Updated:
Save
We are close, very close. But we still have a long way to go to ensure that fusion energy, which comes from the stars and promises to be clean and inexhaustible, can power our refrigerators or our light bulb in the living room. If we ask Dennis G. Whyte, director of the Plasma Science and Fusion Center (PSFC) of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), will answer that this decade will witness the latest achievements of this feat. And he, who has just passed through Spain to participate in a conference on climate change at the Ramón Areces Foundation, speaks with knowledge of the facts: the core of the SPARC project, the ‘artificial sun’ that MIT is creating, was devised more than eight years old during one of his design courses.
“A lot has been achieved, but we still have some fundamental issues to resolve.”
When we talk about fusion energy, it is often explained as the recreation of the Sun’s energy.
In a simple way, yes. Stars, including our own Sun, are very large balls of hydrogen. They are so huge that, at their center, the pressure and temperature become so high that they allow hydrogen atoms to fuse together and become helium. That process releases a lot of energy: a kilogram of fusion fuel contains about ten million times more energy than a kilogram of coal, oil or gas. This is the reason that stars can shine for billions of years. Recreating it on Earth is something a little different. By size, basically. However, yes, fundamentally we do the same thing: take forms of hydrogen and fuse them into helium. And that is an almost inexhaustible source of energy.
Inexhaustible and clean.
Yes. If you see the resources it requires, you realize that it is sustainable and can supply energy for the whole world. This is why we have been studying fusion energy for so long.
And safe. In fusion power plants, in no case could something like Chernobyl be repeated, right?
Indeed. In fusion, the chain reaction of fission does not occur, so it is physically impossible.
So what is the fine print of this energy?
The cost of recreating the conditions that occur in the center of the stars. In fact, our equipment is not efficient enough, as we still spend more energy to ignite the fuel than we recover from the fusion reaction itself. On the other hand, it also generates some waste products. The advantage at this point is that if we apply the engineering well, the waste will be minimal.
Are we close to achieving the first fusion reactor?
It is often misunderstood how advanced science is in this field. We have managed to recreate many things that seem almost science fiction, like getting the plasma to heat up to 100 million degrees. This is all moving forward, but a lot of research and development remains. MIT’s timetable is to start demo operations in 2025. It’s doable, but all of its practical development will come in the next decade.
What do you think about the entry of private initiative?
I think in the next few years we will really see the combination and synergy between advances in fusion science and technology, moving us towards applicable and commercial systems. We haven’t gotten to that point yet, because we still need to verify some very important science-related parts, in particular the point about net energy output. But once that is over, private sector companies will be able to start building power plants fueled by fusion energy.
Are we in a moment of ‘hype’ regarding nuclear fusion or is it really a full stop?
There is something of both. It feels like a turning point, but also because the investment of private companies is noticeable. It is also a technology that fits very well with the urgency around climate change. Personally, I am a strong supporter of our approach at MIT, because we believe it has very promising prospects. But I am also very encouraged by the achievements of the various lines of research and it would be great to get fusion energy by any of these methods. The more attempts, the better.
Is there a competitive race between the different types of systems?
I would say there is healthy competition. Also, it is very interesting that it is happening not only at a technical level, but also at an institutional level. For example, China has a very ambitious program and the UK has just announced its own commercial fusion power development project. The United States has also just released a line more linked to the private sector. All this is positive.
Will the crisis in Ukraine and Russia affect these experiments?
It is clear that we are in an enormously disruptive moment, especially in Europe. But I don’t think it will cause much disruption to the experiments. However, access to energy is an important part of what is happening in the equation in Ukraine. And having clean and independent sources of energy will be a very important part of the social and political balance of the future.
Are you convinced that it will be the technology that combats climate change?
It can be a very important part of the solution. But we have to keep trying as a society and be very serious about achieving it. It is not just a science experiment, but a practical power system.
See them
comments