ARIES “Pathways” Program Farrokh Najmabadi University of California San Diego ARIES brainstorming meeting UC San Diego April 3-4, 2007 Electronic copy:

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Summary Slides on FNST Top-level Technical Issues and on FNSF objectives, requirements and R&D Presented at FNST Meeting, UCLA August 18-20, 2009 Mohamed.
Advertisements

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.
June 14-15, 2007/ARR 1 Trade-Off Studies and Engineering Input to System Code Presented by A. René Raffray University of California, San Diego With contribution.
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.
Contributions of Burning Plasma Physics Experiment to Fusion Energy Goals Farrokh Najmabadi Dept. of Electrical & Computer Eng. And Center for Energy Research.
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.
Impact of Liquid Wall on Fusion Systems Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego NRC Fusion Science Assessment Committee November 17, 1999.
Status of Advanced Design Studies and Overview of ARIES-AT Study Farrokh Najmabadi US/Japan Workshop on Fusion Power Plant Studies & Advanced Technologies.
Characteristics of Commercial Fusion Power Plants Results from ARIES-AT Study Farrokh Najmabadi Fusion Power Associates Annual Meeting & Symposium July.
Prospect for Attractive Fusion Power (Focus on tokamaks) Farrokh Najmabadi University of California San Diego Mini-Conference on Nuclear Renaissance 48th.
Environmental, Safety, and Economics Studies of Magnetic Fusion, Including Power Plant Design Studies Robert W. Conn Farrokh Najmabadi University of California.
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.
Physics Issues and Trade-offs in Magnetic Fusion Power Plants Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA APS April 2002 Meeting.
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.
ARIES Project Meeting, L. M. Waganer, 3-4 April 2007 Page 1 Groundrules, Bases, and Definitions to Scope “The Next Step” L. Waganer The Boeing Company.
Role of ITER in Fusion Development Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA FPA Annual Meeting September 27-28, 2006 Washington,
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.
The Fission-Fusion Hybrid At last! A solution that has found a problem Jeff Freidberg MIT.
Realization of Fusion Energy: How? When? Farrokh Najmabadi Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering Director, Center for Energy Research UC San Diego.
Progress in ARIES-ACT Study Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego Japan/US Workshop on Power Plant Studies and Related Advanced Technologies 8-9 March 2012 US.
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 ?
From ITER to Demo -- Technology Towards Fusion Power Farrokh Najmabadi Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering Director, Center for Energy Research.
ARIES Project Meeting, L. M. Waganer, Dec 2007 Page 1 Restructuring System Cost Accounts and Algorithms L. Waganer December 2007 ARIES Project.
An Expanded View of RAMI Issues 02 March 2009 RAMI Panel Members: Mohamed Abdou (UCLA), Tom Burgess (ORNL), Lee Cadwallader (INL), Wayne Reiersen (PPPL),
An evaluation of fusion energy R&D gaps using Technology Readiness Levels M. S. Tillack and the ARIES Team International High Heat Flux Components Workshop.
* Backup materials can be found at
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.
Thoughts on Fusion Competitiveness Initiative Farrokh Najmabadi, George Tynan UC San Diego University Fusion Initiatives Meeting, MIT 14-15, February 2008.
Page 1 of 11 Progress developing an evaluation methodology for fusion R&D ARIES Project Meeting March 4, 2008 M. S. Tillack.
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,
Page 1 of 16 ARIES Issues and R&D Needs – Technology Readiness for Fusion Energy – M. S. Tillack ARIES Project Meeting 28 May 2008.
Programmatic issues to be studied in advance for the DEMO planning Date: February 2013 Place:Uji-campus, Kyoto Univ. Shinzaburo MATSUDA Kyoto Univ.
KIT Objectives in Fusion by 2020 Workshop on the European Fusion Roadmap for FP8 and beyond April 13 – 14, 2011; IPP Garching.
ARIES- Pathways, October 25-26, 2010 Bethesda, MD Page 1 L. Waganer Consultant for The Boeing Company ARIES-Pathways Project Meeting October 2010.
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.
PERSISTENT SURVEILLANCE FOR PIPELINE PROTECTION AND THREAT INTERDICTION ARIES Pathways Study Kick-off Meeting Ken Schultz 3 April 2007 Determining the.
Page 1 of 9 Power Management Technical Working Group Structure and Goals ARIES Project Meeting June 2007 M. S. Tillack and A. R. Raffray.
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.
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.
Towards An Attractive Fusion Power Plant Farrokh Najmabadi Forum on Next Step Device April 27, May 1, 1998 U. Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin.
Fuel Cycle Research Thrust Using A Full Fusion Nuclear Environment
1 Discussion with Drs. Kwon and Cho UCLA-NFRC Collaboration Mohamed Abdou March 27, 2006.
Whither the ARIES Industrial Advisory Committee? ARIES Meeting 21 Januay, 2009 ARIES Meeting 21 Januay, 2009.
Task 9:Fusion Power Plant Studies Status & Planned Activities
US Participation in the
Discussion of Tasks Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego.
Pilot Plant Study Hutch Neilson Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory ARIES Project Meeting 19 May 2010.
Fusion power: Visions and the Development Path in the ITER Era
The European Power Plant Conceptual Study Overview
Trade-Off Studies and Engineering Input to System Code
Overview of the ARIES “Pathways” Program
Advanced Design Activities in US
Status of the ARIES Program
VLT Meeting, Washington DC, August 25, 2005
Review of Project Goals
US/Japan Workshop on Fusion Power Plant Studies
TWG goals, approach and outputs
Presentation transcript:

ARIES “Pathways” Program Farrokh Najmabadi University of California San Diego ARIES brainstorming meeting UC San Diego April 3-4, 2007 Electronic copy: ARIES Web Site:

Mission of the ARIES Pathways Program Mission Statement:  The ARIES Pathways program will investigate what the fusion program needs to do, in addition to successful operation of ITER, in order to transform fusion into a commercial reality.  The US fusion energy program anticipates a demonstration power plant, DEMO, which will be the link between government-sponsored and industry-sponsored development of fusion. DEMO is probably built by the private industry under partnership or “subsidy” from the government (from FESAC Development path panel).  The pathways program will investigate what is needed, in addition to successful operation of ITER, to be ready for DEMO. Mission Statement:  The ARIES Pathways program will investigate what the fusion program needs to do, in addition to successful operation of ITER, in order to transform fusion into a commercial reality.  The US fusion energy program anticipates a demonstration power plant, DEMO, which will be the link between government-sponsored and industry-sponsored development of fusion. DEMO is probably built by the private industry under partnership or “subsidy” from the government (from FESAC Development path panel).  The pathways program will investigate what is needed, in addition to successful operation of ITER, to be ready for DEMO.

How to we get from ITER to an attractive final product

ITER Integration of fusion plasma with fusion technologies A 1 st of the kind Power Plant! “Fusion Power: Research and Development Requirements.” Division of Controlled Thermonuclear Research (AEC).

World-wide Development Scenarios use similar names for devices with different missions! Commercial ITER + IFMIF + Base Demo Proto EU or Japan CTF Demo US Demo-ProtoDemo (R&D) EU or Japan (Fast Track)  Combine Demo (R&D) and Proto in one device Proto Demo US (1973 AEC) An R&D Device A Power Plant

In the ITER area, we need to develop a 5,000 ft view

What do we need to bridge the gap between ITER and attractive power plants?  With ITER construction going forward with US as a partner and increased world-wide interest and effort in developing fusion energy, it will become increasingly important that new major facilities and program in US demonstrate their contributions to developing fusion energy as a key part of their mission.  We need a detailed map for fusion power development!  How do we optimize such a development path? What are the remaining R&D issues? What are the metrics for distributing resources among R&D issues? What can we do in simulation facilities and what requires new fusion devices? How can we utilize existing devices to help us Prepare for lunching new facilities (resolving issues that can make a difference in any new facilities).  With ITER construction going forward with US as a partner and increased world-wide interest and effort in developing fusion energy, it will become increasingly important that new major facilities and program in US demonstrate their contributions to developing fusion energy as a key part of their mission.  We need a detailed map for fusion power development!  How do we optimize such a development path? What are the remaining R&D issues? What are the metrics for distributing resources among R&D issues? What can we do in simulation facilities and what requires new fusion devices? How can we utilize existing devices to help us Prepare for lunching new facilities (resolving issues that can make a difference in any new facilities).

What are the remaining R&D issues?

An Integrated “holistic” optimization approach should drive the development path. Traditional Approach: Ask each scientific area (i.e., plasma, blanket, …)  What are the remaining major R&D areas? We have generated many “to do” lists. There are little prioritization of R&D.  Which of the remaining major R&D areas can be explored in existing devices or simulation facilities (e.g., fission reactors)? What other major facilities are needed? Many devices are proposed: A device that can explore AT burning plasma with high power density and high bootstrap fraction (with performance goals similar to ARIES-RS/AT). A device with steady-state operation at moderate Q (even D plasma) to develop operational scenarios (i.e., plasma control), disruption avoidance, divertor physics (and developing fielding divertor hardware), etc. Volume Neutron Source for blanket testing.  Most these devices provide only some of the data needed to move to fusion power. They really geared towards one part of the problem. Traditional Approach: Ask each scientific area (i.e., plasma, blanket, …)  What are the remaining major R&D areas? We have generated many “to do” lists. There are little prioritization of R&D.  Which of the remaining major R&D areas can be explored in existing devices or simulation facilities (e.g., fission reactors)? What other major facilities are needed? Many devices are proposed: A device that can explore AT burning plasma with high power density and high bootstrap fraction (with performance goals similar to ARIES-RS/AT). A device with steady-state operation at moderate Q (even D plasma) to develop operational scenarios (i.e., plasma control), disruption avoidance, divertor physics (and developing fielding divertor hardware), etc. Volume Neutron Source for blanket testing.  Most these devices provide only some of the data needed to move to fusion power. They really geared towards one part of the problem.

