From ITER to Demo -- Technology Towards Fusion Power Farrokh Najmabadi Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering Director, Center for Energy Research.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Technology readiness levels in a nutshell
Advertisements

Alain Bertaud Urbanist Module 1: Introduction and the Context The role of, government, urban planners and markets.
ASIPP Zhongwei Wang for CFETR Design Team Japan-US Workshop on Fusion Power Plants and Related Advanced Technologies February 26-28, 2013 at Kyoto University.
Plans for Socioeconomic Studies for FY01 Farrokh Najmabadi VLT PAC Meeting June 28-29, 2000 Oak Ridge National Laboratory Electronic copy:
EFDA Fusion Roadmap Status of implementation Francesco Romanelli EFDA Leader.
From ITER to DEMO – Technology Towards Fusion Power Town Hall Meeting 20th ANS Topical Meeting on the Technology of Fusion Energy Nashville, TN U.S.A.
FNSF Blanket Testing Mission and Strategy Summary of previous workshops 1 Conclusions Derived Primarily from Previous FNST Workshop, August 12-14, 2008.
Prospect for Fusion Energy in the 21 st Century: Why? When? How? Farrokh Najmabadi Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering Director, Center for.
Overview of the ARIES “Pathways” Program Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego 8 th International Symposium on Fusion Nuclear Technology Heidelberg, Germany 01–
Summary and Closing Remarks Farrokh Najmabadi University of California San Diego Presentation to: ARIES Program Peer Review August 18, 2000 UC San Diego.
Fusion Development Path: A Roll-Back Approach Based on Conceptual Power Plant Studies Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego Fusion Power Associates Annual Meeting.
Role of Fusion Energy in the 21 st Century Farrokh Najmabadi Prof. of Electrical Engineering Director of Center for Energy Research UC San Diego UCLA May.
Page 1 of 14 Reflections on the energy mission and goals of a fusion test reactor ARIES Design Brainstorming Workshop April 2005 M. S. Tillack.
March 3-4, 2008/ARR 1 Power Management Technical Working Group: TRL for Heat and Particle Flux Handling A. René Raffray University of California, San Diego.
September 6-7, 2007/ARR 1 Power Management Technical Working Group: Status and Documentation A. René Raffray Mark Tillack University of California, San.
IEA Workshop, San Diego October 2003 Summary of the European SERF-3 Programme David Ward, Ian Cook Culham Science Centre on behalf of GianCarlo Tosato.
Overview of Advanced Design White Paper Farrokh Najmabadi Virtual Laboratory for Technology Meeting June 23, 1998 OFES Headquarters, Germantown.
Summary Report of the Energy Issues Working Group Organizer: Farrokh Najmabadi Covenors:Jeffrey Freidberg, Wayne Meier, Gerald Navaratil, Bill Nevins,
Fusion Development Path: A Roll-Back Approach Based on Conceptual Power Plant Studies Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego 9 th International Symposium on Fusion.
Thoughts on Fusion Nuclear Technology Development and the Role of ITER TBM Farrokh Najmabadi Prof. of Electrical Engineering Director of Center for Energy.
Role of ITER in Fusion Development Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA FPA Annual Meeting September 27-28, 2006 Washington,
The current overall EU policy framework: Europe 2020 strategy, Innovation Union and Energy 2020 Strategy On March 2010, the Commission presented a Communication.
An Enterprising University Roger Ford Chair of Innovation and Technology Strategy.
INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY AGENCE INTERNATIONALE DE L’ENERGIE 1 Dr. Robert K. Dixon Head, Energy Technology Policy Division International Energy Agency.
Challenges of a Harmonized Global Safety Regime Jacques Repussard Director General IRSN IAEA 2007 Scientific Forum.
Power Extraction Research Using a Full Fusion Nuclear Environment G. L. Yoder, Jr. Y. K. M. Peng Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge, TN Presentation.
From ITER to Demo -- Technology Towards Fusion Power Farrokh Najmabadi Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering Director, Center for Energy Research.
1 THE THIRD ENERGY PACKAGE – THE ENERGY COMMUNITY APPROACH Energy Community Secretariat 20 th Forum of the Croatian Energy Association and WEC National.
Realization of Fusion Energy: How? When? Farrokh Najmabadi Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering Director, Center for Energy Research UC San Diego.
Methods, Outcomes, Significance. The obvious.... Check aims and remit Check guidelines, submission dates, additional requirements – Signatures in advance.
Fusion: Bringing star power to earth Farrokh Najmabadi Prof. of Electrical Engineering Director of Center for Energy Research UC San Diego NES Grand Challenges.
