The dream of a solar-powered home energized Rick Mielbrecht.
"Until I saw the price tag," he said. The retired San Joaquin Delta College instructor figured he would be dead by the time he saved enough on his utility bill to offset the $30,000 cost.
But there may be another way.
Mielbrecht signed on with a startup company that says it will manufacture solar panels and loan them to customers, who will buy their energy from the company at a fixed rate for up to 25 years. Some see this as a way to dodge future hikes in utility rates.
The Delaware-based company, Citizenre, says it is a way to make solar power mainstream as California strives to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions.
Existing solar providers, such as Stockton-based BTA Solar, say plenty of people are willing to buy solar units outright, adding that companies are coming from out of the area to court prospective buyers. Those who do invest in the purchase of solar panels can make the cost less colossal. Cash incentives can cover about 25 percent of purchased solar panels, and federal tax credits also are available.
Still, the idea of relatively little money down - Citizenre requires a $500 security deposit - has prompted about 24,000 people across the nation to sign up for renting solar panels, including nearly a dozen Stocktonians who attended a meeting organized by Mielbrecht.
Citizenre has its critics, who point out that the company has not actually built any of the solar equipment that it promises to one day install on residential rooftops. It has not even decided where its manufacturing facility will be located. This leaves other solar providers skeptical whether Citizenre can deliver.
Jeffrey Wolfe, chief executive officer of national solar firm GroSolar, earlier this year said Citizenre is "not going to be able to stand up to their promises."
Solar power harvests energy from the sun and converts it for use in the home. This can reduce global warming, since much of the state's conventional energy comes from the burning of fossil fuels.
Power plants emit gases that scientists say are contributing to climate change, future consequences of which include rising sea levels, more intense floods and droughts, and the demise of some animal species. Homes with permanent solar systems are more desirable to potential buyers than homes without, said Terri Steele of the California Center for Sustainable Energy.
Citizenre officials said those who can afford to buy solar panels should go ahead and do so. "Our goal is just to have the solar out there," company representative Mike Hackley said. "This is a new option that we offer."
Maritime Electric Hurricane Irma Response details utility crews aiding Turks and Caicos with power restoration, storm recovery, debris removal, and essential services, coordinated with Fortis Inc., despite limited equipment, heat, and over 1,000 downed poles.
Key Points
A utility mission restoring power and essential services in Turks and Caicos after Irma, led by Maritime Electric.
✅ Over 1,000 poles down; crews climbing without bucket trucks
✅ Restoring hospitals, water, and communications first
✅ Fortis Inc. coordination; 2-3 week deployment with follow-on crews
Maritime Electric has sent a crew to help in the clean up and power restoration of Turks and Caicos after the Caribbean island was hit by Hurricane Irma, a storm that also saw FPL's massive response across Florida.
They arrived earlier this week and are working on removing debris and equipment so when supplies arrive, power can be brought back online, and similar mutual aid deployments, including Canadian crews to Florida, have been underway as well.
Fortis Inc., the parent company for Maritime Electric operates a utility in Turks and Caicos.
Kim Griffin, spokesperson for Maritime Electric, said there are over 1000 poles that were brought down by the storm, mirroring Florida restoration timelines reported elsewhere.
"It's really an intense storm recovery," she said. 'Good spirits'
The crew is working with less heavy equipment than they are used to, climbing poles instead of using bucket trucks, in hot and humid weather.
Griffin said their focus is getting essential services restored as quckly as possible, similar to progress in Puerto Rico's restoration efforts following recent hurricanes.
The crew will be there for two or three weeks and Griffin said Maritime Electric may send another group, as seen with Ontario's deployment to Florida, to continue the job.
She said the team has been well received and is in "good spirits."
"The people around them have been very positive that they're there," she said.
"They've said it's just been overwhelming how kind and generous the people have been to them."
Ontario Electricity Rates update: OEB sets time-of-use and tiered pricing for residential customers, with kWh charges for peak, mid-peak, and off-peak periods reflecting COVID-19 impacts on demand, supply costs, and pricing.
Key Points
Ontario Electricity Rates are OEB-set time-of-use and tiered prices that set per-kWh costs for residential customers.
✅ Tiered: 12.6 cents/kWh up to 1000 kWh, then 14.6 cents/kWh
✅ Average 700 kWh home pays about $2.24 more per month
Energy bills for the typical Ontario home are going up by about two per cent with fixed pricing coming to an end on Nov. 1, the Ontario Energy Board says.
