Do you have nuclear fusion on your bingo card?

Nuclear fusion is the holy grail for producing energy: virtually limitless clean energy without the waste or meltdown risk of fission. Besides from making reaching climate goals a lot easier, it also provides a solution to the recently more prominent question of energy security and independency. The latest headliness have made updated promises for this exiting new technology, yet, the history of fusion is littered with missed deadlines and postponed breakthroughs. “Fusion is always thirty years away,” the saying goes. Or should we be more optimistic this time?

A new contender

Commonwealth Fusion Systems (CFS), an MIT spin-out founded in 2018, now claims it can break that cycle. The company plans to demonstrate net fusion energy by 2027, meaning their reactor, called SPARC, would generate more energy from fusion than is needed to heat the plasma. It is an extraordinary ambition, but also one that invites skepticism. What, if anything, makes this attempt different?

CFS’s optimism rests on a tangible technical breakthrough: high-temperature superconducting (HTS) magnets. In 2021, the company and MIT successfully tested a large-bore magnet reaching 20 tesla; the strongest of its kind. This enables far higher magnetic fields in a much smaller reactor, dramatically improving efficiency and confinement. Where older designs like ITER are the size of cathedrals, SPARC aims to achieve similar plasma conditions in a machine small enough to fit inside a warehouse.

The implications are profound. Higher magnetic fields mean higher power density: each cubic meter of plasma can yield exponentially more energy. In principle, this allows CFS to build compact, modular systems instead of gigantic research reactors. If the underlying physics holds, this could be the most credible path yet toward practical fusion energy.

Construction of SPARC is now underway in Devens, Massachusetts. The cryostat base, the massive vessel that will contain the fusion chamber, has been installed, and component commissioning is progressing. The timeline foresees first plasma in 2026 and a “Q > 1” (effectively producing energy) demonstration the year after. The company’s next project, ARC, would be the first grid-connected fusion plant, slated for the early 2030s.

The privitising supercharger

Unlike the vast international consortia that characterized earlier fusion efforts, CFS follows a start-up logic: iterate fast, manufacture in-house, and scale through replication. It has built its own magnet factory to industrialize the HTS process and has raised more than $2 billion from investors including Eni, Google, and Breakthrough Energy Ventures. These are not grants for academic curiosity, they are bets on commercialization.

The company’s approach reflects a broader shift in the fusion landscape: from public research toward private engineering. Instead of building a single monumental experiment, CFS wants to prove a working concept, then mass-produce improved versions. In that sense, SPARC is not an endpoint but a prototype factory. If successful, it could compress decades of experimentation into a few product cycles.

This way of developing has been proven to work by companies like SpaceX. Privitising disruptive tech is often more risky, but it can also supercharge the development of new technology, as seen in the space industry. One could argue that the mindset of developing tech of a researcher is vastly different than that of an entrepreneur.

The case for cautious optimism

Still, the challenge ahead is immense. No private fusion project has yet produced net energy, and the gap between magnet performance and integrated plasma operation remains wide. Fusion requires the simultaneous success of multiple systems: magnetic confinement, heat extraction, neutron shielding, and tritium handling. Each has failed ambitious projects in the past.

Moreover, “net energy” in the laboratory does not equal power to the grid. Even if SPARC achieves its goal, the step from experimental device to reliable power plant (one that runs continuously, breeds its own fuel, and operates economically) will take years. The history of advanced energy systems teaches that physics demonstrations are milestones, not destinations.

Nevertheless, CFS is arguably the most credible contender to break fusion’s decades-long stalemate. It combines proven magnet hardware with aggressive engineering, strong private capital, and a defined commercial roadmap. With the backing of MIT, an institute that praises itself for focussing on societal impact, the storm couldn’t be any more perfect. For the first time, fusion progress depends less on political consensus and more on industrial execution.

AI, fusion, what’s next?

If CFS succeeds, it would mark one of the defining moments in modern energy history. Net-positive fusion would not only validate half a century of research; it would redefine the long-term energy mix, displacing both fossil fuels and large portions of conventional nuclear. But if it fails - if timelines slip or physics intervenes - it will reinforce the very skepticism that has haunted fusion since the 1970s.

In that sense, the CFS project captures a broader shift in how we pursue innovation: from intergovernmental idealism to entrepreneurial realism. The race to harness the power of the stars is no longer led by states but by start-ups. Whether that is cause for hope or caution remains to be seen. But one thing is certain: in a world that was completely blindsided by the boom of AI, nuclear fusion just might fit in perfectly with things we didn’t have on our bingo cards for the 2020’s.

 

Artistic interpretation of fusion