercial Startups: European companies like Copenhagen Atomics are actively building small, containerized, modular thorium reactors designed for factory mass-production to slash nuclear energy costs. In the US, companies like Flibe Energy are researching thorium MSRs utilizing government-surplus plutonium as the ignition driver.India's Three-Stage Plan: India possesses some of the world's largest thorium reserves. The country's Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) at Kalpakkam achieved first criticality, unlocking Stage 2 of their energy roadmap, which will ultimately use fast-breeder reactors to convert their massive thorium supply into a primary power grid sourceThorium molten salt reactors are the future
>>62299788>china leadslol no that's all paper tiger propaganda
>>62300301China and Copenhagen The US was doing thorium reactions in the 50’s but stopped because it doesn’t produce weapons grade uranium like other ways. We’ve had this tech for almost 80 years you stupid fuckKekRead a book once in awhile faggot
>>62298210Flight was created because of extreme pressure of WW II. The world is equivalent exchange, bullshit fusion energy cannot exist the way they market it.
>>62298032Why is he wearing safety glasses? so he doesn't get beta emitters in his eye? absolute fucking queer i bet this faggot is afraid of neutrons
>>62302230This just isn’t true
>look inside thread>chinese propaganda
>>62300301>>62303190samefag
>>62303195Incorrect. Also, Xi Jinping looks like Winnie the Pooh.
usable Fusion energy generation is probably not impossible, but is definitely infeasible. Also, why bother when you can have limitless fission generation?IF (strong on the if) Fusion becomes a thing, it will be long after your lifetime. The key issue here is that fusion is basically an H Bomb so you need to be able to start the chain reaction, maintain the chain reaction, and control the chain reaction. So far, only the first step has been done. To harness the energy, you need to do the other two, without reinventing the sun.Instead - buy URAN etf. If you want a good "flyer" individual stock, go with LTBR.I am way over invested in LTBR (avg price ~$5) but think now is a good time to buy, as they are doing their irradiation testing on their fuel right now and should start getting results in the next few weeks, with final results in the fall/winter. If all goes as hoped, the stock should triple at minimum. If it fails, they still have about $5/share in cash and no debt, so you should still be abke to get about half your investment back.
>>62298032https://www.energystartups.org/top/fusion-energy/USA/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_fusion_companies
>>62298032Fusion energy disrupts too much sectors that Jews are currently profiting trillions on and for that reason will never be allowed to exist. Pretty much everything that is awesome that we thought we’d have by now is being repressed because of greedy Jews
>>62298098>economicalthe materials exist, the value is there it will get made. economics are bullshit fugazi
>>62298098Wrong new magnet technology has shifted fusion from a science problem to an engineering problem which means we will have the first commercially viable plant within 5 years.Ironically ITER took so long to build by the time its finished it will be almost completely irrelevant, just like most of Europe.>>62302230>Flight was created because of extreme pressure of WW IIYeah its not like we have extreme pressure for clean energy production today or anything.
>>62303411>start the chain reactiondone>maintain the chain reactiondone for 10mins.>control the chain reactiondoneThere is no chain reaction. Very easy to control.
>>62298098>The roadblocks are too bigWhich ones?
>>62303706if you say so... but if so, why has this been the case for 75 years with no real advancement or replication?
>>62303731The very backend of the equipment is like from the 1980's leftover military/DARPA tech so whenever they decide on upgrading that then maintaining the chain reaction should be easier/profitable. They instead focused money R&D on the reaction portion itself instead of the sustainment.
>>62303731>why has this been the case for 75 yearsIt hasn'tWe went from milliseconds of sustaining plasma 75 years ago to 22.3 minutes just last year.
>>62303764was there net energy generation?
>>62303779>was there net energy generation?Yes obviously.
>>62303779You know, when a mommy deuterium and a daddy tritium love each other very much...
>>62303784not obviously.my research shows that the energy used to fuse the atoms is greater than the energy produced from said fusion. Can you point me to the documentation that says that the sustained fusion was net positive?Fusion is still 30 years away (as it has been form 75 years)
>>62303813Alright. MCF has only been demonstrated at Q=0.67 but scaling up solves this -> less surface area per plasma volume.
>>62298032Soon it will be 20 years since I first saw the line that physicists always claim that fusion power is only 20 years away
ASPI, they well benefit greatly from the Li-6 blankets that will be needed. Most brainlets here don’t understand that neutrons need to have a comfy blanket or they don’t work
>>62299788That's fission, not fusion. Fission is a no-brainer for future energy. Fusion, on the other hand, is really hard and will probably not be a viable energy source in your lifetime.
>>62298210>antigravity rocket belts will never be a thing!
>>62303654>Yeah its not like we have extreme pressure for clean energy production today or anything.We don't.Didn't you just watch the UN and everybody else walk back their "climate change apocalypse" bullshit in the last couple of weeks?
>>62298032Only one public fusion stock. OTC ticker: AMFN.
>>62304862Is it any good?
>>62305157Yes. It's a front for reverse engineered ayyy tech. CTO and engineers are form US ONI/ONR.
I have plasma instability warning that is 4x Princeton's best invest in me
>>62301889>China and Copenhagen>The US was doing thorium reactions in the 50’s but stopped because it doesn’t produce weapons grade uranium like other ways. We’ve had this tech for almost 80 years you stupid fuck>Kek>Read a book once in awhile faggotfactswe couldve been living in the space age back in the 50's
>>62305176Idk I don't believe that. Their tech seem sketchy.>aneutronic fuel>direct electricity conversion>website full of stock imagesThat's all a bit too good to be true.
>>62305157They have a woman CEO.
>>62305560>AMFNNo wait, that was the OTHER 'green energy' stock they were shilling
>>62303721Blanket tech is still very experimental and seems incredibly inefficient to replace/refuel compared to fission.Plant designs are heading in the direction of being extremely expensive. Even if everything works, building a plant will cost orders of magnitude more than a nuclear plant because everything will be bespoke. Costs only come down when assemblies can be iterated (i.e. you build the same plant over and over again).
