There is a lot of debate over where the energy will come from after fossil fuels run out. All of the current 'environmental' technologies like wind, wave, tidal, biomass and solar produce unreliable and low outputs as well as using up valuable land. The only major renewable technologies capable of producing large amounts of energy are geothermal and hydroelectric - both of which can only be used in certain areas. Hydroelectric also damages local ecosystems and uses a lot of land.
So, where do we go?
Nuclear fusion. While not commercially viable, research into it is already taking place. Estimates put the first commercial station in 2050, but a research station (specifically D-T fusion in tokamak confinement) that will produce net power has a final design and is beginning construction.
Nuclear fusion is:
- Safe. A failure at the plant that breaks plasma containment would make the reaction stop by itself and no dangerous substances would enter the environment. The plant itself may be damaged, but this is true of conventional power stations too. As for terrorist threats, none of the material needed for a fusion bomb can be derived by breaking into a fusion power plant or storage facility - there is no additional danger by building one.
- Cheap. Once the reaction is contained and started, it is self-sustaining. The fuel quantities needed are small compared to fossil fuel stations, and there are no extraordinary decomissioning costs that cause nuclear fission plants to be expensive to build.
- Reliable. The reaction need never stop.
- Clean. The solid waste products are primarily safe, and though some of the reactor may become radioactive after many years of use, it is low-level waste that vanishes in tens, not millions, of years. It produces no greenhouse gases or acid rain causing chemicals.
- Sustainable. While the reaction is not renewable, all of the main fuels are found in abundance on Earth and are not concentrated in unstable regions like the Middle East. The deuterium can be derived from seawater, for example.
- Scalable. There is no reason why fusion power cannot expand to fulfil the Earth's needs. A single plant will produce more energy than a similar size fission installation, so if all current power station sites are replaced with fusion, no additional land is needed.
There is only one problem - funding. Few bodies seem willing to invest the billions of dollars needed to create a viable power plant. The returns, not only in power but in new science and technology, are great enough to justify it in my view. The ITER project, involving the EU, India, Japan, People's Republic of China, Russia, South Korea, and the USA, is the most promising route to fusion power at present.
With all of the advantages of fusion power, the USA, in its infinite wisdom concerning the environment and oil running out, has cancelled all funding for ITER. The project will be delayed and will miss out on US technology expertise because of this brilliant decision. Thanks, America.
