From MIT and the “always 15 years away” department.
MIT and newly formed company launch novel approach to fusion power – Goal is for research to produce a working pilot plant within 15 years.

Progress toward the long-sought dream of fusion power — potentially an inexhaustible and zero-carbon source of energy — could be about to take a dramatic leap forward.
Development of this carbon-free, combustion-free source of energy is now on a faster track toward realization, thanks to a collaboration between MIT and a new private company, Commonwealth Fusion Systems. CFS will join with MIT to carry out rapid, staged research leading to a new generation of fusion experiments and power plants based on advances in high-temperature superconductors — work made possible by decades of federal government funding for basic research.
CFS is announcing today that it has attracted an investment of $50 million in support of this effort from the Italian energy company Eni. In addition, CFS continues to seek the support of additional investors. CFS will fund fusion research at MIT as part of this collaboration, with an ultimate goal of rapidly commercializing fusion energy and establishing a new industry.
“This is an important historical moment: Advances in superconducting magnets have put fusion energy potentially within reach, offering the prospect of a safe, carbon-free energy future,” says MIT President L. Rafael Reif. “As humanity confronts the rising risks of climate disruption, I am thrilled that MIT is joining with industrial allies, both longstanding and new, to run full-speed toward this transformative vision for our shared future on Earth.”
“Everyone agrees on the eventual impact and the commercial potential of fusion power, but then the question is: How do you get there?” adds Commonwealth Fusion Systems CEO Robert Mumgaard SM ’15, PhD ’15. “We get there by leveraging the science that’s already developed, collaborating with the right partners, and tackling the problems step by step.”
MIT Vice President for Research Maria Zuber, who has written an op-ed on the importance of this news that appears in today’s Boston Globe, notes that MIT’s collaboration with CFS required concerted effort among people and offices at MIT that support innovation: “We are grateful for the MIT team that worked tirelessly to form this collaboration. Associate Provost Karen Gleason’s leadership was instrumental — as was the creativity, diligence, and care of the Office of the General Counsel, the Office of Sponsored Programs, the Technology Licensing Office, and the MIT Energy Initiative. A great job by all.”
Superconducting magnets are key
Fusion, the process that powers the sun and stars, involves light elements, such as hydrogen, smashing together to form heavier elements, such as helium — releasing prodigious amounts of energy in the process. This process produces net energy only at extreme temperatures of hundreds of millions of degrees Celsius, too hot for any solid material to withstand. To get around that, fusion researchers use magnetic fields to hold in place the hot plasma — a kind of gaseous soup of subatomic particles — keeping it from coming into contact with any part of the donut-shaped chamber.
The new effort aims to build a compact device capable of generating 100 million watts, or 100 megawatts (MW), of fusion power. This device will, if all goes according to plan, demonstrate key technical milestones needed to ultimately achieve a full-scale prototype of a fusion power plant that could set the world on a path to low-carbon energy. If widely disseminated, such fusion power plants could meet a substantial fraction of the world’s growing energy needs while drastically curbing the greenhouse gas emissions that are causing global climate change.
“Today is a very important day for us,” says Eni CEO Claudio Descalzi. “Thanks to this agreement, Eni takes a significant step forward toward the development of alternative energy sources with an ever-lower environmental impact. Fusion is the true energy source of the future, as it is completely sustainable, does not release emissions or long-term waste, and is potentially inexhaustible. It is a goal that we are increasingly determined to reach quickly.”
CFS will support more than $30 million of MIT research over the next three years through investments by Eni and others. This work will aim to develop the world’s most powerful large-bore superconducting electromagnets — the key component that will enable construction of a much more compact version of a fusion device called a tokamak. The magnets, based on a superconducting material that has only recently become available commercially, will produce a magnetic field four times as strong as that employed in any existing fusion experiment, enabling a more than tenfold increase in the power produced by a tokamak of a given size.
Conceived at PSFC
The project was conceived by researchers from MIT’s Plasma Science and Fusion Center, led by PSFC Director Dennis Whyte, Deputy Director Martin Greenwald, and a team that grew to include representatives from across MIT, involving disciplines from engineering to physics to architecture to economics. The core PSFC team included Mumgaard, Dan Brunner PhD ’13, and Brandon Sorbom PhD ’17 — all now leading CFS — as well as Zach Hartwig PhD ’14, now an assistant professor of nuclear science and engineering at MIT.
Once the superconducting electromagnets are developed by researchers at MIT and CFS — expected to occur within three years — MIT and CFS will design and build a compact and powerful fusion experiment, called SPARC, using those magnets. The experiment will be used for what is expected to be a final round of research enabling design of the world’s first commercial power-producing fusion plants.
