The Fusion Race is Determined by "Mass Production" Rather Than "Ignition": China's Next Bid for Supremacy

"Nuclear Fusion" Shifts from "Science" to "National Implementation Competition"

In December 2025, the New York Times depicted the "US-China competition over nuclear fusion" through the lens of the sheer scale of construction sites. In the lush research hub in the eastern region, massive circular structures and arm-like constructions, likened to the length of an aircraft carrier, are rapidly being assembled. Additionally, in the former rice field area of southwestern China, a large X-shaped facility, previously unknown to the outside world, is being constructed under secrecy, drawing attention through satellite image analysis—this is the introduction.ASPI Cyber & Tech Digest

What is symbolic here is not the classic dream that "if nuclear fusion is realized, the world will change," but rather the very "national implementation capability" of turning that dream into real infrastructure, which is now the main subject of competition.

※This article is not a direct reprint of the NYT text but is reconstructed from publicly available quotes and summaries, as well as related primary information (government and research institution announcements, reports, and social media posts from those involved), from an original perspective.ASPI Cyber & Tech Digest

Why is nuclear fusion becoming a "hegemony theme"?

Nuclear fusion is a reaction that extracts energy by fusing light atomic nuclei, and theoretically,it has extremely low CO₂ emissions and relatively small fuel constraints, making it a potential "next-generation key power source."

However, in reality, it doesn't end with just "creating burning plasma." It is a comprehensive martial art that encompasses materials, heat resistance, fuel cycles, maintainability as a power generation facility, cost, and regulations.

This is where geopolitics comes into play. Nuclear fusion research is not only in the context of "clean energy," but also(especially laser inertial fusion) closely related to simulation and experimental capabilities for nuclear weapons. In other words, while it is "energy technology," it is also "security technology."Reuters

China's strength lies not in a "single path" but in "parallel national projects"

The common narrative in US-China comparisons is the "China = state-led, US = private-led" structure, but more accurately, China's characteristic isa "portfolio-type" national investment that advances multiple fusion routes in parallel.

For example, in terms of policy and research, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) has launched an international program in Hefei, promoting international cooperation and openness in burning plasma research and major equipment.Chinese Academy of Sciences
Additionally, Hefei is mentioned as a hub for elemental technologies directly connected to actual machines, such as superconducting magnets and divertors (parts that receive high heat).IGCC

"Records of experiments" also become material for national prestige. State media reported in January 2025 that China's tokamak device EAST had broken the record for long-duration operation (regardless of the detailed evaluation of the research, it serves as a signal of "progress" externally).Xinhua Net

Another face: "Laser fusion" and "dual-use" as seen from satellite images

The large facility in the southwest hinted at in the NYT article gained attention starting from satellite images. This resonates strongly with the report by Reuters in January 2025 about the "construction of a large laser fusion facility in Mianyang, Sichuan." According to the report, the layout of the facility is similar to the US's NIF (National Ignition Facility), with the possibility of a larger experimental area being pointed out.Reuters

Laser inertial fusion (ICF) is not only a potential power generation technology but also relates to the reliability assessment and design research of nuclear weapons. Therefore, reactions on social media do not end with "clean power" but branch into topics of "military application" and "transparency."Reuters

On the US side: Acceleration of private-led initiatives and "catching up with national strategy"

Meanwhile, the US takes pride in the fact that startups and private capital have driven nuclear fusion forward. In fact, reports introducing the roadmap of the US Department of Energy (DOE) mention thatprivate investment has already reached a scale of $9 billion, with the goal of commercialization in the "mid-term (mid-2030s)" through public-private partnerships.World Nuclear News

However, the concern that arises here is "when the opponent is China, can we compete with just the logic of venture capital?"
In fact, the industry group Fusion Industry Association (FIA) has suggested thata temporary injection of public funds on the scale of $10 billionis necessary and has even proposed allocation plans.Fusion Industry Association

Reuters also reported that the US nuclear fusion industry isseeking budget measures exceeding $1 billion annually, strongly conscious of competition with China.Reuters

What does it mean to "win": Not ignition, but supply chains, mass production, and standards

News about nuclear fusion tends to focus on "ignition," "break-even," and "achieving ○ seconds" as "records of experiments." However, what the NYT depicts is not that.

If we were to truly define "victory," it would probably be—

• Materials: Structural materials damaged by neutrons, lifespan of plasma-facing materials

• Fuel: Procurement, breeding (blanket), and management of tritium

• Supply chain for large devices: Superconducting magnets, vacuum equipment, power supplies, control, measurement

• Reproducibility as a "factory": From one-of-a-kind to standardization

• Licensing, insurance, location, transmission: Social implementation as a power source

In other words, "winning as a research institute" is more difficult than "winning as an industry." And what China has excelled at is precisely the latter—the integration of massive supply chains and construction/manufacturing.

This perspective is also reflected in the social media posts of those involved. For example, a poster researching US-China technology competition points out the "risk that even if the US opens the technical route first, China may lead in engineering and scale."LinkedIn

Excerpts from SNS reactions (LinkedIn/Hacker News/Lemmy, etc.)

※The following are some of the posts and comments visible as of mid-December 2025. They are biased by region and community and do not represent the overall public opinion.

1) The cynical "fusion is always '20 years away'" (tech communities)

In comments on Hacker News, based on the long history of nuclear fusion, there is a classic retort that "since childhood, we've been told it's '20 years away.'" While there is hope, the sentiment is that **"there is still no breakthrough."**Hacker News

2) The irony of "just boiling water again?" and the expectation for baseload power (Fediverse)

On Lemmy, there is a chain of "boiler jokes" questioning whether fusion will ultimately center around steam turbines, while there is also defense considering the variability of wind and solar power, stating it could become a "controllable major power source."Lemmy.World

Additionally, there is a mix of caution about whether the article is overly praising China ("Is it greenwashing?").Lemmy.World

3) The unfairness of "VC vs. state" and the argument for an allied "government coalition" (LinkedIn)

Andrew Holland, a nuclear fusion policy communicator, argues that it is not fair for the private-led West to fight against state-scale backing like China, and warns that without a coalition of willing governments, the next major industry will be lost.LinkedIn

In the comments section, there is also the dilemma of "how can we compete without doing the same (state-led)?" and "aren't Western governments too slow due to bureaucracy?"LinkedIn

In another comment, there is a voice drawing parallels to existing nuclear (fission) projects, warning of the risk thatrecipient countries may become dependentdue to exports accompanied by state financing (infrastructure loans).LinkedIn

4) The "implementation perspective" from the industry side: Implications of "winning by scale"

A LinkedIn post by nuclear fusion company Commonwealth Fusion Systems (CFS) emphasizes that what the NYT article depicts is a "competition in engineering and scaling" rather than theory.LinkedIn

The "five signals" we should watch for from now on

To avoid being swayed by nuclear fusion news, it is effective to follow the following "implementation indicators" from 2026 onwards.##HTML