Overview of the ARIES “Pathways” Program Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego US-Japan Workshop on Power Plants Study and Related Advanced Technologies with.
Page 1 of 11 An approach for the analysis of R&D needs and facilities for fusion energy ARIES “Next Step” Planning Meeting 3 April 2007 M. S. Tillack ?
Engaging Communities in Developing a Sustainable Wood Products and Biomass Energy Industry By Gerry Gray Vice President for Policy American Forests.
An Expanded View of RAMI Issues 02 March 2009 RAMI Panel Members: Mohamed Abdou (UCLA), Tom Burgess (ORNL), Lee Cadwallader (INL), Wayne Reiersen (PPPL),
Fusion Energy – FAQ Seppo Karttunen – personal views Is fusion safe? Radioactive waste in fusion? Some further remarks Fusion versus fission Cost of fusion.
© OECD/IEA World Energy Outlook 2007: China and India Insights Pawel Olejarnik Research Analyst International Energy Agency.
Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Stan Milora, ORNL Director Virtual Laboratory for Technology 20 th ANS Topical Meeting on the Technology.
Identification of national S&T priority areas with respect to the promotion of innovation and economic growth: the case of Russia Alexander Sokolov State.
ARIES “Pathways” Program Farrokh Najmabadi University of California San Diego ARIES brainstorming meeting UC San Diego April 3-4, 2007 Electronic copy:
1 Subprojects of IFERC K.Lackner (as Chair of IFERC Project Committee) Garching – 14 Apr 2011.
Integrated Used Nuclear Fuel Management Regulatory Information Conference U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission March 11, 2009 Steven P. Kraft Senior Director.
Thoughts on Fusion Competitiveness Initiative Farrokh Najmabadi, George Tynan UC San Diego University Fusion Initiatives Meeting, MIT 14-15, February 2008.
Realization of Fusion Energy: An alternative fusion roadmap Farrokh Najmabadi Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering Director, Center for Energy.
CLIC Implementation Studies Ph. Lebrun & J. Osborne CERN CLIC Collaboration Meeting addressing the Work Packages CERN, 3-4 November 2011.
1 1 by Dr. John Parmentola Senior Vice President Energy and Advanced Concepts Presented at the American Security Project Fusion Event June 5, 2012 The.
Page 1 of 11 Progress developing an evaluation methodology for fusion R&D ARIES Project Meeting March 4, 2008 M. S. Tillack.
Programmatic issues to be studied in advance for the DEMO planning Date: February 2013 Place:Uji-campus, Kyoto Univ. Shinzaburo MATSUDA Kyoto Univ.
Summary and Closing Remarks Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego Presentation to ARIES Program Peer Review August 29, 2013, Washington, DC.
February 5-6, 2004 HAPL meeting, G.Tech. 1 Chamber Tasks Coordination Presented by A. René Raffray UCSD With contributions from J. Blanchard and the HAPL.
AMBITIOUS TARGETS FOR ENERGY RD & D MEETING PLANETARY EMERGENCIES.
EIROforumSchool on Instrumentation A. Murari May 2013, CERN. JET: the European Fusion Device Andrea Murari EFDA-JET Close Support Unit EIRO School.
Future Direction of the U.S. Fusion Materials Program Dr. Pete Pappano US Department of Energy Fusion Energy Sciences Fusion Power Associates Annual Meeting.
045-05/rs PERSISTENT SURVEILLANCE FOR PIPELINE PROTECTION AND THREAT INTERDICTION Technical Readiness Level For Control of Plasma Power Flux Distribution.
Assessment of Fusion Development Path: Initial Results of the ARIES “Pathways” Program Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego ANS 18 th Topical Meeting on the.
Advanced Design Activities in US Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego Japan/US Workshop on Fusion Power Plants & Related Technologies.
INDONESIA NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR NUCLEAR POWER PROGRAMME INFRASTRUCTURE AND STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION Dr. A. Sarwiyana Sastratenaya Director, Center for.
Developing Technology for Inertial Fusion Energy David H. Crandall Advisor to the Under Secretary for Science On National Security and Inertial Fusion.
Energy Challenge Farrokh Najmabadi Prof. of Electrical Engineering Director of Center for Energy Research UC San Diego UC President Board of Science and.
GAO’s Cost and Schedule Assessment Guides U.S. Government Accountability Office Applied Research and Methods Cost Engineering Sciences Jason T Lee, Assistant.
Discussion of Tasks Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego.
Strength Through Science
Overview of the ARIES “Pathways” Program
Advanced Design Activities in US
What is the Fusion Industry Association?
Status of the ARIES Program
Review of Project Goals
US/Japan Workshop on Fusion Power Plant Studies
TRL tables: power conversion and lifetime
TWG goals, approach and outputs
Presentation transcript:

