Sustainability Community

For the first time, US scientists have achieved a fusion reaction with net energy gain. But the dream of limitless zero-carbon energy is still a long way from reality. The FT's Simon Mundy meets scientists and investors in the UK, France and US, to see how close we really are to commercial fusion power. FT Video, 28 min

I've been reading a bit on fusion energy and it is indeed very inspiring, but don't take my word for it as i am somewhat too optimistic and naive in that respect. Today i saw an interesting piece from Jeremy Bentham, Co-Chair of World Energy Council and a reitered Shell Scenarios Leader sharing his thoughts on fusion energy on one of his social media channels.

Jeremy gives this example: "A new energy source that's technically and commercially viable will generally grow rapidly, about 25-30% per year globally. It will not get much higher than that because you have to build all kinds of assicated new facilities, train people, and actually experience it working before you haev the assurance to invest in the next generation of growth".

Jeremy then states that "...because the world enregy system is so large, you need at least 30 years, before you reach the level of significant materiality at global scale". Experts estimate that we are probably 2 or 3 decades away from nuclear fusion plants being a commercial and technical reality. And then its another 30 years before these plants have grown enough to make a global impact.  all about fusion powere here from World nuclear association

Nearly everything in this Universe is a trade-off.

In the case of ESG, it is a trade off "doing good" and "fiduciary duty" some say. In the case of "abundant and cheap energy with no emissions" - fusion energy - the trade off seems to be in the space of "how much do we invest in it now, since we can't wait decades for it to become proven and scalable, we are running out of time and we need to invest in H2, renewables, and every other possible technology".

By investing in this now, we could potentially reduce these 30 years to 15 which could make a huge difference.

What do you think?

For the first time, US scientists have achieved a fusion reaction with net energy gain. But the dream of limitless zero-carbon energy is still a long way from reality. The FT's Simon Mundy meets scientists and investors in the UK, France and US, to see how close we really are to commercial fusion power. FT Video, 28 min

Aya - thanks,

there's certainly a need for significant investment in alternative / renewable energy sources.  I haven't seen much on fusion technology.  However, Green Hydrogen has also been growing in interest as a potential alternative and seems be a source of great hope and expectation.  e,g, it was included, somewhat, as part of the UK Government's Green Finance Strategy updated in March.   

But is it proven and scalable?

The recent UK and Germany Government partnership announced seems to be a step in the right direction, UK and Germany Sign Hydrogen Partnership to Boost Net Zero Efforts  including use by ITM Power and RWE.  In the US, progress looks promising by Electric Hydrogen - supporting the green hydrogen industry's first unicorn and help enable low-cost green hydrogen at an industrial scale. 

The Green Hydrogen Organisation GH2, a Swiss not profit foundation, is doing a lot of work in this area with a number of policy initiatives, including a recent report with the Global Renewable Alliance on Tackling climate change through fast and fair permitting for renewable energy and hydrogen: recommendations from the Planning for Climate Commission

I wonder if other community members have any other examples of concrete developments in green hydrogen/fusion and other renewable energy alternatives.

Regards

James

------------------------------
James Doyle
Director, Green Finance, Investment Management

Original Message:
Sent: 03-10-2023 16:52
From: Aya Pariy
Subject: Fusion Power: How Close are we?

I've been reading a bit on fusion energy and it is indeed very inspiring, but don't take my word for it as i am somewhat too optimistic and naive in that respect. Today i saw an interesting piece from Jeremy Bentham, Co-Chair of World Energy Council and a reitered Shell Scenarios Leader sharing his thoughts on fusion energy on one of his social media channels.

Jeremy gives this example: "A new energy source that's technically and commercially viable will generally grow rapidly, about 25-30% per year globally. It will not get much higher than that because you have to build all kinds of assicated new facilities, train people, and actually experience it working before you haev the assurance to invest in the next generation of growth".

Jeremy then states that "...because the world enregy system is so large, you need at least 30 years, before you reach the level of significant materiality at global scale". Experts estimate that we are probably 2 or 3 decades away from nuclear fusion plants being a commercial and technical reality. And then its another 30 years before these plants have grown enough to make a global impact.  all about fusion powere here from World nuclear association

Nearly everything in this Universe is a trade-off.

In the case of ESG, it is a trade off "doing good" and "fiduciary duty" some say. In the case of "abundant and cheap energy with no emissions" - fusion energy - the trade off seems to be in the space of "how much do we invest in it now, since we can't wait decades for it to become proven and scalable, we are running out of time and we need to invest in H2, renewables, and every other possible technology".

By investing in this now, we could potentially reduce these 30 years to 15 which could make a huge difference.

What do you think?

------------------------------
Aya Pariy

Original Message:
Sent: 30-06-2023 07:59
From: Aya Pariy
Subject: Fusion Power: How Close are we?

