Wendelstein 7-X achieves world record
&gt; The objective of fusion research is to develop a power plant favourable to climate and environment. Like the sun, it is to derive energy from fusion of atomic nuclei<p>While plasma containment seems like an essential step towards fusion-based energy, is fusion-based energy a desirable goal?<p>Right now, fission-based nuclear energy is only used as a heat source for steam-driven turbines. It&#x27;s a fantastically complex and expensive way to make heat.<p>Is fusion energy on Earth going to do something similar? And if so, is this source of heat actually going to be cheaper than using the sun as a distant fusion reactor? (Which is what drives both solar and wind energy on Earth.) It seems quite doubtful that fusion could ever be cheaper than solar or wind energy, the tech-to-energy ratio just seems massive in comparison.<p>So if it&#x27;s not Earth where fusion energy will be useful, how about in space? Here on Earth, the Carnot cycle is used to convert heat into useful mechanical energy, then finally electrical energy, which is usually the true goal. But the Carnot cycle requires dissipating massive amounts of heat; just as much energy is dissipated as heat as gets turned into electricity. And heat dissipation isn&#x27;t such an easy thing in space, is it?<p>I feel like I&#x27;m missing some rather large puzzle pieces here. Without them, fusion does not really seem like an engineering goal towards a good energy source, just engineering research into better containment of difficult materials. Could somebody help enlighten me?