• Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 days ago

    Doesn’t seem particularly efficient to me… The sun burns hundreds of millions of tons of hydrogen every second. The amount of released energy we actually put to use is indistinguishable from zero, not 45%.

    • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      2 days ago

      I mean, that’s like pointing out that a coal plant isn’t very efficient because it doesn’t burn all the coal on Earth at once.

    • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      If we put it like that, every other energy source on earth begins that way and adds at least one conversion step.

      … except for fusion of course.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Exactly.

        Nuclear plants are probably the least efficient, because they required all that fusion energy inside earlier stars to build hydrogen into uranium, and we can only extract a tiny portion of that trapped fusion energy through fission.