I have some problems comprehending what the objective of ITER is. I'll explain: The stated objective is "a large-scale scientific experiment that aims to demonstrate that it is possible to produce commercial energy from fusion". However; 1) ITER will never produce any usable energy, so will not have demonstrated that, 2) ITER is build from 'scratch' materials, from which commercial costings into the future would be just guess-work (the budget seems to keep going up by multi%age annually due to rising material costs - if they've got the materials budget wrong already, how can they predict commercially viable into the future?) 3) ITER is not designed to run continuously, and is, therefore, unlikely to provide any demonstration of a continuous operation which is generally considered necessary for commercial viability 4) According to the ITER press office [I did ask!], it does not yet have any programmed-in testing for tritium breeding. There are modules that have been proposed by the partners (particularly the Russian and Japanese module proposals are strong) which may well be expected to find their way into the programme, but it strikes me as amazing that there is as yet no firm commitment that there will be tritium breeding demonstrated in ITER, and without it then it has not 'closed the loop' on its commercial viability. 5) With a sample of one and operating hours being very 'intermittent', no significant demonstration of meeting a commercial reliability target will have been accomplished. The stated objective seems to be yet further confused when we consider 'other' tokamak experiments: A) If ITER is going to demonstrate commercially useful energy, then the next step would be commercially useful energy? NOPE! It is already planned to build a bigger device called DEMO. OK, so if ITER demonstrates commercially useful energy then DEMO will get built... and DEMO's purpose will be.... to demonstrate commercially useful energy (?!?!?) So what was ITER for again? B) If ITER fails to demonstrate commercially useful energy, this would only be one experiment on a line of correlation showing 'bigger is better'. So if ITER fails to demonstrate commercial energy, does this mean DEMO won't get built? It would seem unlikely, because that'd mean giving up on the future power source because one experiment out of dozens didn't sit on the line of correlation of all the rest... errr... that's not 'scientific'. C) If the statement of the objective on the website is wrong and actually ITER is only to 'get some practice in' at running a working tokamak, then why are tokamak experiments being run down now when there are still things that can be learned from them and they'd do OK for such work for some time to come, maybe enabling going straight on to 'DEMO'? Corollary: DEMO will be built whether ITER does or does not demonstrate commercially useful power. A power station will not be built after ITER, whether it 'works' or not, a power station will only come after DEMO. Many other tokamak experiments still have learning to be gotten out of them, but are being closed down to focus on one experiment, ITER, so ITER does not appear to be a very efficient route to learning how to build DEMO - which is going to be built anyway.