> Hyperloop case doesn't have 50 years of track record of being "just few years from now"
There have been steady incremental advancements in the field. I think your knee jerk reaction is coming from "cold fusion" which does have the problems you are talking about. Two very different fields.
The main issue with fusion is that it can't be weaponized and therefore doesn't have a nice military grant behind it. It lacks a Manhattan Project. It's probably always been "a few years from now" under the assumption of adequate funding.
The events following this announcement will probably be a good time to form a concrete opinion on fusion. It's being given a fair chance, so lets first see if it can prove itself.
This is promising stuff. Most of the other reactors have been Tokamak reactors - which are better suited to research and not practical applications, so we could be seeing some interesting results here.
There have been steady incremental advancements in the field. I think your knee jerk reaction is coming from "cold fusion" which does have the problems you are talking about. Two very different fields.
The main issue with fusion is that it can't be weaponized and therefore doesn't have a nice military grant behind it. It lacks a Manhattan Project. It's probably always been "a few years from now" under the assumption of adequate funding.
The events following this announcement will probably be a good time to form a concrete opinion on fusion. It's being given a fair chance, so lets first see if it can prove itself.
This is promising stuff. Most of the other reactors have been Tokamak reactors - which are better suited to research and not practical applications, so we could be seeing some interesting results here.