From ITER to Demo -- Technology Towards Fusion Power Farrokh Najmabadi Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering Director, Center for Energy Research UC San Diego TOFE Panel on Fusion Nuclear Sciences August 27, 2012

Is there a case for a “unified” international road-map for fusion? Rationale for fusion development varies substantially around the world.

 With industrialization of emerging nations, energy use is expected to grow ~ 4 fold in this century (average 1.6% annual growth rate) US Australia China India S. Korea France Japan “World” needs a lot of energy! * Data from IEA 2006 annual energy outlook ( )

US Australia China India S. Korea France Japan “World” needs a lot of energy! US, EU, Japan:  Electricity supply needs are mainly for the replacement of existing power plants.  Government regulations have been driving the choice of energy supply.  Different level of access to indigence fossil fuels for electricity production.  Different socio-political atmospheres. US, EU, Japan:  Electricity supply needs are mainly for the replacement of existing power plants.  Government regulations have been driving the choice of energy supply.  Different level of access to indigence fossil fuels for electricity production.  Different socio-political atmospheres.

US Australia China India S. Korea France Japan China, India, (S. Korea), ….  Large supplies of Electricity is needed to maintain economic growth.  Governments actively following policies to expand energy supply.  Different level of access to indigence fossil fuels for electricity production  Different socio-political atmospheres. China, India, (S. Korea), ….  Large supplies of Electricity is needed to maintain economic growth.  Governments actively following policies to expand energy supply.  Different level of access to indigence fossil fuels for electricity production  Different socio-political atmospheres. “World” needs a lot of energy!

While current rationale for R&D differs, the ultimate goal would be the same.  Fusion R&D expenditures are justified to government agencies who have different priorities and, therefore, respond to different “Roadmaps.”  Different R&D plans for the next decade.  However, large-scale (multi-billion $) fusion facilities beyond ITER and NIF can only be justified in the context of their contribution to energy supply, i.e., commercial fusion.  Fusion roadmaps should include all R&D needed to achieve commercial fusion power.  We will also have  Different Customers (e.g., Power Producers)  Different criteria for success (e.g., Commercial viability)  Timing (e.g., Is there a market need?)  Fusion R&D expenditures are justified to government agencies who have different priorities and, therefore, respond to different “Roadmaps.”  Different R&D plans for the next decade.  However, large-scale (multi-billion $) fusion facilities beyond ITER and NIF can only be justified in the context of their contribution to energy supply, i.e., commercial fusion.  Fusion roadmaps should include all R&D needed to achieve commercial fusion power.  We will also have  Different Customers (e.g., Power Producers)  Different criteria for success (e.g., Commercial viability)  Timing (e.g., Is there a market need?)

Fusion Energy Development Focuses on Facilities Rather than the Needed Science  Current fusion roadmaps which focus on “Demo” have a high probability of leading to lengthier and costlier programs (for commercial fusion).  Mission will be redefined to fit the “promised” time frame.  Cost, available data base, etc. will lead to further mission contraction, expanding the R&D needed after the next step and may also to un-necessary R&D.  Recall ITER history (proposed in mid-80s, many revision of its mission, considerable expenditure, …).  Current fusion roadmaps which focus on “Demo” have a high probability of leading to lengthier and costlier programs (for commercial fusion).  Mission will be redefined to fit the “promised” time frame.  Cost, available data base, etc. will lead to further mission contraction, expanding the R&D needed after the next step and may also to un-necessary R&D.  Recall ITER history (proposed in mid-80s, many revision of its mission, considerable expenditure, …). This is in contrast with the normal development path of any product in which the status of R&D necessitates a facility for experimentation.

