Nuclear Fusion Diffusion Challenges and Opportunities: Theory, Policy, Practice and Politics

1 Nuclear Fusion Diffusion Challenges and Opportunities: Theory, Policy, Practice and Politics promise of Generation IV reactors, due to the fundamental Abstract—Fusion energy has the potential to address long- problems of “(i) maintaining safe operation of the nuclear term energy requirements and climate change. However, fusion plants, (ii) securing the fuel supplies, (iii) a strategy for the energy is characterized by a ‘development divide’ between the management of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel” [5, International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) consortium members and the non-ITER ‘Global South’ states. It 41]. is beset with problems, which can be divided into geopolitical, The present impasse, including the impending withdrawal geoeconomic, geo-sociocultural, and geo-technological (GEO- of the United States (U.S.) from the Paris Agreement, is PEST). Geopolitical problems include cooperation on fusion partially because national self-interests are triumphing over energy development between ITER members (of the Global the notion that technological innovation leads directly to North) and the Global South on fusion development. Geo- economic problems include the cost of funding ITER versus implementation (the ‘engineer’s myth’) [6]. However, these newly emerging privatesector fusion companies. Geo- same national self-interests can be leveraged to escape sociocultural problems include the requirement to maintain the gridlock via enabling actions to encourage the development peacebuilding tradition of nuclear energy (embodied by the Cold and commercialization of energy innovations, like fusion War-era ‘Atoms for Peace’ initiative), as well as public energy. With regard to such transformation, the role of perceptions of radiation. Geotechnological problems include tokamak lock-in, fuel type, the viability of ‘compact reactors’, international institutions is “to help governments deliver as and disruptive technology events. We outline these problems and much as they are willing and able to implement so that the discuss how to address them in a timely fashion via an external collective effort better reflects the collective good” [6, 49]. To independent review mechanism, modelled on the International this end, this article calls for a global external independent Energy Agency’s ‘Global Commission for Urgent Action on review (EIR) of the various international, national, and Energy Efficiency’, established in 2019 and due to deliver recommendations in 2020. private-sector fusion projects that will assess the collective good that a collective effort, with developing ‘Global South’ Index Terms—Energy for All, External Independent Review, (and OPEC countries) co-funding and co-development, could Fusion power generation, Global South, ITER, Nuclear Industry, deliver in terms of fusion energy’s contribution to phasing out GEO-PEST Analysis fossil fuels this century. The fusion energy roadmap is presently dominated by the multi-billion dollar decades-long International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) scientific experiment, supported by China, India the U.K., the European Union (E.U.), Japan, I. INTRODUCTION South Korea, Russia, and the U.S. [7][8]. Leveraging ITER’s HE relationship between nuclear energy and the progress along its own technology maturation pathway [9, 92, Tenvironment is a delicate one. Although climate change 243], the first national energy-generating tokamak-based has been designated the highest impact and highest likelihood fusion reactors are projected to emerge in around 2042, in the threat to the global economy and society [1], progress on form of the Chinese CFETR tokamak [10] or, in the case of rapidly resolving it has reached gridlock, one which the Paris the United Kingdom STEP spherical tokamak grid-connected Agreement [2] seems unlikely to overcome. The United design, by 2040 [11]. Nations’ (U.N.) position is that the Paris Agreement is not, on Meanwhile, leading private-sector fusion companies project its present pathway, capable of maintaining greenhouse gas fusion could materialize at the commercial application level emissions at below 3°C above preindustrial levels [3], let within the next decade [12]. However, these private-sector alone the 2°C defined in the Agreement. The likelihood of projections rely on full funding of sometimes highly more extreme global warming scenarios developing is speculative new physics, whereas the rapid development of a accentuated by most G20 countries not being on track to meet global fusion economy would likely require an international their Paris Agreement Nationally Determined Contributions program greater in scope and size than the U.S. Atoms for [4]. Peace project [13], any sign of which is so far lacking. This is partly because nuclear fission has not become Despite the slow progress of fusion development, over the globally accepted as a low-carbon baseload energy alternative past half-century, various countries have viewed the adoption to fossil fuels. This situation is likely to persist, despite the of fusion energy as a highly attractive alternative to fossil fuels [14][15] because of its revolutionary and cost-effective potential in global low carbon energy transition strategies [16] 2 [17]. Fusion is a relatively low radiation process, with the urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts” [30, possibility of extremely low radiation aneutronic fuel systems, 14/35] Here, the Group of 77 UN bloc (G77; actually 133 for example via inertial electrostatic confinement (IEC) [18], states) [32] stands out as a potential co-development partner utilizing the so-called Grad’s wiffle-ball effect [19]; it is also for global fusion community because it is often synonymous safer than fission in that there exists no possibility of a with the Global South. It includes most OPEC countries and terium) and manufactured inside the plant (tritium) via a several very wealthy petro-states, such as Saudi Arabia, and tritium breeder [21]. large fossil-fuel reliant economies, such as Brazil. Given fusion’s potential and the present lack of a global Of the G77, only India is an ITER member, although fusion program, this article makes the case for establishing a several G77 countries have their own fusion programs and high-level, global commission in order for the international already cooperate with ITER, such as Brazil, through Euratom community to conduct an external independent review (EIR) [33], and Thailand [34], or invested in the fusion private- of fusion’s progress and so investigate whether collective sector, as when Malaysia, via its sovereign wealth fund (SWF) global ‘urgent action’ on fusion energy is, in any way, viable, (Khazanah Nasional), invested in the Canadian company and if so, at what cost. In response to increasing demands for General Fusion [35]. This suggests non-ITER states, acting energy and rising greenhouse gas emissions, such an approach either as sovereign states or as blocs, e.g., G77, OPEC, Gulf has already been taken by the International Energy Agency Cooperation Council, could co-develop fusion through ITER (IEA) with regard to urgent action on energy efficiency, when DEMO projects, joint ventures, or investment in private-sector it established the ‘Global Commission for Urgent Action on fusion companies, via SWF, government agencies, state- Energy Efficiency’ on 24 June, 2019 [22]. owned enterprises, or private companies. In arguing for the timeliness of an EIR to examine global Such arrangements may be viable given that the G77 has its progress on fusion and make ‘urgent action’ own geopolitical ‘South-South cooperation’ viewpoint [36], recommendations, this article reviews fusion via a high-level centered on the goals of G77 member states, North-South geopolitical, geo-economic, geo-sociocultural and geo- geopolitical differences, and countering the “power of the technological (GEO-PEST) approach [23], a form of PEST purse” of developed countries, as embodied in oppositional management analysis [24]; PEST analysis has already been dynamics between the General Assembly (GA) and the UN applied in a similar manner to global wind energy [25]. Security Council, due to the G77’s ability to invoke the This article considers the development divide in fusion, ‘majority rule’ of the GA. briefly describes the external EIR mechanism, then makes the OPEC has its own viewpoint on energy development, case for the timeliness of the EIR in terms of the GEO-PEST which, given the reality of resource depletion and exhaustion, framework. The article establishes that there is a sufficient recognizes the development of alternative energies as valid, number of serious GEO-PEST fusion-related problems to and that to this end, recognizes in principle that in developing merit a global EIR. This could then lead to more countries e.g., nuclear energy, it is necessary “to keep the prices of fuel becoming involved in fusion energy development and oil above those of its alternatives for the supply of electricity commercialization, based on the premise of various forms of so that their development would not be damaged by uncertain patent ‘co-development’ [26, 5-31], particularly through prospects” [37, 50]. OPEC also has its own development investment by the Global South, and the OPEC bloc agenda for the Global South, realized through the OPEC Fund for International Development (OFID), which has historically II.THE DEVELOPMENT DIVIDE IN FUSION focused on developing non-OPEC (mainly Arab) states though The geopolitics of economic development

Load more