We must stop wasting money on tokamak fusion, and use if for programs with promise
Robert Hirsch and Roger Bezdek
The ultimate source of energy in the universe is nuclear fusion. It powers the sun and the stars. To work, extremely high temperature and high-pressure gases – plasmas – are required. The stars hold their plasmas by gravity. On Earth, in an attempt to harness fusion for electric power production, magnetic fields are required to hold fusion plasmas. This is an extremely difficult task.
Decades ago, a Russian magnetic field configuration – the tokamak – appeared promising. Countries built ever-larger tokamak experiments to develop this “magnetic bottle.”
The aim was to progress to a system large enough that more energy would be produced than was required to heat the fusion plasma. While substantial progress was made, ever so slowly the promise of commercially viable tokamak fusion power ebbed away. Some recognized the situation, but most simply continued to increase the size of their tokamaks – and their budgets.
Currently, several large tokamak experiments are being conducted worldwide. The largest is ITER (Latin for “The Way”), a collaborative project by 35 countries, under construction in southern France (www.ITER.org). Its goal is to create a tokamak plasma device that produces ten times more energy than was used to heat the plasma.
ITER was originally envisioned to cost roughly $5 billion, a level that might extrapolate to a reasonably priced tokamak fusion power plant. But reality slowly intervened, and the cost of ITER escalated.
ITER managers now contend that ITER’s cost is roughly $22 billion. The U.S Department of Energy, which is supposed to be paying 9% of total ITER costs, has estimated that actual ITER costs are some $65 billion. Even at $22 billion, the cost of an ITER-like electric power plant would be roughly ten times the cost of a nuclear fission power plant, a totally unacceptable cost.
But that’s not all. The easiest fusion fuel combination – not easy – involves two isotopes of hydrogen, deuterium and tritium. Deuterium occurs in water and is easily extracted. Tritium does not exist in nature and decays radioactively. It must be produced.
It’s now recognized that world supplies of tritium are inadequate for future fusion pilot plants, let alone commercial fusion reactors. In other words, fusion researchers are developing a fusion concept for which there will not be enough fuel! But related research nevertheless continues.
How could this happen? First, the cost escalation happened so slowly that it went almost unnoticed. That’s partly because fusion researchers have done their own program reviews for over 60 years. In effect “the foxes are guarding the henhouse.” Practical electric power engineers, utility executives and others who are not members of the fusion mafia have been excluded from fusion program evaluation.
We recently urged the Secretary of Energy to appoint an independent panel to conduct the objective, independent evaluation necessary to lay these facts bare. The Secretary gave our request to the leader of the fusion program, who responded that the program is guided by two recent fusion panels. But those panels consisted of fusion physicists and related researchers – most with vested interests in continuing the current program.
The situation is disturbing. With so many people and institutions at risk of losing jobs and funding, the “wagons have been circled,” and programs continue. Talented people and large sums of money are being wasted – to the tune of a current U.S. fusion budget of over $650 million per year.
This may seem like chump change in an era of multi-trillion-dollar federal expenditures on “infrastructure” and other programs, however defined and politicized. But it is symptomatic of how governments waste our hard-earned tax dollars, and drive our nation deeper into debt with every passing month. And that’s not all.
ITER will yield roughly 30,000 tons of radioactive waste. Researchers feel this is not a problem because the waste will radioactively decay in roughly 100 years, which they tell us is acceptable. Acceptable? In whose backyard might they be planning to put this waste?
Is there hope for commercially viable fusion power? Yes, because other “magnetic bottles” and fusion fuel cycles exist. The related physics is much more difficult, but we won’t know if any of these options are workable unless we try. Unfortunately, there is currently no government support for these options.
We continue to have hope for viable fusion power. However, without sharp focus, capable management, and independent oversight, it won’t happen. Change will be traumatic and will take political courage.
It’s up to Congress and the White House to act. If they’re really concerned about having viable, renewable, sustainable alternatives to the fossil fuel energy that so many of them are determined to eliminate from our fuel mix – by 2030 or sooner – they need to redirect this money to programs that actually might provide substantial reliable electricity at affordable prices.
That’s assuming, of course, that they also intend to keep American health, welfare, jobs and living standards somewhere close to current levels – not roll them back to pre-1950 (or even pre-1900) levels.
Management Information Services, Inc. senior energy advisor Dr. Robert L. Hirsch is experienced in research, development and commercial applications of energy technologies in government, industry and non-profits; he directed federal fusion research in the 1970s. MISI founder and president Dr. Roger H. Bezdek has over 30 years’ experience in private industry, academic and federal government energy, utility, environmental and regulatory areas. MISI is a Washington DC-based economic, energy and environmental research firm.

