Orignal Query (OQ) Over the next 10 years (2025–2035), how should major energy generation options—nuclear fission, natural gas, solar, wind, and fusion (experimental)—be evaluated in terms of cost, risk, scalability, and long-term system value, when accounting for capital investment, amortization timelines, operational reliability, and failure modes? Required Comparative Dimensions Please evaluate each energy source separately, then comparatively, using the following structured criteria: 1. Energy Output & Reliability Average and peak energy production (MW / GWh per year) Capacity factor and intermittency Grid stability contribution (baseload vs variable) Dispatchability and ramping characteristics 2. Cost Structure Upfront capital cost (CAPEX) Operating and maintenance costs (OPEX) Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) Time to break even / amortization period Sensitivity to interest rates and financing conditions 3. Risk Profile Construction risk (delays, overruns) Operational risk (downtime, maintenance complexity) Fuel supply risk (price volatility, geopolitical exposure) Regulatory and permitting risk Public acceptance and political risk 4. Failure Modes & Cost of Failure Typical failure scenarios (technical, financial, environmental) Cost magnitude of failures (localized vs systemic) Recovery time after major failures Liability and externalized costs (environmental, health, cleanup) 5. Scalability & Deployment Speed Typical project lead times Constraints on scaling (materials, labor, geography) Suitability for centralized vs distributed deployment Workforce and supply-chain dependencies 6. Environmental & Systemic Impact Lifecycle emissions (including construction and decommissioning) Land use and ecological impact Waste streams and long-term stewardship requirements Water use and thermal pollution (where applicable) 7. Strategic Role Over the Next Decade Realistic contribution to national/regional energy mix by 2035 Role in energy resilience and grid hardening Compatibility with electrification and storage strategies Path dependency risks (lock-in vs flexibility) Special Treatment: Fusion Current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Realistic probability of grid-scale contribution within 10 years Investment risk profile vs potential upside Whether fusion should be treated as: an energy source, a research hedge, or a long-term option outside near-term planning Synthesis Request (After Analysis) Based on the above metrics, what balanced energy portfolio strategies minimize systemic risk while maximizing reliable energy production per dollar invested over the next decade? Which technologies are core, which are transitional, and which are speculative within a 10-year planning horizon? Constraints & Assumptions Assume no breakthrough energy storage technology beyond incremental improvements Assume realistic regulatory and political friction Avoid advocacy; prioritize evidence, uncertainty ranges, and trade-offs Explicitly distinguish what is economically viable now from what is promising but uncertain Why this query works (quietly) No false certainty Explicit time horizon Defined metrics Clear comparison frame Invites structured research, not opinion Respects uncertainty without paralysis