Tyrannical wrote:
That's what I meant by work, being able to produce a useful amount of power over a period of time. Otherwise we've had cold fusion since the 1950's with muon catalyzed fusion.
Well, that's a hard definition of work.
Orville and Wright only flew a few hundred yards, but within a few years, people were flying across oceans.
If we REALLY needed to achieve fusion power, to save the world, they would do it very fast. The space station gets more money than the ITER project. And that will never feed anyone.
The reason that it hasn't had more money put into it, is that they are worried that someone might come out with a cheaper process, just as they are getting there. But that's looking less and less likely. The US laser process was looking promising for a while, but the problems seem to get bigger, the further they go.
And it looks like renewables will NEVER hit the efficiency that would make them cost-efficient.
With fusion being so inherently safe, I think they should site them near cities, and make use of the waste heat water.
That way, they could be economic long before they reach peak electricity production.
The energy you are putting in would get re-claimed.