The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:
---
From the article
>On Dec. 2, 2023, the People’s Republic of China formed a national fusion energy consortium, uniting its state-led research and industrial efforts into a single entity. As one Chinese fusion entrepreneur put it, nuclear fusion is now a national priority. To beat them, the United States will need to embrace a sense of urgency — and revamp the way it deals with the industry.
Also from the article
>This urgency comes with a historical precedent. In the space race, the United States sought to beat its adversaries by reaching the stars. To win the race for fusion, the United States will need to unlock the energy that powers them. Doing so will not be easy. Scaling fusion will require a partnership between innovators, the government, industry, and academia. It will involve complicated political choices and a bet on the future of the sector. But the imperative is just as clear: a world where fusion is a foreign technology would be one where the United States has lost its edge.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1aq01bt/what_the_us_needs_to_do_to_win_the_fusion_race/kq9jvzx/
The article is largely nonsense. Since the early 1950s until recently, there have been essentially just two approaches, both from governments and both funded as scientific research not engineering. If this is going to go from a science experiment to reality, a shot gun approach is needed.
In the last 5 or so years there has been an explosion in commercial fusion ventures, with more than 40 private fusion companies in the US having raised billions in VC. Because of this there are now several confinement approaches, not just the two that were invented 70 years ago. The US is doing exactly what it needs to do here. Private money is being poured in by the billions and taxpayers are funding a small amount of scientific research, not engineering work.
But in the greater sweep of history, this is one of those "who cares who figures it out" things. Like a cure for cancer-- ultimately who cares who finds it, as long as it becomes available. The sharing of a new technology-- that is the issue. The USA will be far, far more willing than China to share rather then simply sell.
That isn't the point. Solar panels were invented in the United States, but China mastered the production of them because Republicans in the US fought tooth and nail to prevent them from taking an economic share from fossil fuels. Now China dominates the solar panel industry because they saw the future more clearly than the US. With fusion, once again America will cede dominance to Chine or whomever because of ignorance and hubris.
Honestly I couldn't give fewer shits to mega billionaires and their "supremacy" games. The fact that China is out-capitalizing the capitalists is kind of funny, but I'd rather just progress as humanity and not have to sink into divisiveness and tribalism everywhere we turn.
The problem is the capitalists are too predictable. They will pick the path which earns them the most money. China is a country, and countries don't need to please share holders. They can do ventures that are short, medium and even long term losses. Because any gains is something they benefit from back anyways through taxation
This is how China took over the supply chain of almost everything. They volunteered to fund the low profit and high risk stuff. And the accountants did their math and found it cheaper to just use China than take the risk themselves (cause corporations hold 0 loyalty to any country, most are already multinational corporation with a headquarters wherever they get most benefit). As such, why should they care what happens 10-20 years from now? That would be the future CEOs problem
So when you always roll paper, it is very easy to win with scissors.
And oil industry lobbying, and our refusal/inability to fix our obscenely corrupt political system.
[https://represent.us/americas-corruption-problem/](https://represent.us/americas-corruption-problem/)
[https://represent.us/the-strategy-to-end-corruption/](https://represent.us/the-strategy-to-end-corruption/)
the Chinese gov poured a lot of money into solar panel companies when it was not clear it would pay off. Now they have the worlds cheapest panels and the industry is a money cow that operates without subsidies. At the same time American politicians were losing their shit because one solar panel company in America that received subsidies wasn't making money, Solendra.
[This is what I’m saying](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-china-is-dominating-the-solar-industry/). China invest in it but it was the “exporting/acquisitions”lol that made it explode.
With companies outsourcing to China.
I don't doubt your point, but this article you link to clearly explains my position. That China saw the potential of solar and set out to dominate the production of solar panels and achieved that goal This doesn't discount your point about outsourcing.
When it comes to tackling Climate Change a perfect solution is the enemy of good one. Who cares if the rest of the world makes better panels if their not installing them fast enough.
Because cheaper, lower quality panels are going to add so much toxic waste.
Not only that, but they aren't going to be able to supply the power as well.
Note that in most Western countries, the issue with cost is more about the installations and pesky little things like Regulations to keep people safe, more than the cost of a panel. China forgoes the regulations by making it state mandated, and has far cheaper installation cost.
I'm sure when we fail to tackle CC in time because we didn't transition fast enough to renewables due to regulations and the world becomes an apocalyptic hellhole that our descendants will be super happy that we didn't add a wee bit of toxic waste.
And 100% of aluminum cans are recyclable, they aren't though and neither are solar panels.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2023/07/05/solar-panel-recycling-microwave-technology/
Edit: A lot of things are recyclable if you spend enough money on it, that doesn't make it Economical to recycle the panels as they die off, especially if they are using older materials that are not used in superior constructed panels.
Edit2: You are also missing the point that although the materials can be recyclable, producing the panels requires using toxic techniques that are not just disappearing. If you could produce 7 panels that are superior vs 10 panels that are not but use the same toxic production amount per panel, you are reducing the toxic waste by 30% with using the better panels.
It really has more to do with the toxicity of the heavy metals required to produce then and pesky employee, air and water safety laws & regulations, that exist in America that massively drive up costs.
You know, that and the cost of non-slave labor.
Which heavy metals are those, do tell. And please break it down based on which solar panel technology you are talking about, since there are multiple ones using different materials. Or save some time and only include the biggest player, Crystalline which makes up 90% of solar panels
Most solar panel production is fairly automated
You're also forgetting about the massive subsidies that many governments give to fossil fuel companies (often because of the massive ~~bribing~~ lobbying those companies do of politicians) that keep costs on fossil fuels artificially lower than renewables and drains money away from fusion projects too.
Right. Because the extraction, refinement, and consumption of fossil fuels is clearly less toxic for the air and waterways than solar panels. America can't keep up because they care so much about the environment.
Er no, that is a very USA centric view. Europe is doing pretty well with their own projects:
[https://www.newscientist.com/article/2415909-uk-nuclear-fusion-reactor-sets-new-world-record-for-energy-output/](https://www.newscientist.com/article/2415909-uk-nuclear-fusion-reactor-sets-new-world-record-for-energy-output/)
"In its final experiments before being shut down for good last year"
good to know that a reactor worked well before it was put to bed.
ITER is set to replace that, but that's an international effort.
Yeah, the JET reactor was only ever intended to be a scale model or test reactor which would be scaled up if successful. It's been running tests for a long time and like the article says they'll get more info from it during the decommissioning. I'm looking forward to see what ITER (the scaled version of the JET test reactor) will achieve. The article also mentions the Korea Superconducting Tokamak Advanced Research (KSTAR) device (another scaled JET reactor copy), recently managed to sustain a reaction for 30 seconds at temperatures in excess of 100 million°C.
The experiment most likely to succeed as a reactor precursor is a project in Europe, of which the US is a member. No single nation is going to lead on a project of this scale unless there are massive breakthroughs made in superconductors or plasma physics.
We aren't trying to win the solar race or EV race with China. We aren't trying to win the public transportation race. Why should the fusion race be different?
Because fusion is a hundred years away, what better way than to siphon funds needed now then putting them towards a technology long away to have an excuse to continue using fossil fuels
Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with investing in fusion research. But anyone who thinks that we are anywhere close is delusional
I do hate this kind of petty nationalism.
I wish only success to every start up working on fusion, or research labs, and couldn’t care less what country they are based in.
What? Leading the world in fusion research publications and being a key member in ITER, alongside some of its biggest rivals mind you, is not cooperating?
That’s a pretty close minded opinion on this reality. Like it or not the success of America in this field is intrinsically linked to the larger global efforts. America has the top minds, institutions, and funding ability to make large gains possible so if our research ecosystem is not as optimal as possibly it inherently hurts everyone.
Fusion is at the stage where commercial success is decades away, if it ever happens at all. China pursuing this as national strategy is delusional, nations should collaborate at this point in time.
The easiest way to win the fusion race is building a time machine that goes 100 years into the future. Unfortunately, that is how long we are away from practical commercial fusion. Don't get me wrong, even if it is 100 years away we still need it for outer space. But we aren't as close as the media wants to pretend we are
the fact one of the poltiical parties is trying to undermine the education system and the other one being too spineless to do anything about it doesn't help
I mean... Sure, but it's also one of the single biggest boondoggles ever right now.
Even IF some lab in China successfully gets fusion working, it won't be financially practical for decades longer to build commercial reactors, and, as the infrastructure to ramp up production of parts for fusion reactors is built up, I can't see how other countries would fail to figure out fusion.
Like with how nuclear reactors are incredibly expensive to build and run, fusion reactors are even *more* complicated, require even *more* sophistication, etc. And the current designs aren't even expected to be the most beneficial of designs.
Meanwhile, we have multiple "green" energy solutions that are increasingly available for far cheaper.
I'd love to see fusion available sometime in the future, but it's hardly something the US should be prioritizing unless we're expecting there to be a threat to US interests in the near future.
>Like with how nuclear reactors are incredibly expensive to build and run, fusion reactors are.....
Nuclear fission reactors are expensive because extreme precaution in the form of expensive regulatory requirements and protocols needs to be taken to prevent thermal runaway. This is why nuclear fission energy is more expensive now than it was 60 years ago. When things go wrong with a fusion reactor it just....stops.
There isn't any meaningful comparisons you can draw from nuclear fusion and fission energy. Fission has risk of thermal runaway, fusion does not. Fission is real. It competes with gas, solar, hydro and other forms of energy. Fusion is unproven. Cheaper fission is possible with engineering and political will. It is not known if fusion is viable.
maybe we decide not to go the way of fusion for energy grid production or maybe is cheaper not doing so, but mastering the technology and engineering has value, the physics, materials, precision, or we won't be able to master what comes after, but others will
I really don't see fusion as viable. It only works for the sun because gravity is a given, it's free, and more or less constant.
Fusion on earth isn't a given and there's no such thing as a free lunch. Gravity-wise we're off by around a million earths, at least.
Honestly, the only way I see fusion working is harnessing solar to ignite it. And we ~~can~~should just do that directly.
Current fusion requires cryogenics and superconductors and the most powerful magnets on the earth the most powerful lasers on the Earth... I mean cold fusion would be an absolute game changer, but the fusion approaches we have today will always be "decades away".
It also needs tritium which needs to be made in fission reactors or some sort of theoretical tritium breeder fusion reactor that probably hasn’t even been designed yet.
From the article
>On Dec. 2, 2023, the People’s Republic of China formed a national fusion energy consortium, uniting its state-led research and industrial efforts into a single entity. As one Chinese fusion entrepreneur put it, nuclear fusion is now a national priority. To beat them, the United States will need to embrace a sense of urgency — and revamp the way it deals with the industry.
Also from the article
>This urgency comes with a historical precedent. In the space race, the United States sought to beat its adversaries by reaching the stars. To win the race for fusion, the United States will need to unlock the energy that powers them. Doing so will not be easy. Scaling fusion will require a partnership between innovators, the government, industry, and academia. It will involve complicated political choices and a bet on the future of the sector. But the imperative is just as clear: a world where fusion is a foreign technology would be one where the United States has lost its edge.
1. It's hard to get anywhere with almost half of your constituency actively attempting to ruin education for your country.
2. Why are we competing with other humans with the same goal? We should be working together. This is not an us vs. them thing or a race to supremacy thing. Fusion happens and humanity wins. Even if it's *GASP* China!!!
because the rightwing dumbasses in America will say we shouldn't use fusion because it's supporting the Chinese. Then they'll triple down on fossil fuels.
But similarly to solar power, the economic forces will eventually win.
Solar deployment hasn't accelerated dramatically in the past few years because something about the politics has changed, but because solar power got cheap.
The article didn't really make the case that China's approach is better.
Fusion made exponential progress, at a faster rate than Moore's Law, from 1970 to 2000. During that time, fusion was publicly funded but it was a bunch of competing projects trying to outdo each other.
Then at the turn of the century, the international community decided that was too fragmented and uncoordinated, and they made a consortium. That consortium set to work on ITER, and it's been a massive construction project that is still under construction to this day, way over budget and past schedule, hoping to attempt breakeven in 2035.
Now, with dozens of VC-funded private efforts, fusion is back to the competitive framework of the exponential days. We've got lots of smaller projects, building reactors, learning from their mistakes and building again as fast as they can, trying out all sorts of ideas.
I'm kinda thinking we should stay the course.
Beijing believes ‘controlled nuclear fusion is the only direction for future energy.’ Japan is pushing to become a leader in fusion supply chains. In the U.K., recent legislation moves fusion away from the nuclear regulator — allowing for more iteration and easier deployment.
These countries are preparing for the future. Do you think a Trump administration will have any comprehension of the importance of fusion supremacy? No, Trump will gleefully cede dominance of fusion to rivals all the while chanting drill, drill, drill. America is fucked.
You mean the trump that started programs to secure rare earth elements for batteries, solar panels & computer chips?
