ITER has some real engineering value, though. A lot of it is figuring out the missing pieces about logistics, control apparatus, material behaviour, the technologies that are actually practical to implement, and various requirements that have not necessarily been foreseen before construction.
A lot of that can probably explain the various construction delays that happened over the course of its construction, and it probably explains in part why this articles states that it is complementary to ITER.
A big part of those insights will be had before it starts operating, so I wouldn't rule out its contribution to a hypothetical sub-2050 commercial fusion industry.
Edit: and it probably has some scientific value as well, but not being a fusion expert, I can't comment on this.
ITER isn’t really a source of breakthroughs in necessary materials; it didn’t develop new superconductors, hasn’t solved the fusion blanket problem, it won’t be breakeven, Stellerators already are superior in terms of containment, and ITER’a fusion vessel is still intolerant of sputtering. The delays are famously a result of so many countries vying for contracts, and the result is a high performance machine built by committee.
It doesn’t even attempt to generate “new insights” it’s just a bad, old idea at scale.
A lot of that can probably explain the various construction delays that happened over the course of its construction, and it probably explains in part why this articles states that it is complementary to ITER.
A big part of those insights will be had before it starts operating, so I wouldn't rule out its contribution to a hypothetical sub-2050 commercial fusion industry.
Edit: and it probably has some scientific value as well, but not being a fusion expert, I can't comment on this.