“It’s the 21st century moon landing.” Discovering energy through nuclear fusion is much more than just science – it’s also a race into the new Cold War

The US government’s announcement of a “historic achievement” was a political marketing ploy. But everything can change in the economy and in the way Americans try to be world leaders again.

Advertised as “great breakthrough” In the search for clean energy that could be revolutionary in the fight against climate change and in the energy transition that the world must accelerate to reach the goal of carbon neutrality in 2050. But increasing energy through Nuclear fusion With self-confinement, he goes beyond science, entering a field where a lot of politics is also at play.

Nuno Jouvia has no doubts: in the context of a new Cold War in which the United States leads the West against China and Russia, the international relations specialist assured CNN Portugal that the Americans “want to show strategic partners and opponents who are at the forefront”, this time in the fight for technology aimed at to simulate energy generation in the sun.

“This is getting to the moon in the 21st century, achieving the energy transition,” he says, recalling a titanic struggle between the United States and the Soviet Union in space exploration. It started with putting a man into orbit, and then Neil Armstrong took the “small step for man” which was “a big step for humanity.” The quest for hegemony, which culminated between 1957 and 1975, also included vigorous arms races, with each nation making increasingly fearful tests and declarations, with the logic of always deterring the opponent.

Familiar with reality (science and the United States), Marc Nelson confirmed to CNN Portugal that the announcement made by the US government was based largely on political marketing: “He never met or spoke to me until the announcement of fusion and nuclear energy,” said the director of energy consulting at Radiant Energy Group, who has a master’s degree in nuclear energy from the University of Cambridge, who admits he’s cautious about what the discovery really means for science. For Americans, opponents of the United States know this makes no practical sense at the moment. But the same may not apply to anyone who is not in the know.

“Of course the Russians and the Chinese will realize right away that we’re not going to have a nuclear fusion power plant anytime soon. They also have their scientists and realize that’s also for the headlines,” he notes, acknowledging that the same may not happen to people. “If people in China or Russia see America taking steps toward nuclear fusion, there could be political repercussions.”

Luis Guimarães agrees that what we are witnessing may be something similar to the announcement of going to the moon. A PhD in nuclear fusion told CNN Portugal that the US Department of Energy’s announcement isn’t the same as saying they’ll put a man on the moon, but it says they’ll be able to do it soon. Continuing the comparison, John F. Kennedy, then President of the United States, expressed his desire to “land a man on the moon and return him safely to Earth.”

“Scientifically, we still have a long way to go. What the DOE says is that the United States is the land of possibilities, and if anyone has made breakthroughs, it’s the United States. Basically, they are the ones who say they are No. 1 in the world,” the physicist explains.

Deep down, part of advertising also appears as a form of political marketing. The truth is, even before it became official, all the leading newspapers in the United States had the same information: that a big announcement from the Department of Energy was about to arrive. This is what Nuno Jouvia calls “creating expectations,” thus increasing the weight of advertising information even before it becomes official.

“It is clear that when the United States announces something like this, they always wrap everything in a package as if it is something unique and nobody else has,” he adds.

In fact, this is not entirely the case. Luis Guimarães recalls that in February of this year, the European Integration Union made an announcement in the United Kingdom of the new results obtained in Jet, the largest magnetic booking machine in the world. However, the international community has not removed it. These results give confidence to the ITER project, which aims to be the final research machine in magnetic confinement fusion, ahead of the initial commercial prototype. “There was an important announcement of nuclear fusion in Europe in February, but it was little more than a demonstration of better data than that announced in 1996. However, the results were obtained under more adverse conditions, but much closer to what It would be a commercial reactor. The results are fantastic, but the problem is that the general public can easily think that not much has been done since 1996,” he says. Basically, what distinguishes the North American discovery is the dimensions of the energy generated and the manner in which it was achieved.

Competitive Advantage (And Inside)

In addition to the political dimension, there is another dimension that is clearly important: the role of the United States in the global economy and the attempt to retain undisputed leadership, when China threatens to reach that place sooner or later.

Confirms Nuno Jovea, who speaks of a “phase” when referring to the announcement and the news that preceded it.

This is where the concept internal, a definition that includes locating production in the local territory. Much of the industrial production in the United States, Luis Guimarães recalls, is located in foreign countries. This discovery could change that. This is because many European and other nationals may feel attractive to the North American job market in the field of energy, specifically in nuclear research.

says the physicist, who is not in the field of his training but admits he would consider the possibility of a trip to the US to work on these kinds of projects if you were at another point in your life.

According to Mark Nelson, something has changed the paradigm: the increase in the cost of renewable energies, industries in which investment is also high, largely because many companies are not getting the profits they want. North America shows that the United States has never abandoned an energy strategy based on nuclear energy, which means a competitive advantage for the country. And there is another problem: “It has become clear that it does not matter how much infrastructure we build for solar or wind energy, because we still need gas pipelines and other equipment for the power grid,” the specialist adds, noting that this means a higher cost, in addition to the high seasonality of renewable energies.

“With the abolition of these alternatives, people are looking for other solutions. Nuclear power plants operating in Europe can make a lot of profits,” asserts the advocate of installing fission nuclear power plants to reduce energy costs.

Thus Mark Nilsson advocates an energy grid based on nuclear power plants, pointing out that Europe has fallen behind by not making that bet. “the government [norte-americano] It benefits greatly from having a nuclear operation. It’s one of the reasons why America is doing better, financially, than Portugal, for example. Even North America gives his example: He lives in Chicago, Illinois, “where energy prices are stable or down,” unlike the rest of the world, where they have escalated since the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The truth is that producing a model that could be viable for commercialization of nuclear fusion implies years and years of research that will get thousands and billions of dollars from the North American government, but also from the private sector. Joe Biden’s Inflation Act alone foresees an investment of US$370 billion (just under euros) to support research that finds ways to produce energy without producing carbon dioxide. This means investing in materials, but also in human capital, that is, in scientists trained in other countries who want to work in the region.

“There’s a lot of private interest, there’s public investment and we’re working. Now that we’re getting closer, the private sector is also heavily invested. President [Joe Biden] It aims to have a commercial reactor within ten years. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said, “We can get there in a decade, of course we have a goal of being carbon neutral by 2050. Now scientists can work on that kind of solution.”

All because the war in Ukraine and the subsequent escalation in energy prices have changed the paradigm: today the United States has one of the cheapest energy sectors, largely because natural gas reserves make this country have a much better energy situation than the rest of the country. The world, is highly dependent on fossil fuels coming from Russia.

“Energy is expensive everywhere in the West except the United States. Now they bring in the industry that they had in other countries, because it’s cheaper for them and because it’s politically popular,” Luis Guimarães points out.

Independence is the right word: Nuno Jouvia recalls that there was a lot of talk about the need to import energy, something the United States does not have as much as other countries. “They achieved this independence and today they have this ability, even with unclean energy,” says the expert.

This declaration may allow for such energy independence in clean energies. He concludes that the United States will be able to transform itself into a powerfully independent country using clean energy.

For now, says Mark Nelson, it’s important to understand what the real energy gain could be from this discovery. “The number of big steps required from this move to a nuclear power plant is huge, and we don’t know if we’ll get there. The answer won’t come for ten years or more.”