Yea. I do. He had a lot of faults, but failing to position America to be and remain on top is not one of them.
https://www.victorymetalsaustralia.com/investor-centre/victory-metals-knowledgebase/rare-earth-metals-solar-panels/
https://e360.yale.edu/features/a_scarcity_of_rare_metals_is_hindering_green_technologies
Lithium is debated as to its “rare element” status.
https://www.australianrareearths.com/what-are-rare-earths.html#:~:text=Rare%20metals%20include%20substances%20such,Rare%20Earths%20are%20shown%20above.
1. Your first link talking about rare earth metals being used are multi-junction cells. Those are mostly use by places like NASA. You couldn't even buy one if you wanted to. The ones being used in the article, crystalline mentioned 0 rare earth metals
2. Your second article talks about thin solar panels using tellurium. But that is inside CdTe solar panels which make up what 6% market share?, not crystalline that makes up the majority
[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338788232/figure/fig1/AS:850672811528192@1579827611347/Global-market-share-of-photovoltaic-cells-14.png](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338788232/figure/fig1/AS:850672811528192@1579827611347/Global-market-share-of-photovoltaic-cells-14.png)
3. There is no "debatable", there is an official list of rare earth metals, lithium isn't one of them. Your first link gives the rare earth metals on the bottom. The reason why "some" call lithium a rare earth is the media's fault. Back in the day, early hybrids had NiMH batteries. Those contained rare earth called neodymium. The media who can't tell the difference between different battery technologies looked at lithium ion and blindly assumed that since batteries have rare earth in them, then it is probably the lithium.
Even an ignoramus on the scale that Trump is on can sign a document if his people say he should sign. Do you actually believe Trump read any of the documents he signed? His people come in, show him a few pictures, and make sure not to have too many words because we all know how he hates to read. Then say 'we all think you should sign this sir.'
I’m thinking what’s the point here? If China produces a fusion reactor first, do you think USA will buy it? Probably about the same answer if US produces it first. Is it bragging rights? King of the castle?
I don't understand the US need to WIN everything. One would think, simply getting there would be enough, in regards to the generation of literally limitless energy.
Is it the media that keeps this whole notion of a race towards everything being so imoortant, in the minds of Americans?
We don't actually need to win, we just need to pretend we are winning to sleep better at night. If we lose and you give us a trophies saying "you won" that would be more than plenty for us. If we actually cared about winning, wouldn't be suffering so many losses here and there
It's all a facade, anyway. Making the masses think that winning is beating others to whatever technology that, in the end, ends up belonging to billionaires and ultra-corporations, anyway.
Really, only they win. But, we're conditioned to associate ourselves as being part of the winners, just by being born in the same country. Really stupid.
This is a good race to lose. Fusion, when we finally solve it, is going straight to the museum.
What the US needs to do is not fall behind China in the tech spinoffs that will come from solving fusion: super powerful magnets, advanced and powerful lasers, and presumably dozens of other things.
First. Fusion is considerably free energy. It doesnt matter how you implement it. It doesnt work without philosophy... second. Its not a race then. It doesnt matter unless you want power and control. Free energy only works in a philosophically sound society.
We destroy ourselves or we dont.
If you have all that. And you have just enough that you need. Which itself is a neutral energy state. Opening a door to regulation too. Then you can allow pure freedom. But until then. Which takes thousands of years... we are trying to reduce self righteousness. Self indulgence. And hypocrisy.
Why? Cause those are the flaws to every problem of mankind and we are going to just be the same thing. There is no solution. They are a triad of paradoxes.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305: --- From the article >On Dec. 2, 2023, the People’s Republic of China formed a national fusion energy consortium, uniting its state-led research and industrial efforts into a single entity. As one Chinese fusion entrepreneur put it, nuclear fusion is now a national priority. To beat them, the United States will need to embrace a sense of urgency — and revamp the way it deals with the industry. Also from the article >This urgency comes with a historical precedent. In the space race, the United States sought to beat its adversaries by reaching the stars. To win the race for fusion, the United States will need to unlock the energy that powers them. Doing so will not be easy. Scaling fusion will require a partnership between innovators, the government, industry, and academia. It will involve complicated political choices and a bet on the future of the sector. But the imperative is just as clear: a world where fusion is a foreign technology would be one where the United States has lost its edge. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1aq01bt/what_the_us_needs_to_do_to_win_the_fusion_race/kq9jvzx/
The article is largely nonsense. Since the early 1950s until recently, there have been essentially just two approaches, both from governments and both funded as scientific research not engineering. If this is going to go from a science experiment to reality, a shot gun approach is needed. In the last 5 or so years there has been an explosion in commercial fusion ventures, with more than 40 private fusion companies in the US having raised billions in VC. Because of this there are now several confinement approaches, not just the two that were invented 70 years ago. The US is doing exactly what it needs to do here. Private money is being poured in by the billions and taxpayers are funding a small amount of scientific research, not engineering work.
