this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2026
227 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

82087 readers
4304 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

We need better propulsion methods than Helium...

...but we don't exactly have other lighter than air alternatives.

[–] fluxx@mander.xyz 2 points 1 hour ago

Well, there's hydrogen, but that has its own downsides. Like it's a bit explody, for example.

[–] kokesh@lemmy.world 8 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

tRump will shit himself (again) when he sees this!

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 1 hour ago

Fly one over the White House, and another over Maralago.

[–] NinePeedles@sh.itjust.works 81 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

While in the US our brilliant leader is trying to reopen old coal mines.

[–] ramenshaman@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

That being said, there are American companies that have been working on flying wind turbines for quite a while.

We have working models. The difference is the Chinese can say “make it happen”, and they do it. In the US they say, “Gimme lots of investment capital and how can I profit massively off of this?” so it goes nowhere quick.

Maybe we should call them “AI power dirigibles” and people will put some money into it.

[–] oyzmo@piefed.social 35 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

Helium is a non-renewable substance which there is a global shortage of. I wonder how much it takes to lift that thing 😅

[–] recked_wralph@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Not once we get fusion reactors up and running, then we’ll be drowning in that sweet sweet helium-4

[–] Blade9732@lemmy.world 21 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

Wouldn't hydrogen be better for lifting something like a wind turbine.

[–] ramenshaman@lemmy.world 13 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Yeah, that's what the folks who designed the Hindenburg thought as well.

For an autonomous platform with some sort of safety mechanisms for jettisoning the air bag if a catastrophic failure occurs, hydrogen does in fact sound like a way better and less scarce lifting gas.

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 1 points 1 hour ago

Nah, it's perfect!

[–] GreenShimada@lemmy.world 16 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Not necessarily. It's not about the boom factor alone - hydrogen is a small atom, and so under pressure, most commonly used materials are permeable to it. It leaks through every material. It really takes something as solid as steel pipes for hydrogen atoms to not work their way through and escape. So while hydrogen would be cheaper to produce at scale, it's also constantly leaking out of any container.

For wind turbines, static electricity and storms would be huge risks as well, so the application of a floating wind turbine would not be ideal.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 8 points 5 hours ago

Even with steel pipes you get problems with hydrogen embrittlement because hydrogen diffuses into the steel and can cause it to crack.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 4 points 5 hours ago

Helium does a pretty good job of that too.

[–] oyzmo@piefed.social 31 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (2 children)

Yes, but I think hydrogen likes to go bang 🧨💥

[–] bus_factor@lemmy.world 28 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

No worries, that only happens if there's a spark, like for instance some static electricity. Shouldn't be a problem here, surely this thing won't generate any of that.

[–] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 hour ago

Wouldn't this still need to be tethered to the ground? Would that likely have grounding cables?

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 12 points 10 hours ago (1 children)
[–] porcoesphino@mander.xyz 12 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

"Skytanic" was a great episode of Archer. For anyone that hasn't seen it, the running gag is that Archer thinks the non-flammable helium is going to explode the blimp they're on leading to things like this slap

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 5 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

"What part of this you're not getting?"

[–] porcoesphino@mander.xyz 5 points 5 hours ago

"All of it, obviously!"

[–] BussyCat@lemmy.world 6 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Helium may not be renewable but we can manufacture it from things like boron

[–] trolololol@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I need someone to explain the joke. Waiting 100,000 years for radioactive decay seems to be a bit boring as a punch line.

[–] sneezycat@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 hours ago

It'll be really funny in 100 000 years.

[–] yakko@feddit.uk 3 points 7 hours ago

I did not know that

[–] ileftredditforthis@lemmy.world 16 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

People in the UK, mainly the coffin dodgers mind, bitch about how ugly wind turbines are they’d loose their shit about these. They seem to prefer the beautiful and discreet electricity pilots it seems.

[–] ClockworkOtter@lemmy.world 15 points 9 hours ago

Oh no, they don't like pylons either. They just want coal plants in poor people's gardens and subterranean power cabling.