A portion of today's video is brought to you
by Brilliant. Fusion is looked at by many as the holy grail
for supplying all of our clean electricity needs. However, the old joke is that nuclear fusion
is always 30 years away, no matter what advances or promises are made. However, there are several privately funded
startups that are thinking outside the box and accelerating fusion development with the
ultimate goal of commercializing it much sooner than you might think possible. There’s a lot of interesting developments
and news around these companies to sift through. What makes each of these companies’ fusion
promises unique compared to what’s come before? And will they finally break that 30 year promise? I know many of you are probably typing “it’s
never going to happen” into the comments, but here me out. There are three startups I’m going to focus
on in this video that have some unique technologies and approaches to try and deliver commercial
fusion generated electricity in the near future. There’s actually a fourth I’d include
this group, Commonwealth Fusion Systems, but I already made a video about them a little
while ago. I’ll include a link in the description,
so you can check that one out as well. It’s another very promising company that
may make you think differently about the future of fusion. For these three, they’re moving away from
the traditional tokamak reactor, donut shaped design you’re probably familiar with. But first, why fusion and why are things feeling
different now? Unlike solar and wind, nuclear power is 24/7. Yet, not all nuclear power is created equal. Fission is the state-of-the-art process, where
neutrons hit and split radioactive atoms such as Uranium-235, which releases energy and
more neutrons. This generates lots of heat, which can be
used to generate steam and turn turbines. It also triggers an unstable chain-reaction
that could get out of control and lead to reactor explosion or meltdown. If you think this will never happen, just
look at Fukushima. And even when everything goes alright, you’re
still left with a lot of radioactive waste to dispose of. Instead, as the name hints, the fusion process
consists of merging atoms rather than splitting them. To be more specific, you can use deuterium
and tritium, which are hydrogen isotopes. Besides being way more stable than fission
fuel, these elements are more widely available as they can be mostly sourced from seawater. They also eliminate the problems of CO2 emissions
found in fossil fuel power generation and generate no nuclear waste, as found in fission
reactors. So, you may probably see why fusion is considered
much safer and greener than fission. On top of that, it can yield 4x more energy
than the conventional reaction. But how come we aren’t using it to produce
clean energy at a commercial scale yet? In short, the energy you spend to sustain
the reaction is much higher than what you get out of it. In other words, we don’t achieve the so-called
net energy gain. This is because you need to maintain super
high temperatures to keep the reaction going. Just to give you a…scalding sensation…we’re
talking about getting 10x hotter than the sun’s core. When reaching those crazy temperatures, deuterium
and tritium lose electrons and turn into positively charged ions, which form the so-called plasma. Under such conditions, ionized particles defy
their repulsion force and smash into helium atoms. Although bottling something hotter than the
sun in a machine sounds impossible, we’ve been playing around with plasma-containing
rigs since the 1950s. You’d imagine that would be enough time
to find a solution, right? Well, just like any other invention made in
the lab, you need a lot of funds to improve it and make it commercially viable before
it could be used in the real world. Which leads to one of the reasons things feel
different now: funding. It wasn’t until the 1970s that the US government
invested big time into tokamak fusion reactors, which were the most promising design at the
time. Ironically, that push only happened because
of the fossil fuel crisis. However, when fossil fuels prices dropped
again in the mid 1980s, national fusion funding also dropped. After a period of stagnation, the US government
reignited the fusion spark by pouring a pile of cash in an international project called
ITER. Meaning "The Way" in Latin, ITER has engaged
35 countries in the construction of the world's largest tokamak reactor in Southern France. But is this the right way to accelerate fusion
deployment? Over the years, ITER rig’s massive size
has translated into overspending and delays. For instance, last January, France’s Nuclear
Safety Authority (ASN) halted the machine assembly to address some safety concerns. While the creation of their first plasma was
scheduled for 2025, the European Commission thinks that this undesired pit-stop will postpone
it by at least 17 months. When it comes to construction costs, we’re
not doing any better. As of 2018, the US Department of Energy (DOE)
predicted American spending to be 3x greater than expected. To add to all this, ITER’s full operation
won’t start until 2035 and it’s not even going to be a working reactor, but only a
testing facility. I can hear you already. Is that money for nothing? Well, not according to the National Academies
of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Their 2019 report recommended the government
to follow ITER as it’s the best way to dodge fusion’s dire straits. They also encouraged the development of in-house,
yet more compact, fusion pilot plants, which makes financial sense considering that America’s
current budget for fusion is less than one fifth of what we spend on renewables. Luckily, fusion doesn’t only rely on public
moolah. Driven by a tenfold increase in private investments,