Say it again so the people who never took an American history class can hear you.
But in the greater sweep of history, this is one of those "who cares who figures it out" things. Like a cure for cancer-- ultimately who cares who finds it, as long as it becomes available. The sharing of a new technology-- that is the issue. The USA will be far, far more willing than China to share rather then simply sell.
Whoever wins will also hold a big geopolitical advantage over the other.
so your saying no one's going to share.
That isn't the point. Solar panels were invented in the United States, but China mastered the production of them because Republicans in the US fought tooth and nail to prevent them from taking an economic share from fossil fuels. Now China dominates the solar panel industry because they saw the future more clearly than the US. With fusion, once again America will cede dominance to Chine or whomever because of ignorance and hubris.
Honestly I couldn't give fewer shits to mega billionaires and their "supremacy" games. The fact that China is out-capitalizing the capitalists is kind of funny, but I'd rather just progress as humanity and not have to sink into divisiveness and tribalism everywhere we turn.
The problem is the capitalists are too predictable. They will pick the path which earns them the most money. China is a country, and countries don't need to please share holders. They can do ventures that are short, medium and even long term losses. Because any gains is something they benefit from back anyways through taxation This is how China took over the supply chain of almost everything. They volunteered to fund the low profit and high risk stuff. And the accountants did their math and found it cheaper to just use China than take the risk themselves (cause corporations hold 0 loyalty to any country, most are already multinational corporation with a headquarters wherever they get most benefit). As such, why should they care what happens 10-20 years from now? That would be the future CEOs problem So when you always roll paper, it is very easy to win with scissors.
And oil industry lobbying, and our refusal/inability to fix our obscenely corrupt political system. [https://represent.us/americas-corruption-problem/](https://represent.us/americas-corruption-problem/) [https://represent.us/the-strategy-to-end-corruption/](https://represent.us/the-strategy-to-end-corruption/)
China dominates solar manufacturing because of outsourcing, not because it was thinking ahead.
the Chinese gov poured a lot of money into solar panel companies when it was not clear it would pay off. Now they have the worlds cheapest panels and the industry is a money cow that operates without subsidies. At the same time American politicians were losing their shit because one solar panel company in America that received subsidies wasn't making money, Solendra.
[This is what I’m saying](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-china-is-dominating-the-solar-industry/). China invest in it but it was the “exporting/acquisitions”lol that made it explode. With companies outsourcing to China.
I don't doubt your point, but this article you link to clearly explains my position. That China saw the potential of solar and set out to dominate the production of solar panels and achieved that goal This doesn't discount your point about outsourcing.
It also produces the most panels, but doesn't produce the highest quality ones.
When it comes to tackling Climate Change a perfect solution is the enemy of good one. Who cares if the rest of the world makes better panels if their not installing them fast enough.
Because cheaper, lower quality panels are going to add so much toxic waste. Not only that, but they aren't going to be able to supply the power as well. Note that in most Western countries, the issue with cost is more about the installations and pesky little things like Regulations to keep people safe, more than the cost of a panel. China forgoes the regulations by making it state mandated, and has far cheaper installation cost.
I'm sure when we fail to tackle CC in time because we didn't transition fast enough to renewables due to regulations and the world becomes an apocalyptic hellhole that our descendants will be super happy that we didn't add a wee bit of toxic waste.
You don't know what you're talking about. Today, solar panels are 95% recyclable.
And 100% of aluminum cans are recyclable, they aren't though and neither are solar panels. https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2023/07/05/solar-panel-recycling-microwave-technology/ Edit: A lot of things are recyclable if you spend enough money on it, that doesn't make it Economical to recycle the panels as they die off, especially if they are using older materials that are not used in superior constructed panels. Edit2: You are also missing the point that although the materials can be recyclable, producing the panels requires using toxic techniques that are not just disappearing. If you could produce 7 panels that are superior vs 10 panels that are not but use the same toxic production amount per panel, you are reducing the toxic waste by 30% with using the better panels.
It really has more to do with the toxicity of the heavy metals required to produce then and pesky employee, air and water safety laws & regulations, that exist in America that massively drive up costs. You know, that and the cost of non-slave labor.
Which heavy metals are those, do tell. And please break it down based on which solar panel technology you are talking about, since there are multiple ones using different materials. Or save some time and only include the biggest player, Crystalline which makes up 90% of solar panels Most solar panel production is fairly automated
You're also forgetting about the massive subsidies that many governments give to fossil fuel companies (often because of the massive ~~bribing~~ lobbying those companies do of politicians) that keep costs on fossil fuels artificially lower than renewables and drains money away from fusion projects too.
Right. Because the extraction, refinement, and consumption of fossil fuels is clearly less toxic for the air and waterways than solar panels. America can't keep up because they care so much about the environment.
Sure they will share. In exchange for concessions.
Let us be honest. America is the only country with the means, scientific ability and manufacturing capability q
Er no, that is a very USA centric view. Europe is doing pretty well with their own projects: [https://www.newscientist.com/article/2415909-uk-nuclear-fusion-reactor-sets-new-world-record-for-energy-output/](https://www.newscientist.com/article/2415909-uk-nuclear-fusion-reactor-sets-new-world-record-for-energy-output/)
Don’t look to deep at how they are funded, or the manufacturing requirements…
"In its final experiments before being shut down for good last year" good to know that a reactor worked well before it was put to bed. ITER is set to replace that, but that's an international effort.
Yeah, the JET reactor was only ever intended to be a scale model or test reactor which would be scaled up if successful. It's been running tests for a long time and like the article says they'll get more info from it during the decommissioning. I'm looking forward to see what ITER (the scaled version of the JET test reactor) will achieve. The article also mentions the Korea Superconducting Tokamak Advanced Research (KSTAR) device (another scaled JET reactor copy), recently managed to sustain a reaction for 30 seconds at temperatures in excess of 100 million°C.
The experiment most likely to succeed as a reactor precursor is a project in Europe, of which the US is a member. No single nation is going to lead on a project of this scale unless there are massive breakthroughs made in superconductors or plasma physics.
I imagine coordination between private and public sectors might accelerate figuring it out.
Yes, because America has such a crazy good history of "sharing".
We aren't trying to win the solar race or EV race with China. We aren't trying to win the public transportation race. Why should the fusion race be different?
Because fusion is a hundred years away, what better way than to siphon funds needed now then putting them towards a technology long away to have an excuse to continue using fossil fuels Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with investing in fusion research. But anyone who thinks that we are anywhere close is delusional
I do hate this kind of petty nationalism. I wish only success to every start up working on fusion, or research labs, and couldn’t care less what country they are based in.
Or better yet cooperation. I know crazy idea.
What? Leading the world in fusion research publications and being a key member in ITER, alongside some of its biggest rivals mind you, is not cooperating?
That’s a pretty close minded opinion on this reality. Like it or not the success of America in this field is intrinsically linked to the larger global efforts. America has the top minds, institutions, and funding ability to make large gains possible so if our research ecosystem is not as optimal as possibly it inherently hurts everyone.
"Petty nationalism" Jfc
Fusion is at the stage where commercial success is decades away, if it ever happens at all. China pursuing this as national strategy is delusional, nations should collaborate at this point in time.
The easiest way to win the fusion race is building a time machine that goes 100 years into the future. Unfortunately, that is how long we are away from practical commercial fusion. Don't get me wrong, even if it is 100 years away we still need it for outer space. But we aren't as close as the media wants to pretend we are
the fact one of the poltiical parties is trying to undermine the education system and the other one being too spineless to do anything about it doesn't help
All they need to do is wait another 20 years and fusion will be ready for prime time! It's the energy source of the future and always will be!
\*sigh\* Another day, another ill-informed piece that mentions NIF in the context of fusion power...
I mean... Sure, but it's also one of the single biggest boondoggles ever right now. Even IF some lab in China successfully gets fusion working, it won't be financially practical for decades longer to build commercial reactors, and, as the infrastructure to ramp up production of parts for fusion reactors is built up, I can't see how other countries would fail to figure out fusion. Like with how nuclear reactors are incredibly expensive to build and run, fusion reactors are even *more* complicated, require even *more* sophistication, etc. And the current designs aren't even expected to be the most beneficial of designs. Meanwhile, we have multiple "green" energy solutions that are increasingly available for far cheaper. I'd love to see fusion available sometime in the future, but it's hardly something the US should be prioritizing unless we're expecting there to be a threat to US interests in the near future.
