Dennis Whyte

is there another way that we can get to this extremely worthwhile goal that maybe it's not that pathway?

And the other part that was clearly frustrating to me, because I'm an advocate of fusion.

You asked me about, was I, you know, I was like, well, it's laser fusion or inertial fusion or magnetic fusion.

I just want fusion energy, okay?

Because I think it's so important to the world is that, but the other thing, if that's the case,

then why do we have only one attempt at it on the entire planet, which was ITER?

It's like, that makes no sense to me, right?

We should have multiple attempts at this with different levels of whatever you wanna think about it, technical, schedule, scientific risk, which are incorporated in them, and that's gonna give us a better chance of actually getting to the goal line.

At its heart, it's exactly the same concept as ITER.

So it's basically a configuration of electromagnets.

It's arranged in the shape of a donut.

And within that, we would do the same thing that happens in all the other tokamaks and including in ITER and in this one, is that namely you put in gas, make it into a plasma, you heat it up, it gets to about 100 million degrees.

The differentiator in SPARC is that we use the actual deuterium tritium fuel.

And because of the access to very high magnetic fields, it's in a very compact space.

It's very, very small.

What do I mean by small?

So it's 40 times smaller in volume than ITER.

But it uses exactly the same physical principles.

So this comes from the high magnetic field.

So in the end, why does this matter?