Sgt- I think the idea of restricting the capacity of fusion power is a wise call. That said, I am not sure if I agree with what you are saying about bio-fuels although the concern of having teams trying to spend way too much time collecting the materials for a bio-fuel could be problematic for a game. And while I agree that bio-fuels in the US has been difficult, other countries use a variety of bio-fuels more effectively. Brazil has been utilizing fuels based on sugar cane for awhile and Mauritius utilize a sugar derivative for much of their power.
As for batteries- you are probably right that long-life batteries are probably still a long time coming and so we have a stronger move towards hybrids. But I would think that more advanced generations of battery power (as well as bio-fuel) is perhaps a bit more realistic than fusion power. That said, I am no physicist so perhaps I am dead wrong.
Agreed- building a wind farm or solar farm when the country is supposed to be recovering from a nuclear war doesn't make a lot of sense. But it is a longer-term goal that the project probably should be thinking about- especially if the fusion power isn't long-lasting. Rebuilding civilization will require energy development. Depending on the campaign, that might be the broad goals of a project- developing and harnessing energy given the difficult landscape at play.
So far, I am liking Kato13's ideas on this, although I probably wouldn't go much further than regional fusion plants that can be utilized to charge vehicles powered by long-life batteries. This would put pressure on teams to recover regional bases, require some defensive thinking around certain fixed but strategically vital assets and force to operate closer with local communities.
|