fusion startups have popped up like nuclear mushrooms over the last 30 years. As reported by the Fusion Industry Association
this year, their funding increased by 139% compared to 2021, topping $4.8 billion overall. Remember that the US government is allocating
only $500 million to fusion projects per year. Fuelled by deep-pocketed entrepreneurs, startups
could get us to fusion much sooner than ITER. For example, in the previous video I mentioned,
I talked about a company called Commonwealth Fusion Systems (CFS), which is an MIT spin-off. In 2015, researchers designed a more compact
tokamak reactor. Their trick was to use a new superconducting
magnet to confine the plasma in a much smaller space. Just to give you a sense of scale, their Sparc
rig takes up only 2% the size of ITER. Also, last year they created a magnetic field
of 20 Tesla, which is nearly twice as powerful as the one ITER will generate. As touted by the partnership, their machine
will start producing a net energy gain in 2025. That massive influx of private cash is what’s
giving these companies an edge over the lower government funded efforts. Unlike the collaboration between CFS and MIT,
focusing on a reduced version of the conventional tokamak reactor, the three other companies
I want to focus on today are implementing unique designs for pulsed reactions. I had the chance to interview all them and
take the pulse of their technologies. Let’s begin our startups tour in Seattle,
where Helion is rethinking the way of generating electricity from fusion. Typically, you convert the reaction heat into
steam to drive a turbine. Instead, Helion came up with a more straightforward
route called direct energy conversion. As David Kirtley, Helion’s CEO, pointed
out, this implies a significant advantage. The direct energy recovery speeds you up by
generations of machines because you're just directly harnessing the electricity from the
beginning, rather than having to learn how to build the big steam turbine systems or
other things that other people are doing. But how does their system work? In terms of plasma confinement, their approach
is similar to that used by tokamak reactors, which implies the generation of a magnetic
field. But there are some key differences in their
design. To begin with, their reactor looks more like
a dumbbell rather than a donut…a healthier shape so to speak...so, what happens inside
their vessel? To begin with, they inject a gaseous mixture
of deuterium and helium-3 at each end of their reactor and superheat it through electromagnetic
radiation to create plasma. When passing a current through the coils,
the magnets inverts the plasma magnetic field, which wraps around it. This confinement technique is called field
reversed configuration (FRC). But that’s not the end of it. Their system, dubbed as plasma accelerator,
directs the two plasma sources from each end towards the center of the rig. Traveling at 1 million mph, they slam into
a merged plasma which gets compressed by other magnets to make fusion happen. Finally, the resulting pressure pushes back
onto the magnets. They repeat these oscillations in pulses. The post-fusion plasma expansion induces a
magnetic field variation and therefore an electric current, which is captured by the
Helion system. We've been able to show in our previous systems
we've been able to show that we could put energy into a magnetic field and recover it
very, very efficiently, over 90% efficiency ... over 95% efficiency. And that enables us to build fusion systems
a lot faster and smaller. Thanks to this efficient energy recovery,
Helion doesn’t need to achieve fusion ignition, which is the point where the reaction becomes
self-sustained. And this is a huge bonus. Just think that scientists accomplished fusion
ignition for the first time only last year, but they still haven’t figured out how to
replicate it. The national ignition facility is getting
too ignition for the first time, but what happens after ignition is still a big fusion
physics unknown. Helion's goes was we don't want ignition. I don't want to have to get to even as far
as the national ignition facility is trying to do, I want to focus on modern electronics,
which are very efficient, high speed electronics, which are very fast, focusing on taking those
technologies from all industries, applying them to fusion so that I can build systems
that don't require the hard physics of ignition, don't require a lot of those things that the
fusion physics community is still trying to understand and model correctly. That sounds promising, right? But how soon are we going to see their reactor
up and running? Helion is currently developing Polaris, their
seventh generation prototype. However, right from the onset, the startup
has been playing around with multiple machines at the same time. According to David, this is actually what’s
propelling Helion forward. Building multiple systems in parallel accelerates
your timeline. Our sixth generation system, Trenta, is still
operational. We still run it multiple days a week. In the evenings we're doing fusion still,
learning as much as we can from that system while we're building the seventh generation. And the early computer simulations of the
eighth generation are being done right now. We need to be doing a lot of those development
efforts in parallel so that we can be moving as fast as possible, still informing the next
generation, but not waiting on the typical historical design build reporting cycle and
then start again. We found that that really stretches out timelines. Apparently, by the end of 2024 Polaris is
meant to have its light-bulb moment … meaning it will generate enough electricity to power
a light bulb. But that's by design at this point in development. In fact, while many fusion experts always
bring up the net energy gain conundrum, Helion is putting a spotlight on electricity production. In fact, all of these startups are. Other people have shown positive energy in
