Nuclear fusion?

A recent question from a student about nuclear fusion will be answered shortly in this blog:

"It’s an old joke that many fusion scientists have grown tired of hearing: Practical nuclear fusion power plants are just 30 years away — and always will be."

(https://news.mit.edu/2015/small-modular-efficient-fusion-plant-0810)

I am not so pessimistic about nuclear fusion, but we have to be realistic.

It will still take a long time until nuclear fusion will be a part of our energy mix.

Eventually, it will work. Nuclear fusion is a part of our nature, and as so many scientists are working tireless to solve and understand the science behind this chemical/physical process, it will be and can be done.

Furthermore, progress in computational simulation advances this research area further.

However, once the fusion energy factor will be greater than 1 (ratio of fusion power produced in a nuclear fusion reactor to the power required to maintain the plasma in steady state; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_energy_gain_factor), the question of the Life-Cycle-Analysis has still to be answered. Huge amount of energy is needed to create the magnets, for mining the metals............................. .

In this sense the ITER project showed already a huge problem:

"At one of the most critical time in its history, leaders of the ITER fusion project are struggling to find a way to keep the project on track as schedules slip, costs rise, and budgets tighten. The project’s management last year put forward a revised schedule and cost, and the council of representatives from its member states asked a panel of independent experts to review them. Yesterday, the council met in special session to hear a report of the panel’s conclusions. The report—which has been seen by Science—concludes that, while the new schedule is feasible (powering up the reactor in 2025 for the first time), the extra funding needed to achieve it (€4.6 billion) is too much to hope for." (http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/04/updated-panel-backs-iter-fusion-project-s-new-schedule-balks-cost)

Thus, once nuclear fusion is practical possible, we have the second big challenge, finding a more cost and resource efficient solution. Otherwise the CO2 emission (and other green house gas emissions) will be to high for this novel energy source.

As usual, big projects are like dinosaurs, they consume a huge amount of money, resources, and the process of negotiating decreases innovation. Small projects with dedicated and enthusiastic scientist, who love to push the border, can be very useful. Projects like - https://trialphaenergy.com/ or http://www.tokamakenergy.co.uk/further-info/academic/ - are extremely important. They challenge the status quo of nuclear fusion research and open new gateways.

In summary: Indeed, it will take time until nuclear fusion will be realistic, and it will take even more time until it will play a role in the energy mix. The comparison of life-cycle analysis with other energy resources will then be crucial for the practical success. Nuclear fusion is a wonderful possibility, and research in this area is exciting.

Of course, our financial and energy resources are not endless. Consequently, we cannot set everything on one card. Research in nuclear fission, solar and wind energy should be promoted at the same time, this might slow down nuclear fusion research.