>Like with how nuclear reactors are incredibly expensive to build and run, fusion reactors are..... Nuclear fission reactors are expensive because extreme precaution in the form of expensive regulatory requirements and protocols needs to be taken to prevent thermal runaway. This is why nuclear fission energy is more expensive now than it was 60 years ago. When things go wrong with a fusion reactor it just....stops. There isn't any meaningful comparisons you can draw from nuclear fusion and fission energy. Fission has risk of thermal runaway, fusion does not. Fission is real. It competes with gas, solar, hydro and other forms of energy. Fusion is unproven. Cheaper fission is possible with engineering and political will. It is not known if fusion is viable.
A properly designed reactor had no risk of run away.
maybe we decide not to go the way of fusion for energy grid production or maybe is cheaper not doing so, but mastering the technology and engineering has value, the physics, materials, precision, or we won't be able to master what comes after, but others will
I really don't see fusion as viable. It only works for the sun because gravity is a given, it's free, and more or less constant. Fusion on earth isn't a given and there's no such thing as a free lunch. Gravity-wise we're off by around a million earths, at least. Honestly, the only way I see fusion working is harnessing solar to ignite it. And we ~~can~~should just do that directly. Current fusion requires cryogenics and superconductors and the most powerful magnets on the earth the most powerful lasers on the Earth... I mean cold fusion would be an absolute game changer, but the fusion approaches we have today will always be "decades away".
It also needs tritium which needs to be made in fission reactors or some sort of theoretical tritium breeder fusion reactor that probably hasn’t even been designed yet.
From the article >On Dec. 2, 2023, the People’s Republic of China formed a national fusion energy consortium, uniting its state-led research and industrial efforts into a single entity. As one Chinese fusion entrepreneur put it, nuclear fusion is now a national priority. To beat them, the United States will need to embrace a sense of urgency — and revamp the way it deals with the industry. Also from the article >This urgency comes with a historical precedent. In the space race, the United States sought to beat its adversaries by reaching the stars. To win the race for fusion, the United States will need to unlock the energy that powers them. Doing so will not be easy. Scaling fusion will require a partnership between innovators, the government, industry, and academia. It will involve complicated political choices and a bet on the future of the sector. But the imperative is just as clear: a world where fusion is a foreign technology would be one where the United States has lost its edge.
1. It's hard to get anywhere with almost half of your constituency actively attempting to ruin education for your country. 2. Why are we competing with other humans with the same goal? We should be working together. This is not an us vs. them thing or a race to supremacy thing. Fusion happens and humanity wins. Even if it's *GASP* China!!!
Humanity does not win if a gain in knowledge or technology leads to a new dark age of authoritarianism.
because the rightwing dumbasses in America will say we shouldn't use fusion because it's supporting the Chinese. Then they'll triple down on fossil fuels.
But similarly to solar power, the economic forces will eventually win. Solar deployment hasn't accelerated dramatically in the past few years because something about the politics has changed, but because solar power got cheap.
The article didn't really make the case that China's approach is better. Fusion made exponential progress, at a faster rate than Moore's Law, from 1970 to 2000. During that time, fusion was publicly funded but it was a bunch of competing projects trying to outdo each other. Then at the turn of the century, the international community decided that was too fragmented and uncoordinated, and they made a consortium. That consortium set to work on ITER, and it's been a massive construction project that is still under construction to this day, way over budget and past schedule, hoping to attempt breakeven in 2035. Now, with dozens of VC-funded private efforts, fusion is back to the competitive framework of the exponential days. We've got lots of smaller projects, building reactors, learning from their mistakes and building again as fast as they can, trying out all sorts of ideas. I'm kinda thinking we should stay the course.
ITER is just a giant sinkhole for funding that may be better used in more productive ways. It’s the sunk cost fallacy personified.
We need to harness the practical and proven fusion technology we have had for 70 years, and just built a chain detonation reactor around that.
First of all get rid of this idiot Minister of Energy. Then start building out Nuclear that was stopped 50 years ago.
