Harnessing energy from nuclear fusion – the joining of nuclei within atoms – could be a key factor in the transition to a carbon-free global energy system.
As the problems of climate change and energy security become more apparent, the promise of supposedly “clean”, “inexhaustible” and “secure” energy sources, such as fusion, becomes more and more attractive.
In response, the fusion industry is growing rapidly and the phrase that fusion is “30 years away and always will be” begins to lose credibility as the technology moves out of the experimental stage.
However, it is all too easy to create hype around a seemingly ideal solution to societal challenges – and I argue that the realization of energy fusion may come into conflict with the problems it is trying to solve.
Putting this hype into context and exploring the areas where these conflicts might arise is critical to ensuring that the technology is developed in an ethical manner and can provide societal benefit if it proves feasible.
The appeal of carbon-free, low-waste, reliable and relatively safe energy sources such as fusion is obvious. This is taking place in the context of growing global demand for energy and in the context of climate change. All this requires a transition to a clean energy system.
It is widely believed that fusion energy could fill the gaps of existing energy sources. For example, it would bypass the interruption in the supply of renewable energy sources, considering that the supply of solar and wind energy is unpredictable, as it depends on weather conditions. Fusion also avoids the long-lasting radioactive waste, safety problems and public concerns of conventional nuclear fission. It would help mitigate the carbon cost and greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels.
Fusion energy can also reduce energy security concerns because some of its key resources are abundant. For example, the deuterium used in some fusion processes can be easily obtained from seawater. This would reduce dependence on imports and protect countries from global market shocks.
However, these benefits may mask deeper ethical issues surrounding the development of the technology and some potentially harmful consequences. Perhaps one of the most obvious examples of such conflict is related to environmental sustainability. This especially refers to the connection with mitigating climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Climate changes are an issue that fits into a “technological solution” approach – in other words, it can be tempting to avoid important changes in our behavior because we think we can rely on technology to solve everything. This is known as the “block mitigation argument.”
Matching greenhouse gas emissions with energy demand also raises issues of justice and equity. Energy demand is growing in certain regions, predominantly in the global south, which have contributed least to the current climate crisis. However, fusion programs are predominantly located in the Global North. So if fusion becomes feasible, those who have access to that transformative technology are not necessarily those who need it most.
Climate change is a global challenge, so any proposed solution must take into account the global impact. It is necessary to recognize the context of development and include considerations of global injustice in the implementation of fusion if we want to respond to the climate challenge.
Similar concerns can be found in the materials used for fusion energy. These materials include critical minerals such as lithium, tungsten and cobalt. The extraction and processing of these minerals emit greenhouse gases. In some cases, extraction operations are located on or near indigenous peoples’ territories. The supply chain for these materials is also rooted in geopolitical tensions, with alliances, cooperation, competition and the potential for monopolies.
Mercury, for example, is used in the processing of lithium for fusion reactors. Not only is this element environmentally harmful and toxic, it is also largely produced in China.
The accelerated pace of fusion energy development increases the risk of neglecting these potential dangers. However, I believe that it is not about the need for moral inhibition, but about the need for a change of approach. Approaching these potential ethical tensions requires systematic thinking throughout the development process, from considering the implications of design decisions and material choices, to strategies for equitable implementation and knowledge sharing.
Access to energy is established for human well-being and development, and the energy system as a whole has profound social consequences. Failure to deal with the social and ethical challenges of new and developing technologies in this area would be irresponsible, and in the worst case, harmful. This is especially important when the consequences of fusion technology can further exacerbate the challenges it is trying to solve.
The post Fusion is coming, but are we ready for the problems it can cause? appeared first on ITNetwork.
Source: www.itnetwork.rs
