Nuclear fusion has long been described as 'always 30 years away'. In light of private-sector entry into India's fusion research, examine the technological and regulatory challenges in making fusion a viable energy source.

Nuclear fusion joins deuterium and tritium into helium and a fast neutron at about 100 million °C, offering clean power without a runaway chain reaction [1]. Fusion power has long seemed "30 years away." Bengaluru-based Pranos Fusion has now built the test tokamak PRAGYA and aims to finish the PRANIK blueprint by 2027 [1]. That raises a fair question: can private enterprise close this gap?

Technological challenges

• Confinement: no material wall can survive plasma this hot, so superconducting magnets must hold it in place. This is why PRAGYA is testing magnets and plasma control first [1].
• Steady-state operation: SST-1 at IPR, Gandhinagar, was designed for 1,000-second plasmas [2]. Its repeatable discharges reached only about 500 ms by 2015 [3].
• The step to electricity: sustained burn, then net energy gain, then grid power are separate hurdles. The CEO admits electricity is "a further step away" and "would be expensive now" [1].
• Schedule slippage: ITER's 2024 baseline pushed deuterium-tritium operations to 2039, at about €5 billion extra [7].
• Engineering supply chain: ITER components posed "first-of-a-kind" challenges for IPR and Indian industry [3].

Regulatory challenges

• A law written for fission: the SHANTI Act, 2025 replaced the Atomic Energy Act, 1962 and the CLND Act, 2010. It allows private licensees and gives the AERB statutory status [5][6]. However, its licensing covers reactors and the fuel cycle and does not say how tokamaks are classified [6].
• Unclear status of fuel: isotopic separation stays with the Centre "unless otherwise notified." It is unclear whether this covers deuterium and tritium handling [5].
• Liability mismatch: operator liability ranges from ₹100–3,000 crore depending on the facility [5]. A fission-sized band would raise fusion's costs without a matching safety reason.

Way forward

• AERB should notify a fusion-specific category covering tritium and neutron-activated materials. The US NRC's proposed rule regulates fusion machines under byproduct-material rules, not reactor rules [8].
• Startups should draw on IPR's expertise and its ITER-built industrial base through public-private partnerships [3]. India's interest in fusion-fission hybrids that burn radioactive waste could also bring nearer-term benefits [4].

Fusion faces hurdles in both physics and regulation. India should treat it as long-term research, mostly funded privately and through international partners, without diverting attention from solar and fission. A clear fusion-specific rulebook and IPR's three decades of experience could finally shorten the "30 years," in line with SDG 7 and India's net-zero 2070 goal.