
A Nuclear Fusion Breakthrough May Be Closer Than You Think
But as impressive as Tokamak Hall may be, I left the company's campus more taken by the factory floor in the building next door. There, employees are hard at work manufacturing the company's key innovation: giant magnets made of high-temperature, superconducting tape to be used in the tokamak. The magnets keep the superheated fuel in place and stable enough for the fusion process to occur. In the facility, they're churning out magnets for the pilot project—and, eventually, to build a fleet of fusion power plants. It's a testament not just to fusion's technological potential but the commercial possibilities as well.
'The power industry is a very large market, and so you have, inherently, a huge potential for financial return,' Commonwealth Fusion Systems CEO Bob Mumgaard told me after my tour in March. 'If you built something that can produce 1% of energy, you've built the largest company in the world.'
The U.S. energy system is in the middle of an all-out revolution. Growing electricity demand has contributed to a massive build out of any power source that utilities can get their hands on—often gas and solar power, typically the two cheapest options these days. Meanwhile, the country has cemented its place as a superpower in fossil fuel production. Fusion energy, which has for decades been considered as distant and almost like science fiction, has the potential to reshape all of these trends. And it could happen sooner than many energy practitioners realize.
'I think we are showing promise for being able to demonstrate fusion conditions in this decade, and this decade has only five years left,' says Ernest Moniz, the former U.S. energy secretary who now serves on the board of TAE Technologies, a fusion company. 'Eventually, it could become the dominant source.'
There's no question that the pathway to a grid dominated by fusion is long and windy. For decades, it's been dismissed as too fantastical to consider seriously. Yet, now, it increasingly looks like fusion may soon be commercial—and policymakers and business executives around the world have done little to prepare for the wide-reaching consequences.
In February, a leading renewable energy trade group gathered industry luminaries for a summit on the future of the U.S. power sector. In the middle of the discussion, former head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Andrew Wheeler, now a partner at law firm Holland & Hart, rejected the possibility of fusion becoming commercial in the next 20 years. Even if there are advances, the regulatory process will take too long, he said. Moniz jumped in to correct: in 2023, federal authorities announced a streamlined process that will make fusion energy easier to deploy than old-school nuclear fission.
'Very few people know that that's already something in the cards,' Moniz told me later about the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's decision to regulate fusion reactors more like particle accelerators, which are inherently less risky than fission reactors. The decision was later solidified with a federal law.
In casual chats with energy watchers over the last six months, I've had a version of the same conversation over and over again: a policymaker, investor, or academic rejects the possibility of commercial fusion but their opinion reflects outdated information or lacks awareness of the current state of the technology.
There are good reasons for the misperceptions. Fusion first appeared on the energy sector's radar in the 1950s with a lot of hype. Nuclear weapons had proven the destructive power of nuclear technologies in World War II, and federal officials were keen to find ways to use nuclear energy—fusion and fission—to make vast amounts of electricity to power the post-war economy. In a 1953 speech at the United Nations, U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower called for nuclear development as part of an 'atoms for peace' agenda. Scientists confidently predicted that they could make quick advances with fusion just as they had with fission.
So, for decades, governments have funded a wide range of approaches and experiments aimed at advancing fusion power. Billions of dollars poured into research facilities like the Joint European Torus in England and the still-under-construction ITER project in France. Yet the technology has remained stubbornly elusive, with fusion reactions consuming more energy than they generated, leading to the running joke that fusion was always '20 years away.' By the 1990s, many in the energy industry had written off fusion as a scientific curiosity rather than a viable power source.
In 2022, scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California achieved a game-changing breakthrough: a fusion reaction that produced more energy than required to start it. Buoyed in part by that announcement, private companies and financiers have aggressively entered the race in recent years—flipping the fusion game on its head. For decades, fusion spending had primarily come from governments, leading to a vast body of knowledge about the technology but minimal pressure to commercialize.
Private companies take a different approach, trying to make money as soon as possible with fast-paced, commercially-oriented innovation. Today, the Fusion Industry Association counts at least 45 private companies globally working to develop commercial fusion; in total those companies have raised more than $7 billion—largely from private backers.
Commonwealth Fusion Systems (CFS) is leading the pack. The company has raised over $2 billion—more than any competitor—and plans to put power on the grid in the early 2030s. The scientific press has paid significant attention to CFS's technological innovation: using a high-temperature super conducting tape that can create strong magnetic fields. But the company's success is the result of a combination of that technical innovation and a focus on commercial speed. To get past labor shortages, its leaders have hired from a cross section of related fields rather than focusing solely on PhD physicists. And it has adapted its blue prints and supply chains to accommodate easily adaptable products that are already on the market rather than trying to build from scratch.