Forget the tokomak except as an expensive physicists research tool. Turn and look at “cold fusion” again which has now been rehabilitated by NASA and others.
In recent years there has a been a real flurry of experiments, replications and patents. Atomic processes occurring at the subatomic level have yielded elements that weren’t there before the experiment started, confirming goings on.
The key has been keeping on and, like the early days of computing, world-wide swapping of results and modifications. A 110 cu cm unit, awaiting release, is producing 18.5kw of electricity.
The secret:
The process has been simplified and proven. Hydrogen in a small tube with the right catalysts and a low voltage small plasma as well as a pulsed voltage through the plasma seems to be all it takes to show energy in excess of inputs. The trick is the electrical pulses. Different voltages are yielding different elemental residues.
There are several contenders for production and supply. https://brilliantlightpower.com seem to be the most professionally advanced. Randall Mills has had to produce a new theory of physics to explain his project. He expects to power trains and other large movers as well as most other things. Further, the process is capable of remediation of nuclear power station waste. He believes that the energy produced is derived from a change of the state of hydrogen to what he calls a hydrino. These hydrino are on offer to labs for experimentation. They also have their own unique spectroscopic signature.
Another, out of Africa, is a little different: it has been showing units of 5kw to 500kw producing 220v, 3 phase, 50 Hz clean electricity. Teams from the USA have come and investigated and found no other source of supply than the device itself which has been used to power a small car and domestic housing. Currently a racing car with unlimited km’s is under development and can be seen on their Face Book. The movie showing their 10hp small sedan driving around Harare is a delight to view.
The principle is similar to Tesla. Maxwell Chikumbutsu says God showed him some “frequencies” and has enabled him to produce his Greener Power Machine harvesting some inexhaustible planetary phenomena. See https://saithgroup.com the Face Book pages give more detail.There are currently 12 international manufacturers/sellers signed up to promote this.
I have been watching these alternative energy forms for 10 years and it is thrilling to see them coming to fruition. The patent frenzy is reminiscent of the Edison years. I fully expect to see Airbus using its patent to fly an electric aircraft within 10 years. The world could go off the grid with home-produced electricity. Also, the processes are dangerous radiation free.
There will always be conflicting opinions but the commercial interest being shown speaks of others putting their money where they see reward. It’s well past the fraud stage.
Why don’t we just go get some dilithium crystals? That’ll get us the power we need…
Or a beryllium sphere. (Sorry, watched Galaxy Quest again this past weekend.)
The most aggravating part of the fusion reporting is that the articles make it sound like cheap fusion power is ‘soon’, ‘right around the corner’, etc. ITER is a model that is way too big and is already obsolete in that it doesn’t take advantage of the latest in superconducting materials. At best it’s a fusion lab where they can play around with the physics. A real fusion plant would be 2 or 3 generations of reactors later, which at best might actually take a chronological generation to complete.
“Talented people and large sums of money are being wasted ”
Wrong.
It’s not about fusion.
It’s all about pileup stuardship.
At some point we will have to start testing again.
You need “talented people”.
About 40 years ago we discussed fusion very often at the institute for experimental nuclear physics at the Karlsruhe research center in Germany and one major result was the risk by destroying the molecular structure of the stainless steel compound for the plasma by high energetic neutrons with the result of a necessary replacement of the very large vacuum torus every about three months. I don´t know, if there have been any progress since that. This would result in additional extreme high maintenance costs for a torus structure of 10 m diameter and a height of about 6-8 m. Don´t forget the costs of helium cooled superconducting magnets, which have to be removed for maintenance.
Nevertheless the research must go on.
The ITER is forging ahead, many tech records will be broken. Who ever said this was easy?
Wendelstein 7-X fusion device at Greifswald, Germany, to be upgraded
https://www.ipp.mpg.de/4828222/01_20
A masterpiece of engineering, a Stellarator :
https://www.ipp.mpg.de/14779/stellarator
The self organizing capability of plasma is being harnessed by LPPFusion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ajqD0hoOMw&t=70s
No money in Biden’s so called infrastructure bondoggle, and even The Donald did nothing.
Looks like the Beltway is still fossilized one would say.
ITER is just a P.O.C (proof of concept) , costing a huge of money, but even not an industrial prototype which could only come second half of this century …
In the meantime , renewable energy will become enough mature to cover and replace fossil energy for ever …
I don’t think fusion will be competitive enough one day as the complexity is so high so that its price will be always above any other type of energy .
In opposite, in the future, we’ll be able to print solar panels with perovskites as easy as printing wall paper !