The province's electricity regulator has released new time-of-use pricing and says the rate for the average residential customer using 700 kWh per month will increase by about $2.24.
The change comes as Ontario stretches into its eight month of the COVID-19 pandemic with new case counts reaching levels higher than ever seen before.
Time-of-use pricing had been scrapped for residential bills for much for the pandemic with a single fixed COVID-19 hydro rate set for all hours of the day. The move, which came into effect June 1, was meant "to support families, small business and farms while Ontario plans for the safe and gradual reopening of the province," the OEB said at the time.
Fixed pricing meant customers' bills reflected how much power they used, rather than when they used it. Customers were charged 12.8 cents/kWh under the COVID-19 recovery rate no matter their time of use.
Beginning November, the province says customers can choose between time-of-use and tiered pricing options. Rates for time-of-use plans will be 21.7 cents/kWh during peak hours, 15 cents/kWh for mid-peak use and 10.5 cents/kWh for off-peak use.
Customers choosing tiered pricing will pay 12.6 cents/kWh for the first 1000 kWh each month and then 14.6 cents/kWh for any power used beyond that.
The energy board says the increase in pricing reflects "a combination of factors, including those associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, that have affected demand, supply costs and prices in the summer and fall of 2020."
Asked for his reaction to the move Tuesday, Premier Doug Ford said, "I hate it," adding the province inherited an energy "mess" from the previous Liberal government and are "chipping away at it."
UK power grid bottleneck is stalling renewable energy, with connection queues, planning delays, and transmission infrastructure gaps raising costs, slowing decarbonization, and deterring investment as government considers reforms led by a new chief adviser.
Key Points
Delays and capacity gaps that hinder connecting new generation and demand, raising costs and slowing decarbonization.
✅ Connection queues delay projects for years
✅ Planning and NIMBY barriers stall transmission builds
✅ Investment costs on bills risk political pushback
During his three decades at investment bank Morgan Stanley, Franck Petitgas developed a reputation for solving problems that vexed others. Fixing the UK’s creaking power grid could be his most challenging task yet.
Earlier this year, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak appointed Petitgas as his chief business adviser, and the former financier has been pushing to tackle the gridlock that’s left projects waiting endlessly for a connection, an issue he sees as one of the biggest problems for industry.
But there are no easy solutions to tackle the years-long queue to get on the grid or the drawn-out planning process for building clean power generation, with the energy transition stalled by supply delays compounding the problem. And sluggish progress in expanding and improving the electricity network is preventing the construction of new housing developments and offices, as well as slowing the transition to greener power.
That transition has already taken a knock after Sunak last week controversially watered down some of the UK’s climate ambitions, citing in part the cost to consumers. He also acknowledged the issues surrounding the grid and promised the “most transformative plans” in response, drawing on lessons from Europe’s power crisis where applicable. Those are due to be unveiled within weeks.
Shortly after his appointment, Petitgas offered reassurances to business leaders at a meeting in Downing Street that solutions were being worked on, according to people familiar with the matter. But there’s a lack of confidence across business that enough will be done.
Cost is a big factor in the expansion of the electricity grid, and some argue a state-owned generation model could ease bills over time. Improving the onshore network alone could require investment of between £100 billion and £240 billion ($122-$293 billion) by 2050, according to a government analysis last year.
With network expansion funded through power bills, that’s a big ask, particularly with Sunak trailing in polls ahead of an election expected next year.
“It’s very difficult for politicians to say more money should be on bills,” said Emma Pinchbeck, chief executive of Energy UK, a trade body. “So you get to a situation where no one wants to pay for the infrastructure investment until it’s really sticky, and that’s where we’ve got to with the grid.”
There are huge competitive and economic implications if the UK falls further behind. With US President Joe Biden spending an estimated $370 billion on climate measures through his Inflation Reduction Act, and China already a world leader in electric vehicles, Britain’s grid inaction is holding it back in the global race to decarbonize, said Jess Ralston, an analyst at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit think tank.
“The UK is dithering and delaying, and not making any strategic decisions,” she said. “You can see companies just saying ‘I’m going to the US, or I’m going to China’.”
In a statement, the government said it’s a “priority to speed up the time taken to connect new power generators and power consumers to the grid.” It added that it’s taking “significant steps to accelerate grid infrastructure,” including support for new Channel interconnectors announced this year.
