AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration FIRE.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 NNSAs ICF Strategy Presented to Fusion Power Associates 34th Annual Meeting and Symposium Washington, DC December 11, 2013 Kirk Levedahl NNSA NATIONAL.
Advertisements

Physics Basis of FIRE Next Step Burning Plasma Experiment Charles Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory U.S.-Japan Workshop on Fusion Power Plant.
Extension of IEA Implementing Agreement on Large Tokamak Facilities Presented to Committee on Energy Research Technologies October 18-19, 2005 Paris, France.
Perspectives on 10-Year Planning for the Fusion Energy Sciences Program Presented to Public Meeting of the 2014 FESAC Strategic Planning Subpanel Gaithersburg,
Burning Plasma Bringing a Star to Earth Final Report of the Burning Plasma Assessment Committee John F. Ahearne Sigma Xi, Duke University Raymond Fonck.
FES International Collaboration Program: Vision and Budget Steve Eckstrand International Program Manager Office of Fusion Energy Sciences U.S. Department.
VLT Report the fusion trend line Stan Milora (ORNL) and Richard Nygren (SNL) FNST/PFC/MASCO Meeting Aug 2-6, UCLA.
Community Input on Plasma Materials Interactions Rajesh Maingi (PPPL), chair Steve Zinkle (UTK), co-chair Pete Pappano, FES program POC FESAC meeting Gaithersburg,
Implications of Plasma-Material Interactions Dennis Whyte, MIT PSFC & PSI Science Center With contributions from Jeff Brooks (Purdue), Russ Doerner (UCSD),
Steps Toward a Compact Stellarator Reactor Hutch Neilson Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory ARIES Team Meeting October 3, 2002.
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.
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.
Burning Plasma Gap Between ITER and DEMO Dale Meade Fusion Innovation Research and Energy US-Japan Workshop Fusion Power Plants and Related Advanced Technologies.
FY 2000 System Studies Activities Farrokh Najmabadi VLT/FWP Meeting April 6-9, 1999 OFES Headquarters, Germantown Electronic copy:
September 6-7, 2007/ARR 1 Power Management Technical Working Group: Status and Documentation A. René Raffray Mark Tillack University of California, San.
Overview of Advanced Design White Paper Farrokh Najmabadi Virtual Laboratory for Technology Meeting June 23, 1998 OFES Headquarters, Germantown.
Proposed Research for the ARIES Team for Farrokh Najmabadi, Mark Tillack for the ARIES Team Virtual Laboratory for Technology Meeting June 23,
Advanced Design Activities Farrokh Najmabadi Virtual Laboratory for Technology Meeting Dec. 10, 1998 VLT PAC Meeting, UCSD.
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 Burning Plasma Experiment in Magnetic Fusion: What it is and how to do it S. C. Prager University of Wisconsin February, 2004.
Broader Approach Activities toward Fusion DEMO Reactors IT/E-2 IAEA 21 st Fusion Energy Conference (Chengdu 17 th October, 2006 ) Shinzaburo Matsuda Japan.
Recent JET Experiments and Science Issues Jim Strachan PPPL Students seminar Feb. 14, 2005 JET is presently world’s largest tokamak, being ½ linear dimension.
Advanced Tokamak Plasmas and the Fusion Ignition Research Experiment Charles Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Spring APS, Philadelphia, 4/5/2003.
Report of the Burning Plasma Program Advisory Committee S.C. Prager November, 2003.
Kaname Ikeda, October Status of the ITER Project Status of the ITER Project Kaname Ikeda ITER Nominee Director-General October 2006.
Progress in Confinement & Heating Increasing laser energy nn Confinement Parameter & Temperature.
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 ?
Advanced Tokamak Regimes in the Fusion Ignition Research Experiment (FIRE) 30th Conference on Controlled Fusion and Plasma Physics St. Petersburg, Russia.
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.
US ITER UFA Meeting APS-DPP Savannah, GA Ned Sauthoff (presented by Dale Meade) November 15, 2004 US In-kind Contributions and Starting Burning Plasma.
