Obviously not everything is a race, and adoption matters much more than invention, but was interesting seeing China, France, and Britain’s (and I think Canada maybe?) fusion teams one upping their fusion length records. I think my money is still on China, but I’m not a fusion expert so I’m not quite sure hoe far apart all the contenders are from each other.
Nuclear is far more effective, energy efficient and less environmentally damaging than solar.
My problem with fission reactors is they take a really long time to get running whereas solar can be deployed quickly, even in areas that are underdeveloped. We need to decarbonize global electricity production at a rate far too fast to build nuclear reactors for everyone in the world.
(Even worse, tech idiots want to waste their time building reactors just to power their stupid data centers.)
But sure, I’m not anti-nuclear.
Besides, my point is that fusion isn’t necessary. Even if it’s not actually a viable technology for electricity production we’ll be fine, there are other options that don’t require undiscovered science. Nuclear fission is one of those options, as is solar and wind and hydro etc etc.
Those solar panels also must be manufactured, which require building more factories and mines. In the end, the difference in industrial investment scale is not that important.