The old joke, “Fusion has been just around the corner for 40 years..” still applies, but recent developments continue to fan hopes. But 2030s sounds wildly optimistic.
Stanford clean energy advocate Mark Jacobson is not a fan.
The United States will work with other governments to speed up efforts to make nuclear fusion a new source of carbon-free energy, U.S. Climate Envoy John Kerry said Tuesday, the latest of many U.S. announcements the last week aimed at combatting climate change.
Nuclear fusion melds two hydrogen atoms together to produce a helium atom and a lot of energy—which could be used to power cars, heat and cool homes and other things that currently are often powered by fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas. That makes fusion a potentially major solution to climate change, which is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. Still, fusion is a long way off, while other clean technologies like wind, solar and others are currently in use and could be increased.
“We are edging ever-closer to a fusion-powered reality. And at the same time, yes, significant scientific and engineering challenges exist,” Kerry said, in Dubai for U.N. climate talks. “Careful thought and thoughtful policy is going to be critical to navigate this.”
Below, I spoke to Dan Kammen a few years ago, before the recent flameout of Nuscale’s small modular reactor project, and he gave an assessment of fission and fusion that still mostly holds.
He finishes with an assessment of fusion that looks beyond his lifetime.
Big Business making Big Investments in Big Ticket solutions that won’t come online for years and may not be a solution but … there’s rubes to fleece, money to be made
Exactly!
I’ve been looking into the finances of nuclear new-build in England and France, and my conclusion is that it IS NOT and CANNOT BE competitive with renewables.
Indeed, the only logical reason I can find for continuing to pour money into these behemoths is that they make pots of money for a handful of multinationals and their shareholders – free money, since all the upfront costs are foisted onto the tax-payer.
Moreover, business plans are transparently phony, based as they are on assumptions about capital returns extending sixty years and more into the future. Who can guarantee that degree of stability in a world on the cusp of massive climate disruption?
See also above: https://climatecrocks.com/2023/12/15/this-keeps-happening-uk-nuclear-project-off-rails-over-budget/
Why are we wasting time, investment and resources on some complex fusion-driven thermal power plant when we need to spend the money on something that will reduce emissions as soon as possible?
Fusion-based thermal power plants would have the same cost-overruns, schedule delays, operator skill requirements and deferred carbon payback as new fission thermal power plants, and it isn’t anywhere near real-world functionality yet.