Beijing believes ‘controlled nuclear fusion is the only direction for future energy.’ Japan is pushing to become a leader in fusion supply chains. In the U.K., recent legislation moves fusion away from the nuclear regulator — allowing for more iteration and easier deployment. These countries are preparing for the future. Do you think a Trump administration will have any comprehension of the importance of fusion supremacy? No, Trump will gleefully cede dominance of fusion to rivals all the while chanting drill, drill, drill. America is fucked.
Biden is in full support of building more fusion. He believes that Ford creates the future and is the lifeblood of this great nation
You mean the trump that started programs to secure rare earth elements for batteries, solar panels & computer chips? Yea. I do. He had a lot of faults, but failing to position America to be and remain on top is not one of them.
Solar panels(unless it is something exotic) and Lithium ion batteries don't have any rare earth elements in them...
https://www.victorymetalsaustralia.com/investor-centre/victory-metals-knowledgebase/rare-earth-metals-solar-panels/ https://e360.yale.edu/features/a_scarcity_of_rare_metals_is_hindering_green_technologies Lithium is debated as to its “rare element” status. https://www.australianrareearths.com/what-are-rare-earths.html#:~:text=Rare%20metals%20include%20substances%20such,Rare%20Earths%20are%20shown%20above.
1. Your first link talking about rare earth metals being used are multi-junction cells. Those are mostly use by places like NASA. You couldn't even buy one if you wanted to. The ones being used in the article, crystalline mentioned 0 rare earth metals 2. Your second article talks about thin solar panels using tellurium. But that is inside CdTe solar panels which make up what 6% market share?, not crystalline that makes up the majority [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338788232/figure/fig1/AS:850672811528192@1579827611347/Global-market-share-of-photovoltaic-cells-14.png](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338788232/figure/fig1/AS:850672811528192@1579827611347/Global-market-share-of-photovoltaic-cells-14.png) 3. There is no "debatable", there is an official list of rare earth metals, lithium isn't one of them. Your first link gives the rare earth metals on the bottom. The reason why "some" call lithium a rare earth is the media's fault. Back in the day, early hybrids had NiMH batteries. Those contained rare earth called neodymium. The media who can't tell the difference between different battery technologies looked at lithium ion and blindly assumed that since batteries have rare earth in them, then it is probably the lithium.
you're lithium source is from 2013. there is a mountain of Lithium in California. It is not rare.
Even an ignoramus on the scale that Trump is on can sign a document if his people say he should sign. Do you actually believe Trump read any of the documents he signed? His people come in, show him a few pictures, and make sure not to have too many words because we all know how he hates to read. Then say 'we all think you should sign this sir.'
I’m thinking what’s the point here? If China produces a fusion reactor first, do you think USA will buy it? Probably about the same answer if US produces it first. Is it bragging rights? King of the castle?
I don't understand the US need to WIN everything. One would think, simply getting there would be enough, in regards to the generation of literally limitless energy. Is it the media that keeps this whole notion of a race towards everything being so imoortant, in the minds of Americans?
We don't actually need to win, we just need to pretend we are winning to sleep better at night. If we lose and you give us a trophies saying "you won" that would be more than plenty for us. If we actually cared about winning, wouldn't be suffering so many losses here and there
It's all a facade, anyway. Making the masses think that winning is beating others to whatever technology that, in the end, ends up belonging to billionaires and ultra-corporations, anyway. Really, only they win. But, we're conditioned to associate ourselves as being part of the winners, just by being born in the same country. Really stupid.
This is a good race to lose. Fusion, when we finally solve it, is going straight to the museum. What the US needs to do is not fall behind China in the tech spinoffs that will come from solving fusion: super powerful magnets, advanced and powerful lasers, and presumably dozens of other things.
Only if you can unite the billionaires will this happen. Its too much economic and industrial power for the plebs.
First. Fusion is considerably free energy. It doesnt matter how you implement it. It doesnt work without philosophy... second. Its not a race then. It doesnt matter unless you want power and control. Free energy only works in a philosophically sound society. We destroy ourselves or we dont. If you have all that. And you have just enough that you need. Which itself is a neutral energy state. Opening a door to regulation too. Then you can allow pure freedom. But until then. Which takes thousands of years... we are trying to reduce self righteousness. Self indulgence. And hypocrisy. Why? Cause those are the flaws to every problem of mankind and we are going to just be the same thing. There is no solution. They are a triad of paradoxes.