Comparison of Predicted ITER performance versus a fusion power plant (ARIES-RS/AT)  Absolute parameters  Dimensionless parameters

Power plant features and not individual parameters should drive the development path!

An Integrated “holistic” optimization approach should drive the development path. Holistic Approach: Fusion energy development should be guided by the requirements for an attractive fusion energy source:  What are the remaining major R&D areas? Are we generating all of the information needed by the industry to move forward? (Data needed to convince power industry to move forward and licensing authorities to license the device, …).  What it the impact of this R&D on the attractiveness of the final product? (What are the metrics for distributing resources among R&D issues?)  Which of the remaining major R&D areas can be explored in existing devices or simulation facilities (i.e., fission reactors)? What other major facilities are needed? Should we attempt to replicate power plant conditions in a scaled device or Optimize facility performance relative to scaled objectives Holistic Approach: Fusion energy development should be guided by the requirements for an attractive fusion energy source:  What are the remaining major R&D areas? Are we generating all of the information needed by the industry to move forward? (Data needed to convince power industry to move forward and licensing authorities to license the device, …).  What it the impact of this R&D on the attractiveness of the final product? (What are the metrics for distributing resources among R&D issues?)  Which of the remaining major R&D areas can be explored in existing devices or simulation facilities (i.e., fission reactors)? What other major facilities are needed? Should we attempt to replicate power plant conditions in a scaled device or Optimize facility performance relative to scaled objectives

Elements of the Case for Fusion Power Were Developed through Interaction with Representatives of U.S. Electric Utilities and Energy Industry  Have an economically competitive life-cycle cost of electricity  Gain Public acceptance by having excellent safety and environmental characteristics No disturbance of public’s day-to-day activities No local or global atmospheric impact No need for evacuation plan No high-level waste Ease of licensing  Reliable, available, and stable as an electrical power source Have operational reliability and high availability Closed, on-site fuel cycle High fuel availability Capable of partial load operation Available in a range of unit sizes Fusion physics & technology Low-activation material

Existing facilities fail to address essential features of a fusion energy source

ITER is a major step forward but there is a long road ahead. Present Experiments

An Integrated “holistic” optimization approach should drive the development path. Holistic Approach: Fusion energy development should be guided by the requirements for an attractive fusion energy source:  What are the remaining major R&D areas? Are we generating all of the information needed by the industry to move forward? (Data needed to convince power industry to move forward and licensing authorities to license the device, …).  What it the impact of this R&D on the attractiveness of the final product? (What are the metrics for distributing resources among R&D issues?)  Which of the remaining major R&D areas can be explored in existing devices or simulation facilities (i.e., fission reactors)? What other major facilities are needed? Should we attempt to replicate power plant conditions in a scaled device or Optimize facility performance relative to scaled objectives Holistic Approach: Fusion energy development should be guided by the requirements for an attractive fusion energy source:  What are the remaining major R&D areas? Are we generating all of the information needed by the industry to move forward? (Data needed to convince power industry to move forward and licensing authorities to license the device, …).  What it the impact of this R&D on the attractiveness of the final product? (What are the metrics for distributing resources among R&D issues?)  Which of the remaining major R&D areas can be explored in existing devices or simulation facilities (i.e., fission reactors)? What other major facilities are needed? Should we attempt to replicate power plant conditions in a scaled device or Optimize facility performance relative to scaled objectives

ARIES studies emphasize holistic R&D needs and their design implications Plasma Blankets Divertors Magnets Vacuum vessel Traditional approach Power control Power and particle management Fuel management Maintenance Safety Waste Cost Concurrent engineering/physics  This approach has many benefits (see below)

Examples of holistic issues for Fusion Power Power & Particle management: Demonstrate extraction of power core high-grade heat, divertor power and particle handling, nuclear performance of ancillary equipment. Fuel management: Demonstrate “birth to death” tritium management in a closed loop with self-sufficient breeding and full accountability of tritium inventory. Safety: Demonstrate public and worker safety of the integral facility, capturing system to system interactions. Plant operations: Establish the operability of a fusion energy facility, including plasma control, reliability of components, inspectability and maintainability of a power plant relevant tokamak. Power & Particle management: Demonstrate extraction of power core high-grade heat, divertor power and particle handling, nuclear performance of ancillary equipment. Fuel management: Demonstrate “birth to death” tritium management in a closed loop with self-sufficient breeding and full accountability of tritium inventory. Safety: Demonstrate public and worker safety of the integral facility, capturing system to system interactions. Plant operations: Establish the operability of a fusion energy facility, including plasma control, reliability of components, inspectability and maintainability of a power plant relevant tokamak.

