We have exactly 1 point of data. Do you know what you call making safety decisions based on 1 point of data? Idiocy.
For why, we need look no further than the stars themselves:
Turnur:
- Luminousity: 1.91
- Age: 4.597by
- Radius: 393,100 km
- Spectral Class: F9 VI
- Surface Temp: 6080 K
Ohide:
- Luminousity: 0.31
- Age: 3.637by
- Radius: 156,650 km
- Spectral Class: F9 VI
- Surface Temp: 6103 K
Barkrik (since this is now confirmed):
- Luminousity: 12.02
- Age: 1.106by
- Radius: 977,500 km
- Spectral Class: F9 VI
- Surface Temp: 6111 K
Barkrik, for example, is already throwing off 40x as much energy as Ohide. It’s 6 times the radius. If we were to look at just the volume, Barkrik’s 3.9 quintillion cubic kilometers dwarfs Ohide’s 16 quadrillion cubic kilometers of stellar material. And that’s without factoring density, which we know we should, because that much stuff has that much more gravity. Turnur, for the record, comes in at 254 quadrillion km3.
So what do those differences actually mean? We don’t know. It’s one of a long list of 'we don’t know’s involved in this technology. For example:
We don’t know if the Turnur incident reflects an average result, a particularly energetic event, or an incredibly minor event.
We don’t know if a larger, more massive star will be better or worse at containing whatever disruption occurs. Maybe the additional mass will re-absorb some of the energy and reflect it around inside the core the way light bounces around inside a star for thousands of years before making it to the surface. Or maybe the increased density will work to accelerate the event, like a concussion wave that travels farther and stronger through more dense material.
We don’t know if a more energetic star is more or less likely to even have this runaway reaction occur, or if creating the kind of cataclysmic reaction we saw in Turnur would, in a more massive star, take so much energy that the process would essentially shut itself down. If that’s the case, then that does that mean a smaller, less energetic and less massive star like Ohide is more susceptible to this kind of calamity?
We just don’t know.
We do know disaster is possible at 0.41 au. Is it possible at greater distances? Say, out to 0.8, if (for example) the harvester’s been operating longer, or deliberately set to overload? If Ohide goes sideways, does it release a smaller event because there’s less total energy in the system, or a larger one because there’s less stellar mass to act as insulation?
I think that information is all stuff the inhabitants of the temperate world of Ohide III, at 0.7au would like to know before this thing begins operation. Don’t you?