Comment on Startup Claims Its Fusion Reactor Concept Can Turn Cheap Mercury Into Gold
Sabin10@lemmy.world 2 weeks agoI read up on this the other day and their claims are 8 tons produced per gigawatt of energy consumed. Even if they manage a quarter. Of that, it’s enough to obliterate the value of gold. I doubt this will actuary go anywhere either way but it would be nice to see.
That’s an enormous amount!
Most of the value of gold these days is its use in electronics, and jewelery. I’m fine with it being made cheap and plentiful. Anyone holding gold (or gold-backed investments) as opposition to other types of investments is going to see a big loss, but that’s what they bought into.
antler@feddit.online 2 weeks ago
This article says (5 tonnes/yr) per GW produced. It's a fusion reactor, so it's making electricity, not consuming it.
At $0.05/kWh, 1 GWh of electricity is $438 million. At $3400/troy ounce, 5 tonnes of gold is $545 million. So that jives with the company's estimate on the article that the sale of gold could double their revenue.
All bunk, of course
captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
This is a fusion reactor, I’ll believe its making energy instead of consuming it when someone manages to get one to be net energy positive
antler@feddit.online 2 weeks ago
Sure - they're claiming to do two very difficult things simultaneously (net positive fusion and transmute mercury to gold at scale) which makes me even more skeptical. It's like saying "Not only can pigs fly, but we've taught them to simultaneously do calculus."
Steve@startrek.website 2 weeks ago
How much new gold is mined annually? Would this amount affect the price?