Exploring Magnetically Confined Burning Plasmas in the Laboratory AAAS Annual Meeting Ned Sauthoff February 18, 2005 “Yearn to burn” “Burn to learn” Marshall.
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration FIRE.
Discussions and Summary for Session 1 ‘Transport and Confinement in Burning Plasmas’ Yukitoshi MIURA JAERI Naka IEA Large Tokamak Workshop (W60) Burning.
ARIES “Pathways” Program Farrokh Najmabadi University of California San Diego ARIES brainstorming meeting UC San Diego April 3-4, 2007 Electronic copy:
FIRE Activities with Emphasis on Technology Needs VLT PAC Meeting MIT September 4, 2003 AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT,
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.
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc NSO Collaboration FIRE.
ARIES-AT Physics Overview presented by S.C. Jardin with input from C. Kessel, T. K. Mau, R. Miller, and the ARIES team US/Japan Workshop on Fusion Power.
U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science 20 th Meeting of the IEA Large Tokamak ExCo, May th Meeting of the IEA Poloidal Divertor ExCo, May.
Fusion Fire Powers the Sun Can we make Fusion Fire on earth? National FIRE Collaboration AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT,
Report on Developing Industrial Cost Estimates for ITER Systems of Possible Interest to the US For Discussion with FESAC Gaithersburg, MD March 5, 2003.
Programmatic issues to be studied in advance for the DEMO planning Date: February 2013 Place:Uji-campus, Kyoto Univ. Shinzaburo MATSUDA Kyoto Univ.
1 Fusion Fire Powers the Sun Can we make Fusion Fire on earth?
Summary and Closing Remarks Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego Presentation to ARIES Program Peer Review August 29, 2013, Washington, DC.
Compact Stellarator Approach to DEMO J.F. Lyon for the US stellarator community FESAC Subcommittee Aug. 7, 2007.
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc NSO Collaboration Implications.
Page 1 of 9 Power Management Technical Working Group Structure and Goals ARIES Project Meeting June 2007 M. S. Tillack and A. R. Raffray.
FIRE Engineering John A. Schmidt NSO PAC Meeting February 27, 2003.
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc NSO Collaboration Thoughts.
ITER-China Project Huo YuPing PT Leader, ITER-China Chief scientist.
045-05/rs PERSISTENT SURVEILLANCE FOR PIPELINE PROTECTION AND THREAT INTERDICTION Technical Readiness Level For Control of Plasma Power Flux Distribution.
Steady State Discharge Modeling for KSTAR C. Kessel Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory US-Korea Workshop - KSTAR Collaborations, 5/19-20/2004.
Advanced Design Activities in US Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego Japan/US Workshop on Fusion Power Plants & Related Technologies.
Approach for a High Performance Fusion Power Source Pathway Dale Meade Fusion Innovation Research and Energy ARIES Team Meeting March 3-4, 2008 UCSD, San.
Comments on Fusion Development Strategy for the US S. Prager Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory FPA Symposium.
Optimization of a High-  Steady-State Tokamak Burning Plasma Experiment Based on a High-  Steady-State Tokamak Power Plant D. M. Meade, C. Kessel, S.
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration FIRE.
Possible Strategies for a Broadened Fast Track Approach to Fusion Energy Dale Meade Princeton Plasma Physics laboratory Symposium.
1 AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration
4 th General Scientific Assembly of Asia Plasma and Fusion Association (APFA) Hangzhou, China, October , 2003 AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD,
AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration FIRE.
Boundary Physics Breakout Session was a Good Start Breadth of topics: many issues pointed out in three plenary talks: pedestal, SOL/div/PFC, and technology,
US Participation in the
Advanced Design Activities in US
Status of the ARIES Program
TWG goals, approach and outputs
UCLA, Los Angeles - April 26, 2001
Presentation transcript:

AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration FIRE Critical Issues and Plans Discussion Dale Meade FIRE Physics Validation Review DOE Germantown, MD March 30, 2004

Plan A: A Decision is made to Construct ITER FIRE activities would be completed ASAP, and NSO activities would be directed toward other areas within its charter. The thrust of the NSO/FIRE activities will be to make progress on fully exploiting the capability of ITER with an emphasis on those features required for an attractive tokamak fusion power plant presently envisioned by ARIES-RS. This would include: development and optimization of metallic PFCs, development of RWM technology (insulation, feedback control,..) disruption mitigation techniques under high power density conditions plasma control tools (ICRF, LHCD, Pellets,..) development of diagnostics for ITER (esp. AT modes) An example is the synopses submitted for 20th IAEA FEC “High-  Steady-State Advanced Tokamak Regimes for ITER and FIRE”

Plan B: No Decision is made to Construct ITER An alternative to ITER must be put forward before interest in BPP is lost. Put FIRE forward immediately as recommended by: FESAC - FIRE should “be advanced as a U.S.-based burning plasma experiment with strong encouragement of international participation” Energy Policy Act of introduced in the Senate on Feb 11, “If at any time during the negotiations on ITER, the Secretary determines that construction and operation of ITER is unlikely or infeasible, the Secretary shall send to Congress, as part of the budget request for the following year, a plan for implementing the domestic burning plasma experiment known as FIRE, including costs and schedules for such a plan.” Similar recommendation has been made for the EU program by Airaghi (2000) “In the same 2-year period( ), due to the uncertainty over the outcome of the international negotiations, Europe should study an alternative to New-ITER, which would be suitable to be pursued by Europe alone. For example, a copper magnet machine which would still achieve the required objective of demonstrating a burning plasma under reactor conditions even if this would delay the integration of the superconducting technologies.”

FIRE as an Alternative if ITER Does not Go Forward Is the FESAC finding: “ITER and FIRE are each attractive options for the study of burning plasma science. Each could serve as the primary burning plasma facility, although they lead to different fusion energy development paths.” still valid? If not what areas are deficient? Are there any proposed remedies? If still true? Are there areas that can be improved? Suggestions?

Broaden Involvement in Burning Plasmas Establish a US Burning Plasma Program, initially this can be informal like TTF, or High Temperature Diagnostics Workshops. Formalize structure later, connect to ITPA. Evaluate potential FIRE sites in the US and abroad. International Collaboration on FIRE/Alternate BP FESAC BP strategy-FIRE NRC -BPX Alt ASAP, FIRE as possibility EU has explored other options e.g.,Airaghi-2000, CEA-CAD-1999

Plan B: Major Near Term Activities (t o = July 04) Physics Validation Review (update of Snowmass and NSO reviews) Mar 30, 04 Formation of a national FIRE organizationAug 04 Initiation of discussions with potential international collaboratorsAug 04 Form FIRE Project Management teamSep 04 CD-0 Approve Mission Need Oct 04 Community Workshop on Prep for FIRE Conceptual designNov 04 Finalize Plan for FIRE Conceptual DesignNov 04 Initiate FIRE Conceptual Design ( 9 months duration) Dec 04 Initiate R&D program in support of FIRE CDA Initiate studies of potential construction sites for FIRE Completion of FIRE Conceptual Design Sep 05

Update the FIRE Cost Estimate

Advanced Tokamak Modes (ARIES as guide) (  A, SN/DN,  N, f bs, ……) - RWM Stabilization - What is required and what is feasible? - Integration of detached Divertor and Advanced Tokamak - Plasma Control (fast position control, heating, current-drive, fueling) High Power Density Handling - Divertor R&D: High heat flux, low tritium retention - First Wall and Vacuum Vessel R&D Diagnostic Development and Integration with First Wall/fusion environment Integrated Simulation of Burning Plasmas - exploration of fusion-dominated plasmas (self organized?) Areas of Major FIRE Activities for the Near Term

If there is a positive decision to construct ITER, the FIRE project team is enthusiastic about joining this activity to fully exploit the capabilities of ITER. If there is not a decision to move forward with ITER in the “next month or two”, the FIRE Project Team believes that the present FIRE design would satisfy the requirements for a primary burning plasma facility with the additional R&D as described. In either event, a US Burning Plasma Program should be initiated in the near term. There are a number of high leverage physics R&D items to be worked on for the conventional mode and the advanced mode for FIRE and ITER. There needs to be an increased emphasis on physics R&D for advanced modes, high power density PFCs, BP diagnostics and integrated modeling. Concluding Remarks