This past week, the Biden Administration held a major summit on the promise of nuclear fusion energy, while the Department of Energy (DOE) simultaneously launched a new agency-wide initiative to promote the technology. Nuclear fusion is a process by which atoms are forced together to create new and heavier ones, in the process releasing energy. It is the same process that takes place in the sun and in other stars, and stands in contrast to nuclear fission, which involves splitting atoms. Fission is how all nuclear power plants currently work that create commercial energy across the globe.
The Biden Administration sees fusion as a potential source of carbon-free energy to help meet its goal for the U.S. to become a net-zero emitter of carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. Fusion energy is controversial, however. Some claim that it won’t be commercially viable for decades. Others think it may never be. Nevertheless, due to the intermittent nature of renewables like wind and solar power, some backup energy source is almost certainly needed if these technologies are to become dominant. Moreover, if fusion works as its proponents claim, it could play a far more expansive—even revolutionary—role in society.
An engineer stands next to the world's most powerful magnet as it is delivered at the international ... [+]
There are some reasons to be optimistic. For one, several major breakthroughs have occurred in recent years, including in a DOE lab that momentarily created a laser-induced burning plasma (coming close to so-called “ignition,” whereby the reactor begins powering itself) and in a Chinese plant that maintained a fusion reaction for 17 minutes at 158 million degrees Fahrenheit.
These success stories highlight how, although the technical obstacles are indeed significant, they are gradually being overcome. In fact, the greatest barriers to clean and reliable fusion energy may not be scientific, but social. Consider, for instance, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) being built in Saint-Paul-les-Durance, France. A collaboration between 35 countries, construction was recently halted by French regulators who took issue with several barriers meant to control radiation.
The ITER reactor isn’t expected to come online until 2025, and that might be optimistic if regulatory and construction delays continue. Even when the facility opens, it won’t be used to produce commercial energy. Rather, at present it is solely a scientific endeavor.
Nevertheless, the market appears optimistic about the sector’s prospects. According to the Biden Administration, $2.5 billion was invested privately in 2021 alone. As a next step, we are likely to see countries setting up their own experimental reactors. A major report last year from the National Academy of Sciences recommended the United States do just that. But even on the most aggressive schedule, commercially viable fusion energy may be a decade or more away.
As the sector plods along, government officials should be preparing now for the inevitable man-made challenges that will stand in the way once all the technical hurdles are overcome. There are two in particular worth noting.
The first, already mentioned, are regulatory obstacles. Wind and solar projects are learning the hard way that, ironically, environmental regulations often stand in the way of progress, adding years of delays and millions of dollars in additional cost to projects.
Second, and equally important, is public perception of new technologies. Wind and solar farms are relatively pleasing to look at aesthetically, and even still they meet stiff resistance from NIMBYs who don’t want these structures obstructing their natural landscapes. The perception issue will be even more critical for a fusion reactor given fears (whether well-founded or not) of radioactive contamination or meltdown.
Questions about the pace of climate change are one reason why government officials are putting support behind a technology that many members of the public might express hesitancy about if viewed in isolation. Fusion carries risks, to be sure, including the possibility of leaked radiation, radioactive waste, and nuclear proliferation. That said, most experts claim there is far less radiation released with fusion compared to a fission plant, and fusion doesn’t carry the risk of a runaway meltdown scenario, like fission does.
Indeed, when reading about nuclear fusion, one gets the distinct impression that if this this technology pans out, it will resemble the stuff of science fiction movies: a potentially unlimited energy source that produces little in the way of radioactive byproducts. However, even if this vision can be demonstrated to be scientifically achievable, expect progress to be slow. The economics of nuclear fusion, including whether it can compete against the plethora of other alternative energy sources out there, is an open question. Moreover, to thrive, regulatory obstacles must be cleared away, and a culture of acceptance must be nourished through education, most likely far in advance of any rollout.
A potential power source that for years has been thought to be decades from viability may be closer to reality than we think. The Biden Administration is right to be including nuclear fusion into its mix of clean energy solutions. The question now is not just whether scientists can make it work, but if as a society we will allow this technology to flourish once the scientific questions have been put to rest.
