Failures of Social License put Technology Rather than People First

Abstract

Celebrating the Abstract Perceptions of FusionFusion energy offers great promise and hope, two attributes of the energy transition that are in great demand among many audiences. Unlocking the power of the sun on earth opens enormous possibilities. The promise of disconnecting energy production from geography inspires a rethinking of how energy supply chains function altogether. After decades of public sector investment to expand the bounds of fusion knowledge, the private sector’s enthusiasm reflects crucial progress towards commercial prospects to benefit an evolving planet.Fusion’s most recent appeal reflects the growing urgency for greenhouse gas reductions. To stay associated with the climate movement, the nascent fusion sector must recognize their technologies represent a means to an end, not the desired result. Climate changes threaten the human population and the natural systems that sustain it. Modern societies function with tremendous amounts of electricity; and each generation source will leave its own environmental impact. As a result, the energy transition will be phased and evolving as efforts must address not only electricity production but energy use in transportation and industry as well. In the assessment of Arthur D. Little consultants, “Despite extensive efforts, we have a long way to go before achieving a low-carbon economy [3]”.So far, the private fusion sector has received a warm welcome. More and more mainstream environmentalists accept that electricity providers will need to supplement the global energy mix with firm, carbon-free alternatives. Weather-dependent sources like wind and solar must be expanded further but continue to emerge as ultimately insufficient. The potential for fusion, grid-scale storage and deep rock geothermal will continue to evolve as energy demand grows to meet future needs [4, 5].Calls for enhanced stakeholder engagement in the incipient private fusion sector reflect growing sensitivity to issues of environmental and social justice in the broader sector. They speak to a crucial need to reset the relationship between societies and energy systems. However, focus on fusion technology itself will fail in the quest for upstream stakeholder engagement. A technology-first approach immediately engages stakeholders with focus on their deficient knowledge of fusion physics rather than creating an equitable dynamic for exchange.Senior Lecturer at the University of Melbourne, Darrin Durant, offers a useful critique in Arena Magazine. He notes the failures of science communication in the fusion domain, particularly around the difficulties of enabling non-technical audiences to appreciate fusion performance. He writes, “The most accurate way of communicating fusion performance would be with the Q plasma with reference to the Q gain expected to be required for commercialization.” He goes on to explain how radically different these values would be for tokamaks and lasers, concluding, “You can already see how difficult it is to package that set of information in a two-sentence soundbite [6]”.Indeed. The fusion sector is currently competing on performance measures which remain irrelevant to the average person on the street. This makes stakeholder engagement more difficult. Fusion media coverage and marketing materials invite readers to infer that today’s evidence is sufficient to deliver on near-term milestones. This may be adequate and accurate information for investor audiences, and it delivers on important business goals. However, it lends itself to misinterpretation of outside energy sector insiders, leading to debate over what is fact, hype, or dishonesty.The private sector will continue to cater to its distinct and diverse audiences. In pursuit of public understanding of fusion energy’s risks and benefits, the gap between what is relevant to investors in fusion versus what consumers want to know will generate confusion.