The government expects demand for electricity to double by 2035 and that will mean more generation that needs to be linked up to the network by cables and pylons. Local grids will also have to expand to accommodate more connection points for electric vehicles and homes, and invest in large-scale energy storage capacity to balance supply.
But so far, the rapid rise in renewable energy investment has not been accompanied by matching spend on the power network, according to BloombergNEF, a pattern seen in Germany’s grid expansion woes as well.
“The pace and scale of what we now have to deliver is significantly different from the last few decades,” said Carl Trowell, president of UK strategic infrastructure at National Grid. “It’s a national endeavor.”
In June, Electricity Networks Commissioner Nick Winser sent the government recommendations for how to accelerate construction of more transmission infrastructure. He said efforts to decarbonize the power sector will be “wasted if we cannot get the power to homes and businesses.”
“We need a seriously stronger sense of urgency,” said Kevin O’Donovan, country manager for Statkraft UK, which is holding off investment in four wind farms and two solar projects due to grid connection delays.
In addition to cost, the other major stumbling block is planning. Politicians in the governing Conservative Party are wary of angering voters with new infrastructure in rural areas that typically vote Tory. Across the country, “Not In My Back Yard” campaigners – NIMBYs — pose a major challenge to projects.
Petitgas, 62, retired from Morgan Stanley last year after nearly 30 years at the bank, where he led its international division from London. The issues over connections and planning have been repeatedly pointed out to Petitgas by investors and trade groups over a series of meetings this year, according to people familiar with the matter, requesting anonymity discussing private talks.
Yet with a general election looming and the issue plagued by political headaches, many are skeptical that Sunak can find the solutions needed.
One business chief said Downing Street considers the issue too tricky and expensive to tackle in the short-term. Others are concerned that while Petitgas has license from Sunak, he doesn’t have influence across the relevant departments to get grids to the top of the agenda.
Wind Farms
Multiple parts of the UK’s climate plans are under pressure. Earlier this month, an auction for contracts to build new wind farms received zero bids from developers, even as wind leads the power mix in many regions, marking yet another green setback.
The UK is already behind on its target of having 50 gigawatts of offshore wind built by 2030, up from 14 GW today. The challenge is accelerating development without railroading local communities.
Within Sunak’s Conservative Party, some lawmakers are pushing back on new infrastructure in their local areas. A group including Environment Secretary Therese Coffey and former Home Secretary Priti Patel is campaigning against building new pylons across a stretch of eastern England.
According to Adam Bell, director of policy at consultancy Stonehaven, backbench pressure means Sunak is unlikely to take major action on the grid in the near term. He doesn’t see the prime minister accepting Winser’s recommendations, least of all accelerating planning decisions.
“Over the last year, Sunak has favored party management over things that will benefit the country,” Bell said.
Wall Street Fossil Fuel Pivot signals banks reassessing ESG, net-zero, and decarbonization goals, reviving oil, gas, and coal financing while recalibrating clean energy exposure amid policy shifts, regulatory rollbacks, and investment risk realignment.
Key Points
A shift as major U.S. banks ease ESG limits to fund oil, gas, coal while rebalancing alongside renewables.
✅ Banks revisit lending to oil, gas, and coal after policy shifts.
✅ ESG and net-zero commitments face reassessment amid returns.
✅ Renewables compete for capital as risk models are updated.
The global energy finance sector, worth a staggering $1.4 trillion, is undergoing a significant transformation, largely due to former President Donald Trump's renewed support for the oil, gas, and coal industries. Wall Street, which had previously aligned itself with global climate initiatives and the energy transition and net-zero goals, is now reassessing its strategy and pivoting toward a more fossil-fuel-friendly stance.
This shift represents a major change from the earlier stance, where many of the largest U.S. banks and financial institutions took a firm stance on decarbonization push, including limiting their exposure to fossil-fuel projects. Just a few years ago, these institutions were vocal supporters of the global push for a sustainable future, with many committing to support clean energy solutions and abandon investments in high-carbon energy sources.
However, with the change in administration and the resurgence of support for traditional energy sectors under Trump’s policies, these same banks are now rethinking their strategies. Financial institutions are increasingly discussing the possibility of lifting long-standing restrictions that limited their investments in controversial fossil-fuel projects, including coal mining, where emissions drop as coal declines, and offshore drilling. The change reflects a broader realignment within the energy finance sector, with Wall Street reexamining its role in shaping the future of energy.
One of the most significant developments is the Biden administration’s policy reversal, which emphasized reducing the U.S. carbon footprint in favor of carbon-free electricity strategies. Under Trump, however, there has been a renewed focus on supporting the traditional energy sectors. His administration has pushed to reduce regulatory burdens on fossil-fuel companies, particularly oil and gas, while simultaneously reintroducing favorable tax incentives for the coal and gas industries. This is a stark contrast to the Biden administration's efforts to incentivize the transition toward renewable energy and zero-emissions goals.
Trump's policies have, in effect, sent a strong signal to financial markets that the fossil-fuel industry could see a resurgence. U.S. banks, which had previously distanced themselves from financing oil and gas ventures due to the pressure from environmental activists and ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) investors, as seen in investor pressure on Duke Energy, are now reconsidering their positions. Major players like JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs are reportedly having internal discussions about revisiting financing for energy projects that involve high carbon emissions, including controversial oil extraction and gas drilling initiatives.
The implications of this shift are far-reaching. In the past, a growing number of institutional investors had embraced ESG principles, with the goal of supporting the transition to renewable energy sources. However, Trump’s pro-fossil fuel stance appears to be emboldening Wall Street’s biggest players to rethink their commitment to green investing. Some are now advocating for a “balanced approach” that would allow for continued investment in traditional energy sectors, while also acknowledging the growing importance of renewable energy investments, a trend echoed by European oil majors going electric in recent years.
This reversal has led to confusion among investors and analysts, who are now grappling with how to navigate a rapidly changing landscape. Wall Street's newfound support for the fossil-fuel industry comes amid a backdrop of global concerns about climate change. Many investors, who had previously embraced policies aimed at curbing the effects of global warming, are now finding it harder to reconcile their environmental commitments with the shift toward fossil-fuel-heavy portfolios. The reemergence of fossil-fuel-friendly policies is forcing institutional investors to rethink their long-term strategies.
The consequences of this policy shift are also being felt by renewable energy companies, which now face increased competition for investment dollars from traditional energy sectors. The shift towards oil and gas projects has made it more challenging for renewable energy companies to attract the same level of financial backing, even as demand for clean energy continues to rise and as doubling electricity investment becomes a key policy call. This could result in a deceleration of renewable energy projects, potentially delaying the progress needed to meet the world’s climate targets.
Despite this, some analysts remain optimistic that the long-term shift toward green energy is inevitable, even if fossil-fuel investments gain a temporary boost. As the world continues to grapple with the effects of climate change, and as technological advancements in clean energy continue to reduce costs, the transition to renewables is likely to persist, regardless of the political climate.
The shift in Wall Street’s approach to energy investments, spurred by Trump’s pro-fossil fuel policies, is reshaping the $1.4 trillion global energy finance market. While the pivot towards fossil fuels may offer short-term gains, the long-term trajectory for energy markets remains firmly in the direction of renewables. The next few years will be crucial in determining whether financial institutions can balance the demand for short-term profitability with their long-term environmental responsibilities.
Distributed Energy Resources (DER) are surging as solar PV, battery storage, and demand response decarbonize power, cut costs, and boost grid resilience for utilities, ESCOs, and C&I customers through 2030.
Key Points
DER are small-scale, grid-connected assets like solar PV, storage, and demand response that deliver flexible power.
✅ Investments in DER to rise 75% by 2030; $846B in assets, $285B in storage.
✅ Residential solar PV: 49.3% of spend; C&I solar PV: 38.9% by 2030.
✅ Drivers: favorable policy, falling costs, high demand charges, decarbonization.
Frost & Sullivan's recent analysis, Growth Opportunities in Distributed Energy, Forecast to 2030, finds that the rate of annual investment in distributed energy resources (DER) will increase by 75% by 2030, with the market set for a decade of high growth. Favorable regulations, declining project and technology costs, and high electricity and demand charges are key factors driving investments in DER across the globe, with rising European demand boosting US solar equipment makers prospects in export markets. The COVID-19 pandemic will reduce investment levels in the short term, but the market will recover. Throughout the decade, $846 billion will be invested in DER, supported by a further $285 billion that will be invested in battery storage, with record solar and storage growth anticipated as installations and investments accelerate.
"The DER business model will play an increasingly pivotal role in the global power mix, as highlighted by BNEF's 2050 outlook and as part of a wider effort to decarbonize the sector," said Maria Benintende, Senior Energy Analyst at Frost & Sullivan. "Additionally, solar photovoltaic (PV) will dominate throughout the decade. Residential solar PV will account for 49.3% of total investment ($419 billion), though policy moves like a potential Solar ITC extension could pressure the US wind market, with commercial and industrial solar PV accounting for a further 38.9% ($330 billion)."
Benintende added: "In developing economies, DER offers a chance to bridge the electricity supply gap that still exists in a number of country markets. Further, in developed markets, DER is a key part of the transition to a cleaner and more resilient energy system, consistent with IRENA's renewables decarbonization findings across the energy sector."
DER offers significant revenue growth prospects for all key market participants, including:
Technology original equipment manufacturers (OEMs): Offer flexible after-sales support, including digital solutions such as asset integrity and optimization services for their installed base.
System integrators and installers: Target household customers and provide efficient and trustworthy solutions with flexible financial models.
Energy service companies (ESCOs): ESCOs should focus on adding DER deployments, in line with US decarbonization pathways and policy goals, to expand and enhance their traditional role of providing energy savings and demand-side management services to customers.
Utility companies: Deployment of DER can create new revenue streams for utility companies, from real-time and flexibility markets, and rapid solar PV growth in China illustrates how momentum in renewables can shape utility strategies. Growth Opportunities in Distributed Energy, Forecast to 2030 is the latest addition to Frost & Sullivan's Energy and Environment research and analyses available through the Frost & Sullivan Leadership Council, which helps organizations identify a continuous flow of growth opportunities to succeed in an unpredictable future.
ITER Nuclear Fusion advances tokamak magnetic confinement, heating deuterium-tritium plasma with superconducting magnets, targeting net energy gain, tritium breeding, and steam-turbine power, while complementing laser inertial confinement milestones for grid-scale electricity and 2025 startup goals.
Key Points
ITER Nuclear Fusion is a tokamak project confining D-T plasma with magnets to achieve net energy gain and clean power.
✅ Tokamak magnetic confinement with high-temp superconducting coils
✅ Deuterium-tritium fuel cycle with on-site tritium breeding
✅ Targets net energy gain and grid-scale, low-carbon electricity
It sounds like the stuff of dreams: a virtually limitless source of energy that doesn’t produce greenhouse gases or radioactive waste. That’s the promise of nuclear fusion, often described as the holy grail of clean energy by proponents, which for decades has been nothing more than a fantasy due to insurmountable technical challenges. But things are heating up in what has turned into a race to create what amounts to an artificial sun here on Earth, one that can provide power for our kettles, cars and light bulbs.
Today’s nuclear power plants create electricity through nuclear fission, in which atoms are split, with next-gen nuclear power exploring smaller, cheaper, safer designs that remain distinct from fusion. Nuclear fusion however, involves combining atomic nuclei to release energy. It’s the same reaction that’s taking place at the Sun’s core. But overcoming the natural repulsion between atomic nuclei and maintaining the right conditions for fusion to occur isn’t straightforward. And doing so in a way that produces more energy than the reaction consumes has been beyond the grasp of the finest minds in physics for decades.
But perhaps not for much longer. Some major technical challenges have been overcome in the past few years and governments around the world have been pouring money into fusion power research as part of a broader green industrial revolution under way in several regions. There are also over 20 private ventures in the UK, US, Europe, China and Australia vying to be the first to make fusion energy production a reality.
“People are saying, ‘If it really is the ultimate solution, let’s find out whether it works or not,’” says Dr Tim Luce, head of science and operation at the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), being built in southeast France. ITER is the biggest throw of the fusion dice yet.
Its $22bn (£15.9bn) build cost is being met by the governments of two-thirds of the world’s population, including the EU, the US, China and Russia, at a time when Europe is losing nuclear power and needs energy, and when it’s fired up in 2025 it’ll be the world’s largest fusion reactor. If it works, ITER will transform fusion power from being the stuff of dreams into a viable energy source.
Constructing a nuclear fusion reactor ITER will be a tokamak reactor – thought to be the best hope for fusion power. Inside a tokamak, a gas, often a hydrogen isotope called deuterium, is subjected to intense heat and pressure, forcing electrons out of the atoms. This creates a plasma – a superheated, ionised gas – that has to be contained by intense magnetic fields.
The containment is vital, as no material on Earth could withstand the intense heat (100,000,000°C and above) that the plasma has to reach so that fusion can begin. It’s close to 10 times the heat at the Sun’s core, and temperatures like that are needed in a tokamak because the gravitational pressure within the Sun can’t be recreated.