I hope the authors show as much concern for waste from all existing and decommissioned conventional nuclear reactors, which will be around for a lot, lot longer (and so far we don’t have it safely stored in long term repositories).
I think we should be spending on pushing the frontiers of technology and knowledge, even large sums… space programmes, fusion, supercolliders.
This may be the first post that you’ve made that isn’t misleading or even an outright lie. However, the Finnish high level radioactive waste repository is currently under construction and is slated to start operations in 2023. So why don’t they already have it? Two reasons; 1) It required a long period of careful study to make sure that it would safely isolate wastes for 10s of thousands of years deep underground, and 2) Interim storage in above ground vaults is completely safe and relatively inexpensive.
In the U.S., nuclear waste disposal is paid for by a tax of 0.1 cents per Kw-hr that goes into a fund that now has $40 billion saved up. That’s all, 0.1 cents. If the U.S. hadn’t wasted so much time and effort on Yucca Mtn., a very bad site to store nuclear waste, they could have had a repository similar to the Finns already.
The waste storage is a political problem, not a technical one.
Yes, the only way the French have been able to dispose of their nuclear wastes is by compressing it into small paper-weights and requiring all the bureaucrats to use them on their office desks. /sarc
The primary reason the US hasn’t solved the problem of fission waste product disposal is that then-President Carter signed an executive order prohibiting the extraction of fissile materials from the lighter elements with the misguided concern that the recycled materials might be stolen and used by terrorists. There were, and still are, plenty of other sources in the world!
Without the long-lived fissile isotopes, the disposal problem for fission by-products would be much simpler. It it ultimately a political problem, not a technical one!
Contrary to what meab says, this comment by you isn’t of significantly better quality than what we have come to expect from you.
An ITER flyover :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIRdKDMhGUQ
France got the contract as the neighbor sought to shut all nuclear down.
Real serious engineering!
If a modern, science-based R&D program does not achieve it’s objectives in about a decade, it is unlikely to be practical or economical.
Numbers like these and absurd wind sounds better. Coal, gas oil and fission sound better yet..
Seems the research here was shallow. The opening assertion was partial and hence wrong. Naturally occurring Tritium is not a problem because we don;t need it. Tritium that is needed can be bred in the Lithium jacket that also extracts the heat. It isn’t simple, but is doable. So that point is wrong in fact. Easy to check as well.
Which is a shame because it detracts from the correct and important core facts. Only nuclear energy, which is more intense, so also much more sustainable and a much better replacement for fossil energy sources, can replace fossil use. But it will need to pass through Gen 3 passive safety and the Fast Fission reactors, which must also solve the 800 deg coolant temperature first. So fusion is 50 and more likely 100 years away, htough 2 generations of new nuclear fission technology.
A Manhattan project is neither appropriate nor necessary. FIssion can last for the life of the human species once fast fission is mastered. The RUssians are already in commercial generation, BTW. .The Fast Fission reactors will help solve the high temperature materials problems for Fusion, though. Whenever. I suspect the general adoption of perfectly safe geological storage of nuclear waste after spent fuel processing will increase the rate of adoption dramatically as fossil supplies really do start to become scarce, relative to demand.
The message is research at Cadarache in the South of France will be on going for a very long time. Well worth considering as a career. It’s very nice there and the International Schools are top rate.
CEng, CPhys
The government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers. That simply rewards the group with the best lobbyists.
Take the $65 billion in public taxes for example spent on ITER. Most of that money comes from low and middle class working people that cannot afford fancy tax lawyers.
Instead announce at $50 billion prize for the first successful fusion power plant. Private companies and investors with deep pockets will be falling all over themselves to build just such a device. There would be no need to take tax dollars from the poor.
Why does this not happen? Because governments take from the poor to give to the rich. This has been going on from day 1.
And yes, fusion is possible. People have made working fusion machines in their garages without any government funding. They didn’t need $65 billion to make it happen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor
Take existing technology and build more advanced fission reactors. Now you don’t need fusion power for hundreds of years. Problem solved.
I disagree with the authors’ contention that “It’s up to Congress and the White House to act.” With slightly over half the House and almost half the Senate wanting to spend trillions of dollars on solar panels and windmills, now is NOT the time for Congress to stop funding a $650 million per year project that could eventually yield some serious energy.
Whether we’re talking about fossil fuels, renewables, or nuclear fission or fusion, the less Congress and (especially this) White House get involved in the energy markets, the more energy we will have.
This peanut thinks the best way to do it is to use a Dyson sphere. No need to reinvent the sun.
In 30 years…
polywells, FRCs, even the General Atomics steampunk mecha-fusor
but not ITER, waste of time, no future