SPARC is designed to produce about 100 MW of heat. While it will not turn that heat into electricity, it will produce, in pulses of about 10 seconds, as much power as is used by a small city. That output would be more than twice the power used to heat the plasma, achieving the ultimate technical milestone: positive net energy from fusion.
This demonstration would establish that a new power plant of about twice SPARC’s diameter, capable of producing commercially viable net power output, could go ahead toward final design and construction. Such a plant would become the world’s first true fusion power plant, with a capacity of 200 MW of electricity, comparable to that of most modern commercial electric power plants. At that point, its implementation could proceed rapidly and with little risk, and such power plants could be demonstrated within 15 years, say Whyte, Greenwald, and Hartwig.
Complementary to ITER
The project is expected to complement the research planned for a large international collaboration called ITER, currently under construction as the world’s largest fusion experiment at a site in southern France. If successful, ITER is expected to begin producing fusion energy around 2035.
“Fusion is way too important for only one track,” says Greenwald, who is a senior research scientist at PSFC.
By using magnets made from the newly available superconducting material — a steel tape coated with a compound called yttrium-barium-copper oxide (YBCO) — SPARC is designed to produce a fusion power output about a fifth that of ITER, but in a device that is only about 1/65 the volume, Hartwig says. The ultimate benefit of the YBCO tape, he adds, is that it drastically reduces the cost, timeline, and organizational complexity required to build net fusion energy devices, enabling new players and new approaches to fusion energy at university and private company scale.
The way these high-field magnets slash the size of plants needed to achieve a given level of power has repercussions that reverberate through every aspect of the design. Components that would otherwise be so large that they would have to be manufactured on-site could instead be factory-built and trucked in; ancillary systems for cooling and other functions would all be scaled back proportionately; and the total cost and time for design and construction would be drastically reduced.
“What you’re looking for is power production technologies that are going to play nicely within the mix that’s going to be integrated on the grid in 10 to 20 years,” Hartwig says. “The grid right now is moving away from these two- or three-gigawatt monolithic coal or fission power plants. The range of a large fraction of power production facilities in the U.S. is now is in the 100 to 500 megawatt range. Your technology has to be amenable with what sells to compete robustly in a brutal marketplace.”
Because the magnets are the key technology for the new fusion reactor, and because their development carries the greatest uncertainties, Whyte explains, work on the magnets will be the initial three-year phase of the project — building upon the strong foundation of federally funded research conducted at MIT and elsewhere. Once the magnet technology is proven, the next step of designing the SPARC tokamak is based on a relatively straightforward evolution from existing tokamak experiments, he says.
“By putting the magnet development up front,” says Whyte, the Hitachi America Professor of Engineering and head of MIT’s Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering, “we think that this gives you a really solid answer in three years, and gives you a great amount of confidence moving forward that you’re giving yourself the best possible chance of answering the key question, which is: Can you make net energy from a magnetically confined plasma?”
The research project aims to leverage the scientific knowledge and expertise built up over decades of government-funded research — including MIT’s work, from 1971 to 2016, with its Alcator C-Mod experiment, as well as its predecessors — in combination with the intensity of a well-funded startup company. Whyte, Greenwald, and Hartwig say that this approach could greatly shorten the time to bring fusion technology to the marketplace — while there’s still time for fusion to make a real difference in climate change.
MITEI participation
Commonwealth Fusion Systems is a private company and will join the MIT Energy Initiative(MITEI) as part of a new university-industry partnership built to carry out this plan. The collaboration between MITEI and CFS is expected to bolster MIT research and teaching on the science of fusion, while at the same time building a strong industrial partner that ultimately could be positioned to bring fusion power to real-world use.
“MITEI has created a new membership specifically for energy startups, and CFS is the first company to become a member through this new program,” says MITEI Director Robert Armstrong, the Chevron Professor of Chemical Engineering at MIT. “In addition to providing access to the significant resources and capabilities of the Institute, the membership is designed to expose startups to incumbent energy companies and their vast knowledge of the energy system. It was through their engagement with MITEI that Eni, one of MITEI’s founding members, became aware of SPARC’s tremendous potential for revolutionizing the energy system.”
Energy startups often require significant research funding to further their technology to the point where new clean energy solutions can be brought to market. Traditional forms of early-stage funding are often incompatible with the long lead times and capital intensity that are well-known to energy investors.
“Because of the nature of the conditions required to produce fusion reactions, you have to start at scale,” Greenwald says. “That’s why this kind of academic-industry collaboration was essential to enable the technology to move forward quickly. This is not like three engineers building a new app in a garage.”
