Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Technology

Type One Energy Raised $82.5 Million to Do Fusion For Real

It’s aiming to put fusion energy on the grid by the mid-2030s.

A stellerator.
Heatmap Illustration/Type One Energy

The fusion world is flush in cash and hype, as the dream of near-limitless clean energy inches closer to reality. A recent report from the Fusion Industry Association found that in the last two years, companies in the industry have brought in over $2.3 billion, nearly a third of all fusion funding since 1992.

Today, one of those companies, Type One Energy, announced a giant, $82.5 million seed funding round, which CEO Chris Mowry told me is “one of the largest, if not the largest ever, seed financings in the history of energy.” This funding represents the total from the company’s first close in March of last year, which brought in $29 million, plus the recent close of its extension round, which brought in an additional $53.5 million. The extension was co-led by Breakthrough Energy Ventures, New Zealand-based venture capital firm GD1, and Centaurus Capital.

Mowry said the follow-on funding is necessary for the company to achieve its target of commercializing fusion by the mid-2030s. “To do this, we need to ramp this company up pretty quickly and have some pretty ambitious milestones in terms of development of the actual pilot power plant. And that takes a lot of capital,” he told me.

Type One uses a reactor design known as a stellarator. The concept is similar to the more familiar doughnut-shaped tokamak reactors, used by the deep-pocketed MIT-spinoff Commonwealth Fusion Systems and the intergovernmental fusion megaproject ITER. Both stellarators and tokamaks use high-powered magnets to confine superheated plasma, in which the fusion reaction takes place. But unlike the symmetrical magnetic field created by a tokamak, a stellarator creates a twisted magnetic field that is more adept at keeping the plasma stabilized, though historically at the expense of keeping it maximally hot.

Recent progress in the stellarator universe has Mowry excited, as the world’s largest stellarator, developed at the Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics in Germany, has demonstrated high heating power as well as the ability to maintain a fusion plasma for a prolonged period of time. Thus, he told me this tech has “no fundamental science or engineering barriers to commercialization,” and that if the German stellarator were simply scaled up, it could likely provide sustained fusion energy for a power plant, albeit at a price point that would be totally unfeasible. Commercialization is therefore now simply an “engineering optimization challenge.”

The Type One team is composed of some of the world’s foremost experts on stellarator fusion, coming from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, which Mowry said “built the world’s first modern stellarator;” Oak Ridge National Laboratory; and the Institute for Plasma Physics. The company plans to use the additional funding to jumpstart its FusionDirect program, which involves building a prototype reactor in partnership with Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the Tennessee Valley Authority, the nation’s largest public utility. The timeline is aggressive — Type One is aiming to complete the prototype by the end of 2028. And while this machine will not generate fusion energy, its purpose is to validate the design concept for the company’s pilot plant, which will ideally begin putting fusion electrons on the grid by the mid-2030s.

Mowry’s goal is to enter into a public-private partnership by the end of the decade that will help get the company’s first-of-its-kind stellarator pilot off the ground. The government has an integral role to play in helping fusion energy reach scale, he argued, but said that as of now, it’s not doing nearly enough. Federal funding for fusion, he told me, is “on the order of a billion dollars a year.” While that might seem like a hefty sum, Mowry said only a minuscule portion is allotted to commercialization initiatives as opposed to basic research and development, a breakdown “aligned with where fusion was in the 20th century,” he told me, not where it is today.

If Type One’s pilot plant works as hoped, “then you’re talking about deploying the first wave of full-scale, truly commercial fusion power plants in the second half of the 2030s.” Which, when it comes to preventing catastrophic climate change, is “maybe just in time.”

Green

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Climate Tech

The Climate Tech Investor Who Won’t Touch DAC

Especially with carbon capture tax incentives on the verge of disappearing, perhaps At One Ventures founder Tom Chi is onto something.

Direct air capture.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Technology to suck carbon dioxide out of the air — a.k.a. direct air capture — has always had boosters who say it’s necessary to reach net zero, and detractors who view it as an expensive fig leaf for the fossil fuel industry. But when the typical venture capitalist looks at the tech, all they see is dollar signs. Because while the carbon removal market is still in its early stages, if you look decades down the line, a technology that can permanently remove residual emissions in a highly measurable fashion has got to be worth a whole lot, right? Right?

Not so, says Tom Chi, founder of At One Ventures and co-founder of Google’s technological “moonshot factory,” X. Bucking the dominant attitude, he’s long vowed to stay away from DAC altogether. “If you’re trying to collect carbon dioxide in the air, it’s like trying to suck all the carbon dioxide through a tiny soda straw,” Chi told me. Given that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere sits at about 0.04%, “2,499 molecules out of 2,500 are not the one you’re trying to get,” Chi said. “These are deep, physical disadvantages to the approach.”

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Climate

AM Briefing: NEPA Takes a Hit

On the environmental reviews, Microsoft’s emissions, and solar on farmland

NEPA Takes a Hit From the Supreme Court
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Current conditions: Enormous wildfires in Manitoba, Canada, will send smoke into the Midwestern U.S. and Great Plains this weekend • Northwest England is officially experiencing a drought after receiving its third lowest rainfall since 1871 • Thunderstorms are brewing in Washington, D.C., where the Federal Court of Appeals paused an earlier ruling throwing out much of Trump’s tariff agenda.

THE TOP FIVE

1. NEPA takes a hit

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that courts should show more deference to agencies when hearing lawsuits over environmental reviews.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Q&A

How Are Renewable Energy Developers Reacting to IRA Cuts?

A conversation with Mike Hall of Anza.

The Fight's Q&A subject.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is with Mike Hall, CEO of the solar and battery storage data company Anza. I rang him because, in my book, the more insights into the ways renewables companies are responding to the war on the Inflation Reduction Act, the better.

The following chat was lightly edited for clarity. Let’s jump in!

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow