For sure, basic research, but the main idea is that the wind doesn't always blow (goddamn this kiting hobby), and the sun doesn't always shine. Fusion is green, and on demand. Similar argument for nuclear fission, but people are scared shitless of it after Chernobyl and Fukushima, and the radioactivity from the byproducts of fusion are much less nasty vs. fission.

It's rare these days, but you can have a "meltdown" in a tokamak reactor. It's like a particularly bad loss of confinement. But worst case scenario, it ruins your vacuum chamber and instrumentation. Any contamination of the lab should be very minimal.

... electricity "too cheap to meter" at the plant but transmission and distribution costs will still be significant

$750 per person each year in maintenance costs? I believe it. Surely it's passed on to the consumer. That's fine. You're not gonna believe it, but this Texan would be in favor of a future-minded overhaul of the energy grid. Instead, we've gone another direction, and subsidized low prices with increased risk of a total grid collapse. In theory, annual upkeep costs should be lower after further modernizing the grid. Maybe not much less than $750. Dunno.

Not gonna lie, my attendance at the Church of Fusion has gone down a bit over the last couple of years. Not covid-related, btw. Solar cells and battery tech are our best bet at clean energy, imho. Carbon sequestration? I don't think anybody's solved that problem very well yet.