Most of the initial round of funding from CFS will support collaborative research and development at MIT to demonstrate the new superconducting magnets. The team is confident that the magnets can be successfully developed to meet the needs of the task. Still, Greenwald adds, “that doesn’t mean it’s a trivial task,” and it will require substantial work by a large team of researchers. But, he points out, others have built magnets using this material, for other purposes, which had twice the magnetic field strength that will be required for this reactor. Though these high-field magnets were small, they do validate the basic feasibility of the concept.
In addition to its support of CFS, Eni has also announced an agreement with MITEI to fund fusion research projects run out of PSFC’s Laboratory for Innovation in Fusion Technologies. The expected investment in these research projects amounts to about $2 million in the coming years.
“Conservative physics”
SPARC is an evolution of a tokamak design that has been studied and refined for decades. This included work at MIT that began in the 1970s, led by professors Bruno Coppi and Ron Parker, who developed the kind of high-magnetic-field fusion experiments that have been operated at MIT ever since, setting numerous fusion records.
“Our strategy is to use conservative physics, based on decades of work at MIT and elsewhere,” Greenwald says. “If SPARC does achieve its expected performance, my sense is that’s sort of a Kitty Hawk moment for fusion, by robustly demonstrating net power, in a device that scales to a real power plant.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I am amazed that a simple comment about 5 years ago about polarising the magnets would initiate a whole new way of keeping the plasma away from the reaction chamber walls,therefore extending the life of it,i also have an idea of continuously feeding the material into the chamber to extend the reaction making it viable
Anthony, LENR has now been proved beyond reasonable doubt.
See http://www.delcotimes.com/opinion/20171206/letter-to-the-editor-major-advance-in-cold-fusion-touted-as-energy-solution
Since I wrote that article Rossi has found a backer to build the automated factory to produce the QX reactor..This is now rated at 80 W.
Rossi still maintains that production with start in 2018.
BLP’s Suncell is also viable.
No longer 15 years in the future. Good. But still in the future. Bad.
I wish you well, keep your fingers crossed.
Cold Fusion! A pipe Dream but keep on trying! Also try Hydrogen Fuel Cells which is already in use in Europe on an Experimental Light Rail Train!
Ashfield,
The article stated:
“It is important to recognize the Nov. 24 demonstration was to provide people with the characteristics of the E-Cat QX and was not a scientific experiment whose results would allow others to replicate it.”
So LENR has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt. Can you write down the equation for the fusion reaction of E-Cat QX? Producing heat doesn’t prove fusion reaction. Chemical reactions can produce heat. I’m also curious why Rossi used Coefficient of Performance (CoP) because this is used for heat pumps, the reverse process of heat engines. CoP measures the heat transferred per unit work input. But electric generation requires work output from heat engines.
Rossi’s theory is explained at the end of the four hour Stockholm demonstration. It is one of many and none have met general acceptance. I’m inclined to think Shoulder’s EVOs (massive charge clusters) play a major role.
See http://lenr-canr.org/ for >thousand papers should you doubt LENR
Also ” A radio interview with Sergio Focardi, the father of “Ni-H Cold-Fusion”. https://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/04/sergio-focardi-father-of-ni-h-cold.html
Should you be interested in Rossi’s work. Focardi was a highly respected physicist.
Proof of the QX reactor will have to wait for production, hopefully later this year.
How many patents have been issued for this technology?
During my detail at DARPA, I got a day-long tour of the General Atomics Tokamak facility, by their chief scientist. It’s an R&D facility, used by every country on earth that has a fusion program. The advances being made are principally in the area of active plasma stabilization, made possible by advanced control systems (and particularly by high-speed computing). They run continuously at high power levels, though not, of course, at breakeven. That isn’t due to being far off from breakeven, though. It’s due to their being licensed only for using deuterium, instead of deuterium-tritium. D-T has 50 times the fusion cross-section at half the input energy, and yields nearly 5 times the energy per reaction of D-D. That Tokamak would be well past engineering breakeven if it were to use D-T.
The reactor produces a considerable flux of 5 MeV neutrons, yet somehow doesn’t dissolve within seconds. Handling neutrons is a very well understood engineering area. And far from being a radioactive waste producer, the flux from a working fusion reactor would be extremely useful in getting rid of the waste we have.
ITER is using all of the technology and know-how from the GA Tokamak, but will burn D-T. I have no doubt that it will succeed.
If only I could suppose. Sure, ITER will succeed in its stated aims. It will also be unjustifiably wasteful. Perhaps a price we will eventually say was worth it, but my optimism is low.
Arc of fission energy -Discovery of neutron -1933. Chicago Pile 1-1942. USN Nautilus -1954 (fantastic success by the way). And the rest is history.
