Yes, but most of the time that fusion reactor is behind a giant hunk of iron covered in various other matter. Even when in the sky, the sky itself is an effective insulator that only allows 1/4 of the energy through.

That's why we are considering placing a converter above the sky to more efficiently pierce the sky with energy.

"Even when in the sky, the sky itself is an effective insulator that only allows 1/4 of the energy through"

https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Solar_energy_to_the_... Demonstrates otherwise. About 30% is lost to the atmosphere, 70% reaches the surface.

Oh, I remember it being a much higher factor but I must be mistaken.

Towing the converter outside the environment is something I can get behind.

I always liked how NASA realised in 1970 that the moon is a sandpit of fusion-converter material. It's such an awesome reason to build houses above the sky.

It would take far more energy to extract the 3He from the moon's crust than you could get fusing it.

The moon is high in silicon. You can make solar panels from mostly moon dust. Then build solar panels in orbit which are 4x the power generation of sea level panels and they experience less shading.

True enough. But by the time that could be fielded, our energy problems will already have been solved, or civilization will have collapsed.

I agree with you relating to our existing energy problems. However I expect that humanity will be attempting to use as much energy as it can possibly create for at least the next 1,000 years.

I hope we have a bright future growing into space, creating a Dyson ring, orbital habitats, etc.

Replacing our current use of fossil fuels has plenty of strong ground-alternatives. I like the idea of Thorium salt reactors for base load, hydro stored energy and lots of local wind and solar.

I support moving all the smoking buildings outside the environment also. Then many of them can use the fusion reactor directly, with the aid of mirrors and lenses.

I hear there's nothing out there but sea, birds, and fish. No environment in sight.

(for the uninitiated: https://youtu.be/3m5qxZm_JqM)

Or simply pumping water uphill.

The UK is building two of these pump uphill things. Four more and it could sustain a 99% carbon free grid on solar and wind alone.

The UK already has 4 pumped storage plants

True, but existing plants are small in scale and arent really meant for large scale storing of solar and wind power like, say, Coire Glas.