• Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    Uranium generates that energy by fission. The hydrogen in sugar could generate huge amounts of energy if fused.

    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      And this boulder could generate huge amounts of energy if I pushed it up to the top of Mt. Kilimanjaro and let it roll down.

      44 upvotes and 0 downvotes for a comment that doesn’t understand that energy density measurements like this tend to measure the useful energy of a system.

      • WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        It figured out photosynthesis instead. Why do your own fusion when you can just take advantage of the fusion that’s already happening?

    • Redex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      Whilst I get your point, their point is still valid in the sense that you just can’t extract that energy from gasoline in a more efficient manner than just burning it. For practical purposes, gasoline truly is that much less energy dense.