Decarbonization of our society has been a clear need for many years now.
Fossil fuels are the major source of human-produced greenhouse gases (GHGs) and are also riddled with issues of resource availability (with strong geopolitical aspects) and environmental impact.
The 8 billion-plus people now on our planet need a global solution to their energy needs that preserves and protects our ecosystem and allows a dignified level of life for everybody. This is a massive challenge that has not been met with the determination and urgency that it deserves.
Could nuclear fusion energy (which powers the Sun and stars) offer a promising, safe, long-term option for sustainable, clean energy?
The thousands of international scientists and engineers collaborating on the ITER project (“The Way” in Latin) certainly think so. They’re working to demonstrate the viability of large-scale fusion production in real-world conditions—as a viable alternative to fossil fuels.
We spoke to Gabriella Saibene, Former Head of Unit at Fusion for Energy, which is responsible for the European contribution to ITER, to find out more.
How can fusion energy help combat climate change?
The availability of clean electricity is the basis of a carbon-free society, both for direct use and to produce hydrogen for transport, energy storage and more. There is no silver bullet for achieving the radical change required to meet this challenge, and all useful tools in our hands should be used.
Fusion energy is one powerful tool that has the potential to contribute substantially to achieving our goals of quantity and quality of the world’s future energy production.
Fusion energy holds the potential to produce abundant and reliable baseload electricity without greenhouse gas emissions—and without the production of long-term hazardous waste.
The fuel of a fusion energy reactor, deuterium and tritium (both forms of hydrogen), are also either plenty in nature (deuterium) or can be produced by the neutron produced by fusion reactions themselves (tritium).
ITER represents the next step in fusion energy development, aimed at demonstrating the potential of net fusion energy production as a basis for the construction of a first-of-a-kind fusion reactor connected to the grid.
What makes fusion energy an attractive alternative or complement to current fossil fuel alternatives?
The solution to the climate crisis demands a diversified and open-minded approach to energy production technologies, both those already available and those in development.
The full replacement of fossil fuels (both for direct energy production and transport) will benefit from the contribution of solar, eolic, geothermal and nuclear energy. Each technology should be used in the most appropriate way, to create an energy production system to respond to the needs of society in the centuries to come.
Fusion energy is most suited to provide solid and plentiful baseload electricity, not tied to weather and other climatic or geographical constraints or the availability of suitable land. There is a natural abundance of deuterium, which is found in seawater. Tritium is also produced as a byproduct of the fusion reaction itself. So, while fusion isn’t normally considered a “renewable” energy in the same way as wind and solar, the expected availability of fusion fuel will never be an issue that limits the usefulness of fusion in the long term.
Fusion energy is often described as being safer and with minimal waste compared to current nuclear fission. What would you say to people who still have concerns about nuclear power?
This discussion is complex, since evaluating the risks and benefits of nuclear fission is often coloured by not entirely objective facts.
The physics and technology of nuclear fission and nuclear fusion are very different. One essential characteristic of fusion is that the core of the reactor is a hot deuterium-tritium plasma (called burning plasma), where the nuclei fuse. The result is a charged Helium nucleus and a very energetic neutron.
The key point is that the physics of fusion is such that the fusion reactions cannot go critical. That is, reach a status where the fusion reactions grow out of control, producing an uncontrolled amount of energy. This makes it far safer than fission reactors.
Accidents in a fusion plant that could potentially compromise the reactor structure and, therefore, public safety are not possible.
The interaction of the fusion neutrons with the metallic components of the reactor vessel will cause activation of some of the steel elements. Research has been carried out to develop special steels to be used for the construction of fusion reactors, called low-activation steels. In this way, both the quantity and the level/type of radioactivity are such that long-term storage is not required. Finally, containment of tritium (radioactive, with a short half-life of only 12.3y) is normally guaranteed by the special building in which the reactor is located.
What are the main technical and engineering challenges that need to be overcome before fusion can become a commercially viable energy source?
The fusion scientific and technical community is highly confident that ITER will demonstrate that net energy can be produced, with high gain.
The challenges are in developing materials and components that can survive the effects of burning plasmas, especially the neutron loads, over extended periods. This is essential to achieve the economic viability of fusion energy, with the reactor operating in continuum for long periods of time.
Another challenge is to develop and scale the systems needed for the production of tritium, since this isn’t naturally available and its production outside fusion is very limited.
What policy measures, investments, etc., are needed to move from experimental projects like ITER to large-scale fusion energy generation?
The sequential approach in the development of fusion energy needs to be modified.
A linear progression from today’s experiments, to ITER, to a demonstration reactor and then large-scale production is not likely to answer the pressing needs of the world we live in today.
What’s needed now is to design and construct on fast timescales facilities, and specific experimental devices to tackle–in parallel to ITER’s construction and operation–the issues (some of which I’ve highlighted above) that we already know need further R&D.
This requires renewed financial and political support from the traditional backers (governments and European-funded research) as well as the creation of new private-public partnerships. This would extend the knowledge and resources available for fusion. We also need to increasingly involve industry players in the development and production of the high-tech, specialised components and processes needed to achieve a commercially viable reactor.
Get the latest climate change insights direct from the experts.
Sign up to our newsletter
Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the granting authority. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.
The information and documentation in this section are published with permission from their respective sources. While the MAIA Project strives to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the content, we make no guarantees or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the validity, reliability, or accuracy of the information. The original sources are solely responsible for the content they provide. We disclaim any liability for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in the information and for any actions taken in reliance on the information contained on this website.
