>>295666It's not that I think that stuff is pointless (where did you pick that up in my post anyway?), more like there will be some clear energy density limit even with miracle tech - and in a lot of ways, it's gonna limit the progress in a way of putting a clear "impossible" tag on many projects, like IDK, perhaps highly efficient recycling would become impossible for example (chemistry to achieve be too complex and energy intensive).
>ever heard of wind and solar btw?Their environmental impact is still significant when they are everywhere but that wasn't even the point
Also parts of that tech still require non-renewable resources, though I heard they made some decent sodium battery recently at least
I'd still probably go with something like solar/wind because they are a bit more democratic (than nuclear power which would require lots of work and expertise to establish) but they will also be more geographically restricted which kinda sucks if you are not in those areas.
Anyway the thread isn't about that even. I think you raise a valid point about massive facilities dumping heat possibly causing environmental degradation, though they could be causing it somewhere "safe" like far away from humans and all life for example (underwater facility impact would likely be negligible though it's probably possible to ruin something that way as well) - like perhaps they could launch these things into space even lol.