Fuel management: Demonstrate “birth to death” tritium management in a closed loop with self-sufficient breeding and full accountability of tritium inventory. inventory pumps breeder coolant breeder processing coolant processing vacuum processing fueling D+T D+T+  n T Fuel processing

Fuel Management divides naturally along physical boundaries  Most of R&D can be done in a fission facility.  Demonstrate in-situ control of breeding rate (too much breeding is bad).  Demonstrate T can be extracted from breeder in a timely manner (minimum inventory).  Most of R&D can be done in a fission facility.  Demonstrate in-situ control of breeding rate (too much breeding is bad).  Demonstrate T can be extracted from breeder in a timely manner (minimum inventory).  ITER provides most of the required data.  Issues include minimizing T inventory and T accountability  ITER provides most of the required data.  Issues include minimizing T inventory and T accountability (the rest)

ARIES Pathways Approach Holistic Approach: Fusion energy development should be guided by the requirements for an attractive fusion energy source:  What are the remaining major R&D areas? Are we generating all of the information needed by the industry to move forward? (Data needed to convince power industry to move forward and licensing authorities to license the device, …). Holistic Approach: Fusion energy development should be guided by the requirements for an attractive fusion energy source:  What are the remaining major R&D areas? Are we generating all of the information needed by the industry to move forward? (Data needed to convince power industry to move forward and licensing authorities to license the device, …).  Form an industrial advisory committee to help define (or refine) requirements for an attractive fusion energy source, for the demo, and helps guide in generating all of the information needed by the industry to move forward? (Data needed to convince power industry to move forward and licensing authorities to license the device, …).  Organize ourselves among concurrent physics/engineering issues, review previous work, and define remaining R&D areas.  Form an industrial advisory committee to help define (or refine) requirements for an attractive fusion energy source, for the demo, and helps guide in generating all of the information needed by the industry to move forward? (Data needed to convince power industry to move forward and licensing authorities to license the device, …).  Organize ourselves among concurrent physics/engineering issues, review previous work, and define remaining R&D areas.

An Integrated “holistic” optimization approach should drive the development path. Holistic Approach: Fusion energy development should be guided by the requirements for an attractive fusion energy source:  What are the remaining major R&D areas? Are we generating all of the information needed by the industry to move forward? (Data needed to convince power industry to move forward and licensing authorities to license the device, …).  What it the impact of this R&D on the attractiveness of the final product? (What are the metrics for distributing resources among R&D issues?)  Which of the remaining major R&D areas can be explored in existing devices or simulation facilities (i.e., fission reactors)? What other major facilities are needed? Should we attempt to replicate power plant conditions in a scaled device or Optimize facility performance relative to scaled objectives Holistic Approach: Fusion energy development should be guided by the requirements for an attractive fusion energy source:  What are the remaining major R&D areas? Are we generating all of the information needed by the industry to move forward? (Data needed to convince power industry to move forward and licensing authorities to license the device, …).  What it the impact of this R&D on the attractiveness of the final product? (What are the metrics for distributing resources among R&D issues?)  Which of the remaining major R&D areas can be explored in existing devices or simulation facilities (i.e., fission reactors)? What other major facilities are needed? Should we attempt to replicate power plant conditions in a scaled device or Optimize facility performance relative to scaled objectives

Do ARIES Designs Provide sufficient information to develop these metrics?  ARIES designs were point designs, meant to provide “long- term” guidance to the program.  We never worked on one particular design long enough to understand and document all trade-offs.  Prioritization of R&D requires a quantitative measure: Trade-off studies around several design points.  ARIES designs were point designs, meant to provide “long- term” guidance to the program.  We never worked on one particular design long enough to understand and document all trade-offs.  Prioritization of R&D requires a quantitative measure: Trade-off studies around several design points.  Revisit ARIES tokamak designs, and investigate the parameter space and impact of various constraints. Examples:  Is it better to push on for a higher  or divertor heat flux?  It is better to push on for a higher  or high-efficiency blanket?  Revisit ARIES tokamak designs, and investigate the parameter space and impact of various constraints. Examples:  Is it better to push on for a higher  or divertor heat flux?  It is better to push on for a higher  or high-efficiency blanket?

Timeline for the ARIES Pathways program  First year:  Focus on defining R&D issues and system studies to identify high- leverage areas.  Second and third years:  Develop embodiments for a next-step device (CTF).  First year:  Focus on defining R&D issues and system studies to identify high- leverage areas.  Second and third years:  Develop embodiments for a next-step device (CTF).