New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Bottling the Sun's Power on Earth

A breakthrough in fusion could solve the world's energy problems, but remains improbable. David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The military, space and aviation experts at Lockheed Martin want you to know that they're closing in on fusion. The firm's secretive Skunk Works has announced that its compact fusion reactor is a mere 10 years away and would investors please send money.

The device would work… if it works…by fusing atoms of hydrogen together. This fusion produces a larger atom—helium—plus copious energy. As a bonus, fusion does not produce radioactive waste, unlike its poor cousin fission that's in use in nuclear reactors around the world today.

The key to Lockheed's device, they say, is superconductors. They’ll create magnetic fields strong enough to contain the superhot plasma created by fusion. When the atoms of heavy hydrogen fuse in that plasma, neutrons are released that then hit the reactor wall, heating it. That heat then boils water to make steam to spin a turbine.

Or so the theory goes. Unfortunately neutrons have a nasty habit of making materials brittle, among other challenges faced by Lockheed and everyone else chasing fusion. 

Of course, the world already enjoys the benefits of one fusion reactor, which sits at a comfortable remove and can be easily harnessed with a working technology called photovoltaics. It's called the sun.

—David Biello

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.] 

[Also see: Scientists Skeptical of Lockheed’s Fusion Breakthrough]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe