Last week, the nuclear fusion startup Helion announced that it has raised five hundred million dollars. They said that they have developed new technologies that may make commercial nuclear fusion viable. While it is too early to know if Helion claims are accurate, there are so many fusion projects and breakthroughs recently that the Helion claim cannot be dismissed. The possibility of carbon-free energy generation raises an important question. How much would the world change if a cheap and clean energy source were readily available.
The arrival of cheap fusion energy will trigger other changes. While nuclear fusion may not be able to be used to power an airplane, it could be used to generate cheap hydrogen fuel which could do things that fusion power cannot. A chain reaction would occur that spread cheap and clean energy across the economy.
With the arrival of cheap fusion power, it will be easier to get anywhere much more quickly. Many remote places would be transformed. Hopefully many of the changes would be positive. A probable second-order effect would be that countries with good infrastructure planning would receive a significant relative gain over countries without good planning.
Desalinating water would be cheap and easy. This would transform and terraform many landscapes. Deserts would bloom but there will be an environmental debate about how many deserts should be retained. It might be possible to manipulate temperatures outdoors which could partially offset the impact of climate change.
Wages should rise significantly. More goods and services should be available. However, the demand for labor would rise substantially. On the other hand, automation of many jobs would accelerate. Robots will proliferate which will trigger more second and third order effects.
Cheap abundant energy will also make supercomputing more available, and the cryptocurrency industry will be more convenient. Nanotechnology will get a major boost.
With an increase in the relative plenty of material goods, people may invest more resources in seeking status. Membership in exclusive clubs will likely be more expensive.
Limiting climate change may not be as simple as it might first seem. Nuclear fusion can replace all the fossil fuel power plants but there are secondary consequences that should be considered. As water desalinization becomes cheaper and easier, irrigation will become cheaper. Many areas would become more verdant which could lead to more cattle being raised and eaten. The methane released by more cows would contribute to climate change. On the other hand, cheap abundant energy would make protective technologies cheaper and more ubiquitous which could offset the methane problem.
In a would with cheap zero carbon energy, the stakes would be greater for a large group of decisions. If we are unable to clear the air of pollution, the increase of radical change would spawn a whole host of new problems. One of these would be more methane emissions. The race between the destructive and restorative powers of technology would become much more consequential.
In the short run, fossil fuel-rich nations such as Saudi Arabia and Russia would be the losers. Over the long term, many commodity producing nations would also have reason to worry. China might find it easier to grow more crops and would stop buying from food exporting countries. Areas stricken by drought with deserts and water problems but with decent institution could be major winners.
As is so often the case with any new technology, the challenges are real but there is enormous potential benefit.