FUSION I finished the book about the history of nuclear fusion reactor research that I've been mentioning lately. The title is "Fusion: The Search for Endless Energy", by Robin Herman. My copy is the first edition from 1990, which I picked up from a small bookshop sometime many years ago, I think before I finished secondary school. Like so many books, I never got around to reading it properly until now. There was a second edition published in 2006, which is still available from Cambridge University Press (for quite a lot more than the $15 for my second-hand hardcover): https://www.cambridge.org/au/universitypress/subjects/physics/plasma-physics-and-fusion-physics/fusion-search-endless-energy The author, who died last year, was a journalist (rather an unlikely one to cover this topic, if her Wikipedia page is anything to go by) and as such it's not a technical book. Key scientific developments are summarised at a level that's easily digested, but primarily as part of a narrative describing the overall history of the field. Key individuals in the plasma physics community, and politics behind the scenes of the experiments, are given as much focus as that applied to the technology itself. This wider context explains many of the motivating factors behind fusion's often unsteady rate of development, and of course the field's unrealised promises (not to mention occasional mistaken claims) of success. I think complex technologies are always best understood on top of the historical narrative of their development. This book explains that history with ample entertaining anecdotes picked up through the author's own interviews at a time when scientists from the first generation of fusion research were still alive to tell their stories. At times it does ham things up a little, a bit overly eager to elevate the generally dry world of plasma physics research, but succeeds at presenting such a complex field in a highly readable way. It also tries to cover a global perspective, both sides of the iron curtain, and also peeking into Japanese research later in the game. Upon finishing the book, the obvious thing to do is to look into what's happened in fusion research since 1990. That actually seems to be an interesting point in time with which to compare the current state of the science, because in some ways it seems that everything has changed yet nothing has changed. Having documented the record-breaking giant Tokamak reactors of the USA and the EU, TFTR and JET, which nevertheless failed to realise their scientist's dreams of reaching 'breakeven', the book mentions the beginnings of the ITER project. With initial design work dating back to the late 1980s, ITER is still today the fusion community's one big work-in-progress, possibly nearing completion but also encountering new delays. In pushing for a giant international effort, it seems that the scientists unwittingly deprived themselves of continuing to build up ever bigger Tokamak-based reactor designs via the national programmes of their individual countries. In the USA, a successor project to the TFTR reactor at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, home of the first US experiments into fusion reactor design, was never realised at the same scale. The one commercial company that got into building fusion reactors during the era covered by the book, General Atomics, is still running their DIII-D reactor from 1986, while trying to raise funding to build a new design. The JET reactor in England is still currently the biggest working fusion reactor, with efforts recently focused on research to help the ITER project. The Russian T-series Tokamaks, the origin of the design that now dominates magnetic fusion research, never caught up to scale of western designs in the 1980s since their big T-20 reactor project fell victim to the failing Soviet economy. But their T-15 reactor has also been upgraded for research contributing to ITER, and curiously they've also converted it to work as a fusion-fission hybrid. This is a little-explored, and in many circles unpopular, branch of fusion reactor development which is surprising to see pop up at this point. https://www.iter.org/newsline/152/477 https://www.neimagazine.com/news/newsrussia-launches-t-15md-tokamak-at-the-kurchatov-institute-8757349 The Chinese have also now gone heavily into fusion research, as an ITER member as well as through construction of various reactors themselves. They've even pulled an old Stellarator out of the Australian National University, which seems to have been the only significant Australian fusion reactor known to the internet, the Heliac-1, built in the early 90s. So much for aussie fusion then, I suppose. https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6033331/anu-partner-with-china-on-nuclear-fusion-technology-for-power-supply/ Outside of magnetic fusion, the latest big news has been the success of the National Ignition Facility (successor to the Nova facility described in the book) at surpassing breakeven - getting a fusion reaction to release more energy than is put in to start it. While ITER seems to have stolen the focus of magnetic fusion funding away from national projects, the NIF and laser fusion has been USA's big national project, bred out of a laser fusion programme which was still significantly classified at the time of the book's publication. After initial failure in the 2010s, NIF finally acheived the 'ignition' that their facility was named for in 2021, then 'breakeven' last December and again last month. The trouble with this is that 'breakeven' was really intended as an interim target for magnetic fusion, a milestone that the big 1980s Tokamaks were hoped to reach, from which to plot a path towards a practical fusion power plant design. The difference with laser fusion is that whereas a magnetic fusion power plant is expected to reach this point of energy production through one massive injection of energy into a gas and then have the reaction sustain itself afterwards, a laser fusion reaction is one flash in the pan which actually blows the environment for the reaction (the fuel pellet) apart in the instant that it happens. Whereas magnetic fusion is often described as akin to putting the sun in a box, I think laser fusion is more akin to detonating a mini H-bomb in a box. Indeed this has really been the force behind laser fusion research from the start: studying the behaviour of fusion reactions as they happen in bombs in order to advance the USA's nuclear weapons research. The LIFE programme to develop laser fusion into a power-producing proposition has already been abandoned. NIF's long reset times, massive laser energy losses excluded from the breakeven calculation (vastly dwarfing actual energy production), and the extremely expensive (some even made with diamond) ultra-precise fuel pellets that are destroyed in each test, make it look a world away from something that could economically produce electricity. But perhaps what's most different in the fusion field compared to in the 1990s is that these national, and now international, fusion programmes are no longer the only game in town. While General Atomics was the only private company to do significant practical research over the period covered by the book, there currently seems to be an explosion of fusion start-ups building all sorts of reactor designs, following both old avenues abandoned by the national programmes of the past, and completely new concepts. The same enthusiasm for green energy solutions that encouraged governments to back constructing the big Tokamaks following the 1970s oil crisis, before promptly losing interest later in the 80s, has now gripped private investors. With the resulting new companies promising much shorter paths to fusion than the slow road that's being laid by ITER. While it's great that many alternative avenues to fusion are now being investigated as part of the current green energy race, the fact that it's being done in the private sector has some disadvantages too. It means that some of the walls of secrecy that were first taken down back in the late 1950s when fusion research was declassified by the major governments, are now being errected again for the sake of protecting intellectual property. Much of the reaearch and technology is being kept under wraps by companies afraid of helping their competitors to reach the fusion goal first. The result is lots of glossy 3D-rendered animations and sales pitches, but frustratingly little information with which one can separate fact from hype. Many machines have been built by these start-ups in the 2010s, with their creators often claiming that they've learnt enough from those tests already to build a working fusion generator within the decade. Given that venture capitalists are little interested in investments that take much longer to pay off, perhaps that's no wonder. The promised results of public fusion projects seem eternally to be 20-30 years away, but perhaps private fusion will forever be 5-10. - The Free Thinker