&gt; &quot;But fusion IS very expensive electricity.&quot;<p>You&#x27;re falling into the same trap as the article author, you have no way of knowing that.<p>For example, this article on the dense plasma focus approach to nuclear fusion shows the costs are far below that of other non-nuclear sources:<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com&#x2F;cost-advantage-roi&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com&#x2F;cost-advantage-roi&#x2F;</a><p>Even if you take into account the research costs (which I think is a mistake, the cut off point is too hard to define, I mean would you include R&amp;D into petrol-based cars in the solar car R&amp;D costs?) the level of funding that the dense plasma focus has had to date has been relatively small, it could recoup those costs quickly. You can get a sense for the investment costs involved in one dense plasma focus project here (though admittedly this doesn&#x27;t include all similar research projects, of which there are a few):<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.integrityresearchinstitute.org&#x2F;FutureEnergy&#x2F;FocusFusion-Ver6.htm" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.integrityresearchinstitute.org&#x2F;FutureEnergy&#x2F;Focus...</a><p>So you see, because you have no way of knowing which fusion approach would win out, you cannot say with any certainty that it is expensive electricity.