'We wanted to make the technology work as soon as possible,' says Brandon Sorbom, the company's chief science officer. 'Everything else is subordinate to that.'
The company's SPARC facility—where I visited the under-construction tokamak—is scheduled to deliver first net energy production in 2027. Late last year, the company said it would build its first commercial power plant in Virginia with the goal of delivering power to the grid in the early 2030s.
Assuming CFS's plant works as planned, a big question remains unanswered: how much will the electricity it produces cost?
In theory, the economics of successful fusion should be favorable. The fuel sources—tritium and deuterium—come from easily accessible sources, namely seawater and lithium, and should be cheap to produce compared to fossil fuels. Like many renewable energy sources, the main cost will come from financing the necessary infrastructure. And, while the executives at CFS are exceedingly confident that their approach to fusion will put electrons on the grid, they are less certain about how the cost will first pencil out. At $100 per megawatt hour they anticipate good business; at $50 per megawatt hour fusion takes over the world. 'What becomes interesting is if you get fusion soon to a power price that's relatively competitive, but you have a path to something that's really competitive,' says Rick Needham, the company's chief commercial officer.
Until the plant enters operation, it's hard to know where the numbers will fall. But we do know that costs tend to decrease over time with any technology as builders become more knowledgeable and efficient. The question is who will put up the money to make it happen? To scale, CFS and its competitors will need to raise billions more to finance individual projects—knowing that returns for early investments will not be as good as they might come to be in the future.
Fusion has perhaps received the most attention—and increasingly sourced its capital—from the so-called hyperscalers, big tech companies looking wherever they can to find power sources for their A.I. data centers. And both Microsoft and Google have reached agreements to buy fusion power when plants are up in running, including a June deal between Google and CFS.
'The hyperscalers, and any energy-intensive sort of industrial user of power, are starting to wake up,' says Michl Binderbauer, the CEO of nuclear fusion company TAE Technologies, which counts Google as investor. Whether these big tech players will open their wallets to finance the build out remains to be seen, even as the early signs are encouraging.
It's easy to be drawn in by the utopian vision of what fusion energy can do for the world. Fully realized, the technology can provide cheap, infinite clean energy across the globe. Given how energy, and fossil fuels in particular, shapes geopolitics, proponents of fusion say the power source could alleviate conflict and create a more peaceful world. And it would dramatically aid the fight against climate change—not just transforming today's power sector but leading to a rethink of how we use energy in industry and transportation.
But technological shifts are rarely so simple. New energy sources have historically disrupted existing power structures, created winners and losers, and generated unforeseen consequences that ripple across industries and nations.
Indeed, one place where people are paying attention is in China, which is racing to build its own state-backed fusion companies. If China does a better job of commercializing fusion, it would significantly alter geopolitical dynamics. 'China is a country of extraordinary initiative. In domain after domain, China invests early,' Senator Mark Warner, a Virginia Democrat who is also the vice chair of the Intelligence Committee, told me at a fusion event in February.
Even for those who are paying attention to fusion, it remains almost impossible to plan for its commercial emergence. Demand for electricity is rising everywhere, including the U.S., and utilities need to ensure that the grid is well supplied with technologies that exist today. For an industry that plans in decades-long time scales, the timing is challenging. Many places, including the U.S., are experiencing a surge in demand—and will build a whole lot of energy infrastructure—just before commercial fusion, potentially, comes online.
That timing could prove costly. Power plants built in the next decade might become stranded assets if cheap fusion electricity arrives. Grid infrastructure designed for today's energy mix may need expensive retrofitting. And regulatory frameworks built around fossil fuels and traditional renewables will require fundamental rethinking.
'The downside is that it's not here right now,' says Needham. But in energy markets, there is a fine line between a technology being too futuristic and becoming the next big thing. We may be approaching that line now.
