By Dan Bertan '17

October 15^th marked the day that Lockheed Martin shook the world of energy providers.  The American Engineering giant announced that its concept for a Nuclear Fusion reactor that could be functional within the next decade.  This announcement has numerous implications, including the possibility of cheaper, cleaner, and potentially limitless energy on Earth.

Nuclear fusion is the process of colliding two atomic nuclei together at high speeds to form a new atom, releasing a significant amount of energy.  This process is much cleaner than nuclear fission, the current nuclear reaction used to provide energy.  Unlike fission, nuclear fusion reactors would be incapable of a meltdown.

Fusion can provide potentially limitless energy if achieved on Earth, as the reactor’s main fuel source is deuterium, which is an isotope of hydrogen found in water.  Fusion also eliminates the nuclear waste problem that fission causes, as the process produces significantly less pollution.

Dr. Tom McGuire, the head of the Lockheed team, explained that current models of fusion reactors are highly inefficient and require almost as much energy to keep them running as they put out.  However, Lockheed’s design uses magnetic fields that grow in strength as plasma reaches the reactor’s wall, allowing it to be kept in high-pressure conditions, maintain high collision rates for nuclei, and produce more energy.  This increase in efficiency allows for the reactor to be smaller, weighing in at approximately 1,000 tons and having a height of 7 meters. ITER, a current model for fusion, weighs 23,000 tons and is about 30 meters tall.  A reactor of McGuire’s design could be transported by truck, in theory.

The implications of this progress in nuclear fusion technology are enormous.  Nuclear fusion is a safe, efficient, and potentially limitless form of energy.  It is one of the cleanest forms of energy, as it leaves minimal waste and does not deplete any nonrenewable fuels, unlike coal, oil, and natural gas.  Additionally, nuclear fusion is cheap, costing less than coal energy plants.  A coal plant costs approximately $2.8 billion to build, but another company working on fusion reactors, EMC2 Reactors, estimates that its model will cost between $30 and $200 million.  If engineers can achieve fusion on Earth, it is possible that the pollution caused by fossil fuels can be eliminated, allowing for the reversal of damage caused to the ozone layer, drilling sites in the sea, and the air.

Sources:http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21625861-lockheed-martin-thinks-it-can-make-fusion-power-reality-within-decade-big-bet-smallhttp://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/how-lockheed-martins-power-play-could-boost-fervor-over-fusion-n227366http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/cheaper-coal-fusion-concept-aims-bridge-energy-gap-n223266http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2014/10/17/a-working-nuclear-fusion-reactor-in-three-years-really/