On top of this there have also been big recent developments in fusion reactors. Probably still 50 years out for them to be useful though.
The fallacy is believing that because it has historically been so far away that is still that far away.
E.g. Helion, a y combinator backed company (our beloved HN overlords), just raised half a billion from investors for a series E round that include Peter Thiel and a few others with well earned reputations for making lucrative investments. I think there's a good chance that we'll have operational fusion plants next decade already. It's not money in the bank yet but clearly enough of a chance for the likes of Peter Thiel to commit some serious money to this.
Helion is pitching 1 cent per khw. That completely kills the business case for new nuclear plants. The payoff on those investments is going to be insanely good if this works as advertised.
That doesn't sound right. If Thiel thinks eg it has 1/100 chance of working, but if it works the stock value will be 10.000x what it is today, then it's a sound investment, but it still has a 1% chance of working.
I'd also posit that a return on investment in a company like this isn't only going to happen if it achieves its goal. Looking at how research intensive/cutting edge the end goal is, they could stumble across 100 different new innovations in the process that could sprout into their own business ideas.
PS. Am I the only one who thinks this page sucks? https://www.helionenergy.com/our-technology/
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2014/08/nextbigfuture-intervie...
> The breakeven machine will need about $35 million in funding (2015-2016) and the target is to develop it in 2016.
> If all proceeds on schedule then a Helion Energy machine that that proves commercial energy gain would be a 50 Megawatt system built in 2019. $200 million will be needed for the commercial pilot plant. The plan would be to start building commercial systems by 2022.
Superconducting magnets and faster computers to accurately model magnetic containment.