Arc of fusion energy – Eddington describes fusion -1920. I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn and some 14 MeV neutrons you can have in 30 years. Anyone interested? (1950 – present)
That sums it well.
15 years!!!!
Unlikely
Fusion is not so polution free – berilium is used to prevent ansorption of tritium.berillium dust is somewhat poisonous. The steel used in the construction also becomes radio active.
From the register:
interior of the reactor can exceed 300 million°C, twenty times hotter than the centre of the Sun. Jet manages this through a variety of methods including microwaving, albeit at a different frequency to that used to excite the water molecules in your curry.
Fortunately, Jet is undergoing maintenance. We are experiencing less radiation than if we were outside, thanks to those thick walls.
“Jet was built as a physics experiment,” James Edwards, a control software engineer on the project, tells The Reg on our tour. “Iter is more of an engineering experiment.”
Jet is a European project involving 40 laboratories and 350 scientists. In 1997 it set a record, producing 16MW of fusion power from a total input power of 24MW.
Iter, however, is a scaled-up version of Jet currently under construction in the south of France planned to open in 2025 – a fusion reactor that aims to use 50MW to generate 500MW for 500 seconds. Iter, in turn, will pave the way for Demo, one or more proof-of-concept fusion power stations, with South Korea aiming to put a Demo live in 2037.
For now, however, Jet is the world’s biggest fusion device and proves that nuclear fusion can generate power – it’s just not big enough to create more power than it uses.
From a MIT Club of Northern California 2016 presentation by Dr. Dennis Whyte. Link to his video presentation is below.
Dr. Whyte will describe the ARC nuclear fusion reactor (shown above right), based on a new superconducting material, for achieving very high density magnetic fields. It will be used as a research center, but could ultimately become a prototype for an inexpensive 200MW power plant, vaulting nuclear fusion from scientific curiosity to potential commercialization.
The ARC reactor is being designed to produce at least 3 times the power required to run it, which has never been done before and is the result of several new technologies which dramatically reduce the size and cost.
The biggest breakthrough is a new superconducting material which produces a much higher magnetic field density, yielding a ten-fold increase in fusion power per volume. Molten salt will be used as a liquid cooling blanket for fast heat transfer and easy maintenance. And 3D printing techniques will allow the fabrication of reactor components in shapes that cannot be made by milling machines. The result is a much smaller, lower cost and highly efficient modular power plant with zero emissions and abundant fuel. Presentation at: http://fusion4freedom.com/dennis-whyte-video/
If articles about fusion weren’t so amusing, I’d be annoyed.
“…work made possible by decades of federal government funding for basic research.”
Calling BS may be a bit much, but “hype” is certainly a mild term for such a press release and trivial effort at “fast-tracking” fusion power generation.
Good grief. (I’ve been saying that a lot lately.) 15 years they say. So, 2033. Got it? 2033, check. See if you can even find historical information on the effort. I suggest a 99% chance that the efforts described will be forgotten in ten years, by 2028.
The tell is the whining sound in the hat-tip to government funding for wasted research. Yes, government funding for research is a bust, a total waste, and articles (press releases) like this one are solely aimed at keeping the spigot of inefficiency flowing.
Fusion is inevitable, but for 20 years, I’ve been saying it is 100 years away. (That is opposed to the fusion researchers who have been saying it is 20 years away for over 70 years now.) I judge fusion problems as just as hard today as when I was trying to become an expert in the field 20+ years ago.
My tech take on this article: Superconducting magnets will contribute to efficiency gains in second-generation fusion power plants, about 150 years from now, not in prototypes for first generation, especially not in only fifteen years.
If the quoted PhD was ’75, rather than ’15, I might listen.
Again, the only point of MIT’s effort here is to keep the Federal funding spigot flowing. It is a sad state of affairs.
A closing point, any time an article includes the word “inexhaustible,” stop reading. The author was clueless. This observation holds for all articles dealing with power production.
We’ve been able to generate fusion at greater than breakeven for 65 years. That’s how long since the first thermonuclear bomb test. There’s no reason why pulsed nuclear power at bomb scales could not be practical. In fact, the various aneutronic alternatives may be feasible under these conditions (I’ve been told that every fusion reaction that could be tested in a bomb has been, and worked). Even if not, the neutron flux would be useful in getting rid of nuclear waste.
In case pulsed power sounds infeasible, please consider that your internal combustion engine produces just that. The scale is different, but not as much as you might think.
LOL @ur momisugly Michael Kelly. Considering the fact that a fusion explosion is triggered by a fission device, and that harnessing a 20+ kiloton explosion for capturing energy is currently infeasible, you may be on to something.