Posted on 05/28/2025 6:00:48 AM PDT by Red Badger
Infinity Two utilizes stellarator fusion technology, proven for stable, continuous, large-scale operation by experiments such as the W7-X machine.
Infinity Two's design is uniquely based on the world's sole implementable, peer-reviewed fusion power plant physics. - Type One Energy
=====================================================================================
Type One Energy, a US-based firm, has successfully completed the first formal design review for its “Infinity Two” stellarator fusion reactor power plant.
The advanced design, targeting 350 megawatts (MW) of electricity for the grid by the mid-2030s – enough to power tens of thousands of homes – is now one step closer to realization, particularly in support of a potential project with the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).
The progress on the Infinity Two fusion reactor design, coupled with the collaboration with TVA, is already attracting attention from the global energy industry.
“Several prominent energy utilities and industrial companies have expressed an interest in Infinity Two and participation in Type One Energy’s deployment of its first-generation fusion power plant technology,” said the firm in a press release.
Rigorous review of the fusion reactor design
This achievement marks the first time a fusion power plant design aiming for such a substantial output has passed an independent technical review. This signals a critical turning point in the race for commercial fusion energy.
The Infinity Two concept is uniquely based on the world’s only implementable, peer-reviewed physics basis for a fusion power plant, recently published in the Journal of Plasma Physics.
The rigorous design review board was chaired by Type One Energy’s Chief Technology Officer, Dr. Thomas Sunn Pedersen, and included prominent external experts such as Dr. George H. “Hutch” Neilson from the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory and Dr. Paolo Ferroni from Westinghouse Electric Company.
Dr. Neilson lauded the project, stating, “It is the first serious fusion power plant design that I’ve seen. The work they’ve done to date provides a sound foundation for continued design development of what could be the first system to produce net electricity from fusion.”
The successful review confirms that Infinity Two’s technology, architecture, performance, and reliability requirements align with the expectations of TVA and the broader global energy market for a first-of-a-kind commercial fusion power plant.
Efficient design for commercial viability
The Infinity Two architecture is grounded in stellarator fusion technology, which has uniquely demonstrated stable, continuous steady-state operation at a large scale in experiments like the W7-X machine.
“I think it is important that the Type One Energy team is taking a comprehensive plant-level approach to develop their technology which includes a description of all necessary systems, not just the plasma core,” explained Dr. Ferroni.
Type One Energy’s proprietary design aims for a compelling two-year power plant operating cycle, separated by 30-day planned maintenance outages, utilizing existing materials and enabling technologies.
The company has also leveraged a partner-rich commercialization program, with firms like Atkins-Realis assisting in designing systems and structures beyond Type One Energy’s core stellarator focus.
“Our ability to efficiently architect the initial Infinity Two design in an efficient, partner rich manner reaffirms our commitment to pursuing the lowest risk, shortest schedule, path to a commercially viable fusion power plant,” said Christofer Mowry, Chief Executive Officer for Type One Energy.
“The energy industry needs more reliable, clean, power generation technology that can meet the rapidly increasing demand for electricity and we are delivering a commercially compelling solution.”
Fusion power will be priced like new pharmaceuticals. The US will pay through the nose for generations of R&D. China, Japan, and Europe will pay what they want, next to nothing.
they used to always say 20 years away. Now they’re saying 10 years or less.
Yes. No scoffing here. No one can predict technological achievements of this sort. Heck they may achieve it but then realize they cant control it and then shelf it and try something else. Research is a messy business.
“The company has also leveraged a partner-rich commercialization program”
This crap was written by some Harvard MBA, wasn’t it?
Now they’re saying 10 years or less.
—
By that time, there will be a Dem President or Dem controlled Congress, and nuclear anything will be killed.
I don’t think so. Have considered that all this climate change nonsense and wind/solar sideshow is about getting the voting public to accept, even embrace, new nuclear power technology?
Have considered that all this climate change nonsense and wind/solar sideshow is about getting the voting public to accept, even embrace, new nuclear power technology?
—
Sure you betcha. No. Its about political power on the progressive radical left, not energy sources.
Yes, but who is the man behind the curtain.
This is a press release, not a news article, as it pretends to be.
If the word nuclear appears in any licensing docs the treehuggers will not allow it. Never. Not in the US.
“.....So far actual fusion has just been a fleeting laboratory experiment and no where near to a sustained source of power for commercial use. There have been predictions that fusion power is just a few years away for the last 30 years. Maybe someday, but not likely in the near future......”
Thank you for your post. Actually, one can manufacture a device and not have it be cost effective. When I was in nuclear engineering graduate school over 50 years ago, fusion reactors were support to be just a few years off in the future according to some.
In my graduate nuclear engineering courses we spent some time on the technology (and its different types of magnetic containment) to discuss what were the real challenges.