For the first time, US scientists have achieved a fusion reaction with net energy gain. But the dream of limitless zero-carbon energy is still a long way from reality. The FT's Simon Mundy meets scientists and investors in the UK, France and US, to see how close we really are to commercial fusion power. FT Video, 28 min

------------------------------
Aya Pariy
------------------------------

Aya - thanks,

there's certainly a need for significant investment in alternative / renewable energy sources.  I haven't seen much on fusion technology.  However, Green Hydrogen has also been growing in interest as a potential alternative and seems be a source of great hope and expectation.  e,g, it was included, somewhat, as part of the UK Government's Green Finance Strategy updated in March.   

But is it proven and scalable?

The recent UK and Germany Government partnership announced seems to be a step in the right direction, UK and Germany Sign Hydrogen Partnership to Boost Net Zero Efforts  including use by ITM Power and RWE.  In the US, progress looks promising by Electric Hydrogen - supporting the green hydrogen industry's first unicorn and help enable low-cost green hydrogen at an industrial scale. 

The Green Hydrogen Organisation GH2, a Swiss not profit foundation, is doing a lot of work in this area with a number of policy initiatives, including a recent report with the Global Renewable Alliance on Tackling climate change through fast and fair permitting for renewable energy and hydrogen: recommendations from the Planning for Climate Commission

I wonder if other community members have any other examples of concrete developments in green hydrogen/fusion and other renewable energy alternatives.

Regards

James

I've been reading a bit on fusion energy and it is indeed very inspiring, but don't take my word for it as i am somewhat too optimistic and naive in that respect. Today i saw an interesting piece from Jeremy Bentham, Co-Chair of World Energy Council and a reitered Shell Scenarios Leader sharing his thoughts on fusion energy on one of his social media channels.

Jeremy gives this example: "A new energy source that's technically and commercially viable will generally grow rapidly, about 25-30% per year globally. It will not get much higher than that because you have to build all kinds of assicated new facilities, train people, and actually experience it working before you haev the assurance to invest in the next generation of growth".

Jeremy then states that "...because the world enregy system is so large, you need at least 30 years, before you reach the level of significant materiality at global scale". Experts estimate that we are probably 2 or 3 decades away from nuclear fusion plants being a commercial and technical reality. And then its another 30 years before these plants have grown enough to make a global impact.  all about fusion powere here from World nuclear association

Nearly everything in this Universe is a trade-off.

In the case of ESG, it is a trade off "doing good" and "fiduciary duty" some say. In the case of "abundant and cheap energy with no emissions" - fusion energy - the trade off seems to be in the space of "how much do we invest in it now, since we can't wait decades for it to become proven and scalable, we are running out of time and we need to invest in H2, renewables, and every other possible technology".

By investing in this now, we could potentially reduce these 30 years to 15 which could make a huge difference.

What do you think?

For the first time, US scientists have achieved a fusion reaction with net energy gain. But the dream of limitless zero-carbon energy is still a long way from reality. The FT's Simon Mundy meets scientists and investors in the UK, France and US, to see how close we really are to commercial fusion power. FT Video, 28 min

I've been reading a bit on fusion energy and it is indeed very inspiring, but don't take my word for it as i am somewhat too optimistic and naive in that respect. Today i saw an interesting piece from Jeremy Bentham, Co-Chair of World Energy Council and a reitered Shell Scenarios Leader sharing his thoughts on fusion energy on one of his social media channels.

Jeremy gives this example: "A new energy source that's technically and commercially viable will generally grow rapidly, about 25-30% per year globally. It will not get much higher than that because you have to build all kinds of assicated new facilities, train people, and actually experience it working before you haev the assurance to invest in the next generation of growth".

Jeremy then states that "...because the world enregy system is so large, you need at least 30 years, before you reach the level of significant materiality at global scale". Experts estimate that we are probably 2 or 3 decades away from nuclear fusion plants being a commercial and technical reality. And then its another 30 years before these plants have grown enough to make a global impact.  all about fusion powere here from World nuclear association

Nearly everything in this Universe is a trade-off.

In the case of ESG, it is a trade off "doing good" and "fiduciary duty" some say. In the case of "abundant and cheap energy with no emissions" - fusion energy - the trade off seems to be in the space of "how much do we invest in it now, since we can't wait decades for it to become proven and scalable, we are running out of time and we need to invest in H2, renewables, and every other possible technology".

By investing in this now, we could potentially reduce these 30 years to 15 which could make a huge difference.

What do you think?

For the first time, US scientists have achieved a fusion reaction with net energy gain. But the dream of limitless zero-carbon energy is still a long way from reality. The FT's Simon Mundy meets scientists and investors in the UK, France and US, to see how close we really are to commercial fusion power. FT Video, 28 min

For the first time, US scientists have achieved a fusion reaction with net energy gain. But the dream of limitless zero-carbon energy is still a long way from reality. The FT's Simon Mundy meets scientists and investors in the UK, France and US, to see how close we really are to commercial fusion power. FT Video, 28 min