Why the US-UK fusion energy alliance is now a commercial imperative
A Washington strategist warns China is cornering fusion’s critical supply chains as the West’s science lead narrows
The United States and the United Kingdom have spent decades leading the world in fusion energy research. Now, with China pouring billions into facilities, supply chains and talent, the two nations are being pushed to turn their complementary strengths into a formal commercial alliance — before the window closes.
The case for partnership is concrete. The US brings the world’s most active fusion venture capital community, the strongest results in inertial confinement, and the best domestic supply of beryllium. Together with British scientific expertise, they cover ground that neither can hold alone.
“The US still has the best results in inertial confinement and the most vibrant community of entrepreneurs and venture capitalists in the world,” said Ylli Bajraktari, president of the Special Competitive Studies Project (SCSP) Action Program. “The US is the best source of beryllium, and the UK knows the most about radiation-resistant fusion robotics.”
“We can’t each compete with China on our own, but with laser drivers from Germany and superconductors from Japan, an alliance can be stronger,” he said.
The UK still holds the most important records for magnetic confinement fusion, and its scientists are considered world-class across many aspects of the fusion ecosystem. Germany can contribute laser drivers, while Japan — currently the global benchmark in high-temperature superconducting tape production — can supply the magnets that tokamaks and particle accelerators require.
Recent deals between the US and UK covering neutral beams, molten salts and enriched materials suggest the commercial framework for such a partnership is already beginning to take shape. Private companies have also begun building their own capacitors, signalling early moves toward supply chain self-sufficiency.
“The records for energy gain still belong to the US and UK,” Bajraktari said. “We worked hard for that to happen, and will need to keep working if we want to beat China.”
The SCSP is a Washington-based non-partisan organization focused on technology competitiveness and national strategy. Bajraktari delivered his remarks at Fusion Fest, an event organized by Economist Impact in London.
China’s supply chain grip
The commercial opportunity in fusion comes with a significant caveat: much of the supply chain that every fusion company in the world will depend on is consolidating in China.
High-temperature superconductors are essential for the magnets in tokamaks and accelerators.
China now has four major companies capable of producing more superconducting tape than Japan, previously the global leader. China controls 90% of the world’s gallium supply and has already demonstrated a willingness to restrict exports of both gallium and germanium — moves that sent a clear signal to Western manufacturers. China is also currently the only supplier of tritium-breeding lithium — a material no Western fusion company has in adequate supply.
“This control of the supply chain is an existential threat to the West’s energy future,” Bajraktari said. “We’re not going to out-China China.”
China has been actively recruiting staff from Western laser companies to combine imported expertise with its dominant natural resource base. Its Belt and Road Initiative has already secured long-term access to copper reserves across the Global South — a material every fusion company will require — and it possesses the precision manufacturing capabilities that fusion machines demand.
He said Western companies have already begun responding, with private firms building their own capacitors and recent US-UK agreements on neutral beams and molten salts representing early steps toward reducing dependency on adversarial suppliers. He warned, however, that many vulnerabilities remain.
The investment gap compounds the supply chain problem. SCSP conservatively estimates that China has spent $6.5 billion on fusion infrastructure since the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL)’s National Ignition Facility (NIF) first produced net energy in December 2022. Less conservative figures put the total at $10 billion to $13 billion.
The UK’s recently announced £2.5 billion fusion investment plan, while welcome, does not match China’s recent spending surge. Chinese fusion facilities have gone from empty fields to completed buildings in roughly one to two years — a construction pace with no Western equivalent.
Bajraktari said China did not originate the science behind electric vehicles, solar panels or 5G technology. Instead, it used state subsidies and manufacturing scale to seize commercial dominance after others had done the foundational research.
“They focused on subsidies and scaling manufacturing, and it paid off,” he said. “They’re selling solar panels at a loss to get the world in their debt. It will happen in fusion if we don’t move quickly and together.”
Underfunded, not outmatched
On the policy side, the US has a model that works — it just needs the money to match its ambition.
The Department of Energy created a milestone-based funding program for fusion modelled on the public-private partnership structure that returned America to commercial space. The framework has broad support from industry. But it has never been funded anywhere near its authorized levels.
Even companies that win awards under the program are barely covering the cost of compliance, let alone accelerating toward commercial deployment.
“The framework is good, but we need more funding if we want to get our plants on the grid,” Bajraktari said.
Public dollars are essential for unlocking specific technical challenges that private capital is unlikely to fund on its own — among them high-energy neutron-resistant materials and tritium-breeding blankets. Beyond that, he said targeted public investment should support the most credible private companies across a diverse range of fusion approaches, rather than concentrating bets on a single technology path.
The scale of the competitive challenge is stark. China added 543 gigawatts of energy capacity last year alone across solar, wind, coal and nuclear. Its additions over the past five years exceed the total size of the US electricity grid.
SCSP said China’s fusion facilities include a burning plasma tokamak in Hefei, an adjacent research and development campus, a fission-fusion hybrid reactor in Jiangxi targeting 100 megawatts by 2031, and a laser fusion facility in Mianyang conservatively estimated at three megajoules — 50% larger than the NIF that achieved the first energy-positive fusion result.
For Bajraktari, the deeper issue is what kind of energy future gets built.
“Technology is never neutral,” he said. “It takes the values of the system that develops it. If we win, we can usher in a new era of energy abundance that stabilizes the globe.”
He said the physics has been solved. What remains is will — and capital. With the right alliance structure, targeted public funding and a coordinated approach to supply chain resilience, the democratic world has the ingredients to compete.
The window, he said, remains open — but not indefinitely.