The three I most remember are the pulsed nature of the magnetic fields, and hence the cyclic loading and material cracks of anything having an economic commercial life of say 10 years or more. A second we examined was the high neutron flux or other leftover particle remnants and what that might do to the original materials in the reactor core from a materials standpoint again over an economic commercial life. Finally, the Balance of Plan or BOP and how did you shield it, its controls, etc. from the radiation such that you didn’t have to replace too much within a short period of time.
With Q=0.5 and Q=1 being reached already with existing fusion magnetic confinement. Hybrid fusion - fission breed reactors are already feasible. The fission blanket multiplies the yield of neutrons by 50 to 200 times. With a blanket of U238 with Pu239 breed insitu with a kef=0.9 just barely subcritical you get 100+ multiplication of the initial fusion energy and breed at a BR of 2+ per atom of Pu consumed. A 50 megawatt fusion neutron source with a Q=0.5 would need 100 megawatts of power to run it but with a large fission blanket being driven by the insane amounts of 12 MEV neutrons each one triggering at least 3 more fission events before a capture event you get 100x multiplication due to that neutron cascades. You would ha’ve 5,000 megawatts thermal in the blankets. Using supercritical CO2 as your coolant because it’s transparent to neutrons unlike water you get 45% efficiency on your turbines. You push back the 100MW needed to run the plasma at a loss and use the net surplus for grid power. A hybrid of this size would also breed 2500+ kilograms of Pu239 per year enough to feed 20 CANDU reactors with fissile fuel or dozen PWR. The electricity from your hybrid is not the product it’s the plutonium that it breeds with gusto that is the product including the plutonium in the energy balance and it’s closer to 500 to one in the initial fusion energy in neutrons. 12Mev yields three 200Mev fission events each of those yield 2.1 additional 200Mev events and then every neutron released in that cascade is eventually captured by an atom when it’s in the middle of a dense mass of U238 most will capture in that yielding yeah more Pu239 which is man’s greatest achievement.
By that time, there will be a Dem President or Dem controlled Congress, and nuclear anything will be killed.
/////
You always look on the bright side of life.
Just pragmatic. is all.
I asked chatgpt to review the literature on fusion power plants and make a projection as to when the first fusion power plant for electrical production comes online. Here was the answer.
💰 Timeline to Profitability
Achieving a fusion reactor that not only produces net-positive energy but also does so profitably involves overcoming substantial technical and economic hurdles.
Private Sector Outlook: Companies like CFS are optimistic, projecting the operation of commercial fusion power plants in the early 2030s. CFS’s ARC reactor, for instance, is planned to be operational in Virginia by that time .
Wikipedia
+2
Wikipedia
+2
Reddit
+2
Industry Projections: According to a 2024 report by the Fusion Industry Association, about one-third of surveyed fusion companies anticipate achieving commercial viability between 2031 and 2035, with another third targeting 2036 to 2040 .
Fusion Industry Association
+2
Financial Times
+2
NucNet
+2
Economic Considerations: Profitability will depend on factors such as construction costs, operational efficiency, maintenance, and the cost of fuel. Some analyses suggest that fusion could achieve a levelized cost of electricity between $0.06 and $0.11 per kilowatt-hour, making it competitive with other energy sources .
Medium
🔭 Outlook
While the exact timeline remains uncertain, the convergence of scientific breakthroughs, technological advancements, and increased investment suggests that the first profitable fusion reactors could become a reality in the 2030s. Continued support from both the public and private sectors will be crucial in overcoming the remaining challenges and bringing fusion energy to the grid.
Yup.🙄
I put the same question to Grok. This was the answer.
Conclusion
Fusion reactor research is progressing at an unprecedented pace, driven by scientific breakthroughs, private investment, and global collaboration. While net electricity production could occur by the early 2030s in optimistic scenarios, achieving profitability—producing electricity at competitive costs—will likely take until 2040–2045. This timeline reflects the need to resolve engineering challenges, scale tritium breeding, and optimize economics in a competitive energy market. Continued investment, cross-sector collaboration, and technological innovation will be critical to realizing fusion’s potential as a clean, abundant energy source.
Then just for fun, I asked Grok by how much power and compute Grok increase over the next five years. This was the answer:
Final Estimate
Combining these factors, Grok in 2030 is likely to be 50–100 times more powerful than Grok 3 in 2025,
if xAI achieves breakthroughs in model efficiency or secures disproportionate resources, the upper bound could reach 500–1,000x, though this is speculative.
////////////
then I asked grok the. following: Would the increased power and compute for Grok enable Grok to accelerate the development of fusion reactors for electrical production. If so, by how much? Here was the conclusion from grok:
Conclusion
Grok’s projected 50–100x increase in power by 2030 could significantly accelerate fusion reactor development by enhancing plasma simulations, materials discovery, reactor design, plasma control, tritium breeding, and economic modeling. This could reduce the timeline for profitable fusion electricity by 5–10 years, shifting the realistic timeline from 2040–2045 to 2030–2040, with an optimistic scenario as early as 2030–2035. The exact impact depends on Grok’s integration into fusion research, data access, and the resolution of non-technical barriers.
Interesting article. Thx for posting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.