Developing Fusion Power Technologies (FNS)…

Developing commercial fusion energy requires changes in our folklore:  Fusion power technologies (fusion nuclear sciences) are in their early stages of development. We are NOT ready!  Development of fusion nuclear sciences requires a large amount of resources.  We readily talk about multi-billion-$ plasma-based facilities but frown at $1B price tag of IFMIF.  The perception that the only way to develop fusion nuclear technologies is to have 14-MeV neutrons is not correct (cook and look approach is very expensive and time-consuming)  A large potion of R&D can and should be performed in simulated environments (non-nuclear and/or fission test).  Fusion nuclear testing is needed only to validate the predicted performance plus all synergetic effects that were not foreseen.  14-MeV neutron sources are NOT equal.  Fusion power technologies (fusion nuclear sciences) are in their early stages of development. We are NOT ready!  Development of fusion nuclear sciences requires a large amount of resources.  We readily talk about multi-billion-$ plasma-based facilities but frown at $1B price tag of IFMIF.  The perception that the only way to develop fusion nuclear technologies is to have 14-MeV neutrons is not correct (cook and look approach is very expensive and time-consuming)  A large potion of R&D can and should be performed in simulated environments (non-nuclear and/or fission test).  Fusion nuclear testing is needed only to validate the predicted performance plus all synergetic effects that were not foreseen.  14-MeV neutron sources are NOT equal.

We should focus on developing a technical roadmap A detailed technical Road Map based on TRL methodology  Includes what needs to be done (both critical and “non-critical”)  Highlights the order they need to be done  Includes clear mile-stones or check points showing progress  Provides the justification for and the mission of needed facilities  A times-less exercise that needs updating Such a Technical Roadmap provides the technical basis to develop policies and program portfolio.  Allows flexibility in implementation scenarios (aggressive or slow)  Allows multi-year program planning  Provides a firm basis on cost/benefit analysis  Provides a mechanism for “coordination” internationally and with plasma physics research. A detailed technical Road Map based on TRL methodology  Includes what needs to be done (both critical and “non-critical”)  Highlights the order they need to be done  Includes clear mile-stones or check points showing progress  Provides the justification for and the mission of needed facilities  A times-less exercise that needs updating Such a Technical Roadmap provides the technical basis to develop policies and program portfolio.  Allows flexibility in implementation scenarios (aggressive or slow)  Allows multi-year program planning  Provides a firm basis on cost/benefit analysis  Provides a mechanism for “coordination” internationally and with plasma physics research.

Framework for technical roadmap  Phase 1: Achieve TRL level 4 for all components (“Component and/or bench-scale validation in a laboratory environment)  Examples: demonstration of thermo-mechanical response of a blanket and divertor unit-cell, tritium extraction system in lab scale, fundamental material property demonstration and optimization.  Phase 2: Achieve TRL level 6 for all component (“System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in relevant environment.)  Examples: demonstration of an integrated full scale blanket/divertor module/sectors in non-nuclear (simulated environment). Demonstration of blanket/divertor unit-cell in fission environment.  Phase 3: Achieve TRL level 7-8 for all components (“System prototype demonstration in an operational environment”)  Example: Validation in a fusion nuclear facility. Resolution of synergetic effects.  Phase 1: Achieve TRL level 4 for all components (“Component and/or bench-scale validation in a laboratory environment)  Examples: demonstration of thermo-mechanical response of a blanket and divertor unit-cell, tritium extraction system in lab scale, fundamental material property demonstration and optimization.  Phase 2: Achieve TRL level 6 for all component (“System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in relevant environment.)  Examples: demonstration of an integrated full scale blanket/divertor module/sectors in non-nuclear (simulated environment). Demonstration of blanket/divertor unit-cell in fission environment.  Phase 3: Achieve TRL level 7-8 for all components (“System prototype demonstration in an operational environment”)  Example: Validation in a fusion nuclear facility. Resolution of synergetic effects.

In summary …  We need to develop a fusion energy technical roadmap (“Fusion Nuclear Sciences” road-map).  Large-scale facility should be only validation facilities.  Required science and engineering basis for any large facility should be clearly defined and included in such a Road-map.  We need to start implementing such a road-map to show that we are serious (only the “pace” is set by funding).  We need to start work-force development.  Increased funding and emphasis for fusion have always been driven by external factors.  We need to be prepared to take advantage of these opportunities.  It is possible to field fusion power plant before 2050, but we lay the ground work now!  We need to develop a fusion energy technical roadmap (“Fusion Nuclear Sciences” road-map).  Large-scale facility should be only validation facilities.  Required science and engineering basis for any large facility should be clearly defined and included in such a Road-map.  We need to start implementing such a road-map to show that we are serious (only the “pace” is set by funding).  We need to start work-force development.  Increased funding and emphasis for fusion have always been driven by external factors.  We need to be prepared to take advantage of these opportunities.  It is possible to field fusion power plant before 2050, but we lay the ground work now!

Thank you!