a format that's hard to capture or hard to use. Our goal is to focus all the way on electricity
and do it from the beginning, so that what we're making, the physics we're proving, gets
to electricity. Polaris should show that we can make electricity
from fusion for the first time. The focus on positive electricity production
makes sense. We need zero-carbon electricity as soon as
possible if we want to hit net zero targets by 2050. So, at the end of the day, firing up a fusion
reaction without producing any electricity does pretty much nothing towards meeting that
goal. Our next stop is Canada, where General Fusion
is working hard to bring fusion-produced electricity to the market by 2030. Just like Helion’s, their system magnetically
insulates the plasma. Just like Helion’s, their system magnetically
insulates the plasma. That is where the similarities end though,
as General Fusion’s rig has a totally different design. But before I get into that design, if some
of the concepts behind fusion are a little fuzzy to you, and you'd like to learn some
of the physics and underlying concepts, I'd strongly recommend checking out the “Scientific
Thinking” and "Physics of the Everyday" courses at today's sponsor, Brilliant. All of their courses are highly interactive
and "Scientific Thinking" covers things like how heat flows and energy moves. And "Physics of the Everyday" dives right
into how nuclear energy works, plus a lot more. These courses have helped me refresh my knowledge
and to wrap my head around some of the more complex concepts. There's so many other lessons to chose from. Everything from Logic to Electricity and Magnetism. The more we understand the science behind
these problems, the better we can solve them. And you can go at your own pace, learning
a little bit each day. But the best part is how hands-on the interactive
courses are, which is the best way to learn. Join over 11 million people learning on Brilliant
today. Go to https://brilliant.org/Undecided to sign
up for free. And also, the first 200 people will get 20%
off their annual premium membership. Thanks to Brilliant and to all of you for
supporting the channel. General Fusion's rig deisgn. An array of steam-driven pistons surrounds
and compresses a rotating chamber filled with a liquid mix of lithium and lead. When spinning, the metal-based solution forms
a cavity, wherein deuterium and tritium atoms are dropped. As fusion takes place within the metallic
slurry, their machine walls are shielded against extreme temperature and pressure, which prolongs
their lifetime. I had a chance to speak to Mike Donaldson,
General Fusion’s Vice President, who shared a great analogy to picture their reactor. It's much like a diesel engine, but quite
a bit bigger and requires a little bit more science. Thinking of it like a diesel engine really
helped it click with me because of the way it compresses and pulses to create energy. From the electricity generation standpoint,
General Fusion’s mode of operation is closer to the standard practice. When fusion occurs, the molten metal absorbs
the released energy, which is sent to a heat exchanger to generate steam. Vapor will then drive a turbine to produce
clean electricity. Simplicity is possibly the biggest benefit
of General Fusion’s design and Mike summarized it in a nice way. You can take that liquid metal, put it through
a heat exchanger, boil steam, and then all sorts of traditional technologies use steam
to turn a turbine. So that part is known. So it's really a practical approach that removes
those traditional barriers that other Fusion approaches still haven't overcome yet. Over the last 20 years, General Fusion has
been designing the components of their system independently. Liquid metal, plasma injector, steam pistons. Now, they’re fusing all those pieces together
into a demonstration plant in the UK, which is scheduled to go live in 2027. So, what’s behind this bullish timeline? According to Mike, faster computer simulations
and machine learning have been speeding up their progress. We use computational fluid dynamics modeling
to develop how to form that liquid metal cavity and what's going to happen to that cavity
when it compresses. One of the ways that we can leverage machine
learning is by throwing it at that data set to really understand what we've got. Aside from smarter and faster data handling,
General Fusion is leveraging top-class fusion expertise to speed up the construction of
their demonstration plant. The startup partnered with Culham Centre for
Fusion Energy, which crafted the Joint European Torus (JET), one of the world’s biggest
tokamak reactors. Speaking of the UK, that’s where the third
startup catalyzing fusion is operating. Unlike Helion and General Fusion, which are
betting on magnetic coils or steam-driven pistons to confine and heat their plasma,
First Light is harnessing a different weapon…literally…their novel pulsed ignition is called projectile
fusion and shoots off an old concept, that is inertial-confinement fusion (ICF). Put simply, after triggering a sort of railgun,
a copper disk-shaped projectile will fly at 6.5 km (ca. 4 miles)/s towards a small plastic cube, a.k.a
target, encapsulating the fuel. The impact gives rise to a pressure wave that
collapses the fuel. This then turns into plasma, thus sparking
fusion. Another major difference compared to Helion
and General Fusion is that First Light doesn’t generate any magnetic fields to trap their
plasma. And that’s because their reaction is so
quick that the plasma doesn’t have time to bounce back. When it comes to converting the fusion energy
into electricity, the British startup adopts a very similar technique to that designed
by General Fusion. In this case, a lithium-based coolant will