This story is supported by a partnership with Outrider Foundation and Journalism Funding Partners. TIME is solely responsible for the content.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Post
15 hours ago
- New York Post
US and Mexico sign accord to combat Tijuana River sewage flowing across the border
The United States and Mexico have signed an agreement outlining specific steps and a new timetable to clean up the longstanding problem of the Tijuana River pouring sewage across the border and polluting California beaches, officials from both countries announced Thursday. Billions of gallons of sewage and toxic chemicals from Tijuana have polluted the Pacific Ocean off neighboring Southern California, closing beaches and sickening Navy SEALs who train in the water. That's despite multiple efforts and millions of dollars that have been poured into addressing the problem over decades, including under the first Trump administration. 3 An agreement has been signed by the United States and Mexico to ensure the Tijuana River gets cleaned up as the sewage and pollution from the river has affected California beaches. REUTERS 'There is a great commitment by the two countries to strengthen cooperation,' Mexico's Environmental Secretary Alicia Bárcena said Thursday after meeting with Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin in Mexico City for the signing of the memorandum of understanding. The accord comes three months after Zeldin flew to San Diego to meet with Mexican officials and visit the border. 'I smelled what a lot of residents in the community lived through and have to deal with,' he said Thursday. 'I saw the degradation of the Tijuana River valley. I heard about the beaches that were closed. I met with the Navy Seals, who have had their training impacted. It was a powerful visit all around for me.' Under the agreement, Mexico will complete its allocation of $93 million toward infrastructure projects, including adhering to a specific schedule for priority projects spanning through 2027. The 120-mile-long (195-kilometer) Tijuana River runs near the coast in Mexico and crosses into Southern California, where it flows through Navy-owned land and out to the Pacific. 3 Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin called the agreement by both nations, 'a great commitment by the two countries to strengthen cooperation.' AP As Tijuana's wastewater treatment plants have aged, its population and industry — including the manufacturing plants, known as maquiladoras that make U.S. goods — have boomed. At the same time, there has been an increase in the amount of toxins that have made their way into the river and into San Diego County — since 2018, more than 100 billion gallons of raw sewage laden with industrial chemicals and trash. The pollution has sickened not only swimmers, surfers and lifeguards but also schoolchildren, Border Patrol agents and others who do not even go in the water. Scientists say the sewage is vaporized when it foams up and enters the air people breathe. California beaches near the border have been closed more often than not over the past four years. 3 The signing comes three months after Zeldin met with Mexican officials in San Diego, California, to discuss solutions to fix the Tijuana River. REUTERS 'The communities along the Tijuana River have suffered this public health crisis for far too long,' said Kristan Culbert, associate director of California river conservation at American Rivers, in a statement Thursday. Since 2020, more than $653 million in funds have been allocated to address the issue, but the crisis has continued largely because of delays by the Mexican government, Zeldin has said. Zeldin said this agreement factors in 'population growth, operation and maintenance costs, and other variables that would make this solution durable and long term.' Keep up with today's most important news Stay up on the very latest with Evening Update. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters He praised the new administration of Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, who took office last October, for its willingness to address the issue. Sheinbaum said earlier Thursday that her government would expand a wastewater treatment plant that would reduce the contamination reaching the coast. 'There are other actions that were signed that we have to complete, that we're going to get done in the next year for the entire Tijuana sanitation system, for the entire metropolitan Tijuana area,' she said. Sheinbaum said the United States also has to make investments in the binational problem. Referring to another agreement to send more water to the U.S. to reduce Mexico's water debt in the Rio Grande, Sheinbaum said the Tijuana River agreement 'is a good example of how when our technical teams sit down, they can resolve a problem that seemed unsolvable.' The U.S. has agreed to complete the expansion of the South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant next month. The agreement also stipulates that Mexico this year divert 10 million gallons per day of treated sewage away from the shore.


Tom's Guide
18 hours ago
- Tom's Guide
Should you heat or ice a muscle injury? New study has found the answer
We're hardly short on ways to boost muscle recovery, whether it's pummeling ourselves with the best massage guns or paying a visit to the local physiotherapist. But a debate has been simmering in the background about hot and cold therapy, and it's this: is heat or ice better for muscle recovery? Or both? Growing up, I've always been taught to apply ice to swollen ankles or sore muscles post-workout, but then the rise of heat therapy came along, and suddenly, you're either jumping into an ice bath, braving an infrared sauna, or flipping between the two in something called 'Contrast Water Therapy.' Now, a study says this is the real answer. Here's what it shows. A study published in the Journal of Physiology looked at the effects of hot water and cold water therapy on muscle recovery in 34 participants. They found evidence to suggest that hot water immersion therapy significantly improved recovery compared to cold water. They found evidence to suggest that hot water immersion therapy significantly improved recovery compared to cold water. Researchers simulated a muscle injury in a lab setting, then used several modalities to see which would offer the most improvement. Participants were offered three recovery methods: cold (15 minutes at 12 degrees Celsius / 53.6 Fahrenheit), hot (60 minutes at 42 degrees Celsius / 107.6 Fahrenheit) and room temperature (30 minutes at 12 degrees Celsius / 53.6 Fahrenheit), all performed daily for 10 days. Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. Recovery was monitored using inflammation markers, muscle biopsies and performance testing. While strength improvements were similar in each setting, hot water showed to reduce perceived muscle pain and improve muscle damage markers; cold water didn't improve perceived muscle pain or reduce markers of damage. In short, the experiment found that hot water immersion could be more beneficial than cold water and room temperature immersion recovery methods for muscle regeneration and injury. Whether it's wild swimming, cryotherapy, or ice plunges, subjecting the body to temperatures below 15 degrees Celsius (59 degrees Fahrenheit) has been thought to have multiple benefits for the body, including boosting mood and focus and enhancing recovery. One study published in Biology reported participants felt more alert and attentive and less nervous or distressed after cold water bathing. The American Heart Association (AHA) warns of some risks associated with cold water immersion, and the data surrounding the practice is limited, so always exercise this form of recovery with caution and seek medical advice if you're unsure. There are many types of heat therapy, such as infrared saunas, traditional saunas, steam rooms and heat packs. However, it's hot water immersion — think hot tubs or similar — that could be the most effective. A study found that soaking in a hot tub, or soaking in hot water in general, could boost blood flow, immune response and cardiovascular health compared with traditional or infrared saunas when assessing heat methods. This could be in part because the immersion method helps raise core body temperature more effectively, which could be a key stimulus for the responses the study found. Then, there's contrast therapy, or hot and cold therapy (as it's also known). This involves switching between both methods in the same recovery session, allowing you to benefit from the energizing and mood-boosting benefits of cold water, followed by the soothing and relaxing benefits of heat. Here's a little evidence to support the method: a study published in PLoS One found that contrast therapy outperformed passive recovery or rest in reducing muscle pain after workouts in athletes. The next time you're faced with the decision: Hot or cold? Now you know which way to swing. Follow Tom's Guide on Google News to get our up-to-date news, how-tos, and reviews in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button.


Fox News
18 hours ago
- Fox News
US-Mexico Tijuana River sewage crisis deal is ‘massive' win for Americans, EPA says
A new deal between the United States and Mexico aimed at resolving the Tijuana River sewage crisis is "massive" win for Americans living in the San Diego area, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin announced this week. The memorandum of understanding was signed Thursday as the EPA said "For many decades, untreated raw sewage has flowed into Southern California from Mexico, polluting the Tijuana River Valley, closing beaches, fouling the air, harming the region's economy, and sickening people on both sides of the border." "The Trump Administration is proud to deliver this massive environmental and national security win for Americans in the San Diego area who have been living with this disgusting raw sewage flowing into their communities for far too long," Zeldin said in a statement. The EPA said the deal meets multiple "top Trump Administration priorities and milestones critical to ensuring a 100% solution to this issue" -- including expediting already-existing critical infrastructure projects. "The United States — which has withheld sending more American dollars to projects until Mexico fulfilled their obligations toward other projects — agreed to release EPA Border Water Infrastructure Program funding to complete the rehabilitation of Pump Station 1 and the Tijuana River collection pipes. This is because Mexico agreed to fund and begin construction on two priority projects this year, the diversion of treated effluent from two wastewater treatment plants and the rehabilitation of the Parallel Gravity Line," the EPA said, in reference to a wastewater collecting pipe in Mexico. "This increased the total number of projects planned for this year from two to six." "To that end, Mexico will immediately seek internal funding to initiate the construction process for the diversion, which will divert 10 million gallons per day of treated effluent entering the Tijuana River, and the rehabilitation of the Parallel Gravity Line. This will be completed no later than December 31, 2025," the EPA added. It also said "Several necessary Mexico side projects have been added to account for future population growth in Tijuana and operation and maintenance costs." The deal was reached after Zeldin traveled to San Diego in April to speak to those affected by the situation. "I made a commitment to the residents that I would spearhead an effort to construct an all-encompassing plan to finally bring the sewage crisis to an end," Zeldin said. "Since my visit, the Mexican and United States' governments have been working collaboratively to urgently finalize a permanent 100% solution to this longstanding issue. Secretary Rubio and the whole State Department, and the National Security Council at the White House worked hand-in-hand with EPA, and other federal partners, to make this agreement a reality." "This is not just a solution for 2025," he added. "We devised this agreement to factor in population growth, operation and maintenance costs, and other variables that would make this solution durable and long term. Grateful to President Claudia Sheinbaum, Secretary [of the Environment and National Resources of Mexico Alicia] Bárcena, and the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs for their partnership, cooperation, and commitment to work with us to clean up the Tijuana River Valley. This is a huge win for millions of Americans and Mexicans who have been calling on us to end this decades old crisis."