Regarding the beryllium – unfortunately it wont be a solution for a widespread application, at least for an ITER-like plant with beryllium blankets. Check this out: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fusengdes.2010.11.040
I cite just the relevant paragraphs here. The rest is mostly about lithium anyway.
“The situation with regard to beryllium and lead should also be
discussed. Beryllium is regarded as a very rare metal. Despite its
presence in over 90 known minerals, only bertrandite and beryl
occur in minable concentrations. Annual production was 140 t
in 2009; figures for the total reserves are not available, but the
resources amount to only 80,000 t [18]!
[…]
The beryllium burn-up in 2760 HCPB power plants would be
524 t annually and the initial loading 331,000 t, vastly exceeding
the present estimation of resources (see above)! The situation for
lead in HCLL power plants is somewhat better: the annual burn-
up would be 8560 t and the initial loading 11.3 Mt. With 1.5 Gt
resources (see above) the burn up is such that there would be suffi-
cient lead for about 175,000 years, assuming it were available only
for fusion. This situation is far from optimal, but better than for
beryllium.”
.