flow inside the fusion chamber and capture the heat. The liquid also serves as a machine protection
against fusion-induced damage. Finally, passing the coolant through a heat
exchanger, you’ll get the steam to run the turbine. After bullet-proofing their projectile fusion
last April, they’re now aiming their guns at demonstrating net energy gain by 2024. If everything is on target, they may have
a power plant up and shooting in 2030. These three startups don’t seem to be joking
about getting fusion out in the world in years, not decades. So, can they really debunk the “30-years
away” myth once and for all? The truth is that it’s a hard call to make. While smaller systems require less massive
infrastructure than ITER, fusion systems are very complex and therefore building them implies
significant technical challenges. Scaling down doesn’t necessarily mean making
the system simpler. For instance, Helion’s current reactor only
generates pulses only every 10 minutes. However, their devices will have to run much
quicker to power the grid in a consistent way. A commercial system will want to get from
once every 600 seconds to at least once a second. That's a big engineering jump. Now, this is all by design. Their current prototypes are about proving
out specific aspects of the system and aren’t meant to go at 600 times per second, but it
does show that there’s still work to be done. Another thing that could hold up fusion’s
rollout on a worldwide scale is the lack of an established supply chain. Building a system like the one designed by
Helion will require the mass production of a series of components such as semiconductors,
capacitors, magnets, etc. There's a whole bunch of those engineering
technologies that have to reach commercial maturity before we could really think of making
generators out of these systems. Having said that, the Seattle-based startup
is already putting together an in-house value chain. This holistic approach to their design, manufacturing,
scale up, and electricity production was something all of the companies hit on in my conversations. It’s one of the key reasons why these approaches
are good candidates for making the fusion dream come true sooner than anybody else,
like ITER. A lot of what we're doing in our facility,
we call this one Antares, behind me, is building out those manufacturing lines of electronics,
semiconductors. We just opened up a large scale machine shop
with our big 15 foot long CNCs to start machining all the big parts that we need for the big
high powered magnets. For General Fusion, it’s not about spinning
up unique manufacturing and supply chains, but making the most out of off-the-shelf machinery
like heat exchangers, turbines, etc. They’re leaning into already existing supply
chains. So from the commercialization standpoint,
we want to make sure that we're not using any exotic materials. So you bring up supply chain. While we do need to partner with suppliers
that can build big industrial equipment, we are not establishing a new supply chain. All these startups have a plan to address
their weaknesses, some fusion experts working in the public sector are still skeptical about
their ambitious claim of delivering a large-scale working fusion reactor within a decade. Critics argue it’s just a clever move to
attract more investors. I don’t know how biased state-funded researchers
are, but none of the fusion startups I talked to were salesy at all. They were very pragmatic and realistic about
the challenges ahead. We're not predicting yet how long that's going
to take to get commercial electricity on the grid, we're being very thoughtful about those
and over promising those. It's definitely an aggressive schedule for
sure, but we have to keep our eye on the ball. The most important part is to get this fusion
demonstration plant demonstrating that we can reach fusion conditions at scale. After that, there will be some challenges. Being zero-carbon, on-demand and safe, it’s
clear why so many people are passionate about fusion power as the best way to build a climate-friendly
energy grid. While I can’t vet these companies for viability,
I can appreciate their expertise and motivation to make fusion a reality in the short term. The massive influx of funding has allowed
them to attract the top talent and invest in development at a much faster pace than
government funded operations. After speaking to people from Commonwealth
Fusion Systems, Helion, General Fusion, and First Light Fusion, there’s one clear thread
about all of them: they’re all passionate and believe we can solve this complex engineering
and physics puzzle. Clearly, they’ll have to deal with technical,
logistical and regulatory obstacles, but their technologies may bring us fusion much earlier
than we thought is possible. If you'd like to watch some fantastic videos
about fusion from a physicist's point of view, I'd strongly recommend checking out Dr. Sabine
Hossenfelder. I'll link to some of her videos in the description. So what do you think? Do you think any of these fusion startups
have a shot? Jump into the comments and let me know and
be sure to check out my follow up podcast Still TBD where we’ll be discussing some
of your feedback. If you liked this video, be sure to check
out one of these videos over here. And thanks to all of my patrons for your continued
support, you really make these videos possible. And thanks to all of you for watching. I’ll see you in the next one.
Company A: Create a fusion reactor design no one has ever seen.
Company B: Create a fusion reactor using parts and technology we have already seen, operating in a way that is analogous to an existing technology.
Company C: Fire a railgun at it.
At the end of the day it probably doesn't matter what they do assuming they aren't tech grifts for investors money. Either ITER or Commonwealth Fusion Systems will pave the way to fusion.