[neutronicus]

Fission already lets you generate zero-Carbon power from cheap fuel, at the cost of constructing a monumentally expensive plant.

Fusion sort of looks like it will give you that dynamic, only more extreme. Fuel even cheaper, plants even more expensive and time-consuming (and risky, given lack of track-record)

Solving the waste problem is nice, but not climate-relevant (and you will still be generating a bunch of activated metal due to all the fusion neutrons)

I agree with you that humanity wants to be fusing a lot of hydrogen in 100 years. I don't think it's super relevant to the challenges of the next 20, though

[loufe]

Prototypes and early models are extremely expensive but there are encouraging signs that fusion plants could be cheaper. The technology is inherently safer so site-preparation would be cheaper (can be a massive bill for fission), the same consideration could lead to factory-style production of magnets and other similar components, more interest from the public (safe, climate-friendly) and any sea-touching countries (energy-security) would mean more demand pushing economies of scale further, safer means less time passing certification, etc.