When atomic nuclei do start to fuse, vast amounts of energy are released. While the experimental reactors currently in operation release that energy as heat, in a fusion reactor power plant, the heat would be used to produce steam that would drive turbines to generate electricity, even as some envision nuclear beyond electricity for industrial heat and fuels.
Tokamaks aren’t the only fusion reactors being tried. Another type of reactor uses lasers to heat and compress a hydrogen fuel to initiate fusion. In August 2021, one such device at the National Ignition Facility, at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, generated 1.35 megajoules of energy. This record-breaking figure brings fusion power a step closer to net energy gain, but most hopes are still pinned on tokamak reactors rather than lasers.
In June 2021, China’s Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak (EAST) reactor maintained a plasma for 101 seconds at 120,000,000°C. Before that, the record was 20 seconds. Ultimately, a fusion reactor would need to sustain the plasma indefinitely – or at least for eight-hour ‘pulses’ during periods of peak electricity demand.
A real game-changer for tokamaks has been the magnets used to produce the magnetic field. “We know how to make magnets that generate a very high magnetic field from copper or other kinds of metal, but you would pay a fortune for the electricity. It wouldn’t be a net energy gain from the plant,” says Luce.
One route for nuclear fusion is to use atoms of deuterium and tritium, both isotopes of hydrogen. They fuse under incredible heat and pressure, and the resulting products release energy as heat
The solution is to use high-temperature, superconducting magnets made from superconducting wire, or ‘tape’, that has no electrical resistance. These magnets can create intense magnetic fields and don’t lose energy as heat.
“High temperature superconductivity has been known about for 35 years. But the manufacturing capability to make tape in the lengths that would be required to make a reasonable fusion coil has just recently been developed,” says Luce. One of ITER’s magnets, the central solenoid, will produce a field of 13 tesla – 280,000 times Earth’s magnetic field.
The inner walls of ITER’s vacuum vessel, where the fusion will occur, will be lined with beryllium, a metal that won’t contaminate the plasma much if they touch. At the bottom is the divertor that will keep the temperature inside the reactor under control.
“The heat load on the divertor can be as large as in a rocket nozzle,” says Luce. “Rocket nozzles work because you can get into orbit within minutes and in space it’s really cold.” In a fusion reactor, a divertor would need to withstand this heat indefinitely and at ITER they’ll be testing one made out of tungsten.
Meanwhile, in the US, the National Spherical Torus Experiment – Upgrade (NSTX-U) fusion reactor will be fired up in the autumn of 2022, while efforts in advanced fission such as a mini-reactor design are also progressing. One of its priorities will be to see whether lining the reactor with lithium helps to keep the plasma stable.
Choosing a fuel Instead of just using deuterium as the fusion fuel, ITER will use deuterium mixed with tritium, another hydrogen isotope. The deuterium-tritium blend offers the best chance of getting significantly more power out than is put in. Proponents of fusion power say one reason the technology is safe is that the fuel needs to be constantly fed into the reactor to keep fusion happening, making a runaway reaction impossible.
Deuterium can be extracted from seawater, so there’s a virtually limitless supply of it. But only 20kg of tritium are thought to exist worldwide, so fusion power plants will have to produce it (ITER will develop technology to ‘breed’ tritium). While some radioactive waste will be produced in a fusion plant, it’ll have a lifetime of around 100 years, rather than the thousands of years from fission.
At the time of writing in September, researchers at the Joint European Torus (JET) fusion reactor in Oxfordshire were due to start their deuterium-tritium fusion reactions. “JET will help ITER prepare a choice of machine parameters to optimise the fusion power,” says Dr Joelle Mailloux, one of the scientific programme leaders at JET. These parameters will include finding the best combination of deuterium and tritium, and establishing how the current is increased in the magnets before fusion starts.
The groundwork laid down at JET should accelerate ITER’s efforts to accomplish net energy gain. ITER will produce ‘first plasma’ in December 2025 and be cranked up to full power over the following decade. Its plasma temperature will reach 150,000,000°C and its target is to produce 500 megawatts of fusion power for every 50 megawatts of input heating power.
“If ITER is successful, it’ll eliminate most, if not all, doubts about the science and liberate money for technology development,” says Luce. That technology development will be demonstration fusion power plants that actually produce electricity, where advanced reactors can build on decades of expertise. “ITER is opening the door and saying, yeah, this works – the science is there.”
Whether you would prefer Live Online or In-Person
instruction, our electrical training courses can be
tailored to meet your company's specific requirements
and delivered to your employees in one location or at
various locations.
