Fusion Energy Sciences Program Department of Energy Perspective February 23, 2004 www.ofes.fusion.doe.gov E xcellent S cience in S upport of A ttractive.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Extension of IEA Implementing Agreement on Large Tokamak Facilities Presented to Committee on Energy Research Technologies October 18-19, 2005 Paris, France.
Advertisements

Federal Budget Process Steve Kidd and Allison Boehm Budget and Program Analysis Staff April 2009.
U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science Advanced Scientific Computing Research Program NERSC Users Group Meeting Department of Energy Update June 12,
FES International Collaboration Program: Vision and Budget Steve Eckstrand International Program Manager Office of Fusion Energy Sciences U.S. Department.
Nuclear Energy University Programs NGNP Systems Analysis August 10, 2011 Hans Gougar.
The Federal R&D Budget: Process and Perspectives Matt Hourihan April 9, 2015 For George Washington University Course IAFF 2190W: Science, Technology &
FNSF Blanket Testing Mission and Strategy Summary of previous workshops 1 Conclusions Derived Primarily from Previous FNST Workshop, August 12-14, 2008.
January 8-10, 2003/ARR 1 Plan for Engineering Study of ARIES-CS Presented by A. R. Raffray University of California, San Diego ARIES Meeting UCSD San.
U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science Dr. Raymond Orbach February 25, 2003 Briefing for the Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee FY04 Budget.
Suggested US Plans and Strategy for ITER Test Blanket Mohamed Abdou Presented at APEX/TBM Meeting, UCLA, November 3-5, 2003.
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.
Impact of Liquid Wall on Fusion Systems Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego NRC Fusion Science Assessment Committee November 17, 1999.
November 4-5, 2004/ARR 1 ARIES-CS Power Core Options for Phase II and Focus of Engineering Effort A. René Raffray University of California, San Diego ARIES.
Office of Fusion Energy Sciences (OFES) Perspective Gene Nardella, Acting Associate Director of Science for Fusion Energy Sciences
November 8-9, Blanket Design for Large Chamber A. René Raffray UCSD With contributions from M. Sawan (UW), I. Sviatoslavsky (UW) and X. Wang (UCSD)
Presentation to the FESAC Panel on Inertial Fusion Energy Dr. N. Anne Davies Associate Director for Fusion Energy Sciences October 27,
Overview of Advanced Design White Paper Farrokh Najmabadi Virtual Laboratory for Technology Meeting June 23, 1998 OFES Headquarters, Germantown.
1 Brief Status of ITER TBM A High-Level Ad Hoc Group (AHG) met April 10-11, per request of the ITER Council. In that meeting, Parties intentions were stated,
O ffice of F usion E nergy S ciences Excellent Science in Support of Attractive Energy Presented at the ARIES Meeting Princeton, New Jersey Al Opdenaker.
Advanced Design Activities Farrokh Najmabadi Virtual Laboratory for Technology Meeting Dec. 10, 1998 VLT PAC Meeting, UCSD.
Senior Review Evaluations (1 of 5) Proposals due: 6 March 2015 Panel evaluations: Week of 22 April 2015 Performance factors to be evaluated will include.
Research Groups Committed to Understanding Energy One of the world’s premier centers for R&D on energy production, distribution,
U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee Meeting Dr. N. Anne Davies Associate Director for Fusion Energy.
ITER Test Blanket Module and the Need for Coordination Outline What ITER means for the World Technology / Chamber / Blanket Community ITER Plans for TBM.
Briefings to the Materials Community on ITER Test Blanket Module (TBM) Mohamed Abdou August 11, 2003 Outline 1.What is going on with ITER and TBWG 2.Other.
Developing a Vendor Base for Fusion Commercialization Stan Milora, Director Fusion Energy Division Virtual Laboratory of Technology Martin Peng Fusion.
U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science Update from DOE’s Office of Science Patricia Dehmer Deputy for Science Programs Office of Science, U.S. Department.
Nuclear Science User Facilities (NSUF) DOE Headquarters Perspective Michael Worley Director, Office of Innovative Nuclear Research Office of Nuclear Energy.
Fusion: Bringing star power to earth Farrokh Najmabadi Prof. of Electrical Engineering Director of Center for Energy Research UC San Diego NES Grand Challenges.
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 ?
October 27-28, 2004 HAPL meeting, PPPL 1 Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis of Ceramic Breeder Blanket and Plan for Future Effort A. René Raffray UCSD With contributions.
U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science Advanced Scientific Computing Research Program NERSC Users Group Meeting Department of Energy Update September.
The Federal R&D Budget: Process and Perspectives Matt Hourihan March 19, 2015 for the Marine Geoscience Leadership Symposium AAAS R&D Budget and Policy.
1 Solid Breeder Blanket Design Concepts for HAPL Igor. N. Sviatoslavsky Fusion Technology Institute, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI With contributions.
1 Mohamed Abdou With input from M. Sawan (UW), D. Sze (UCSD), N. Morley (UCLA), C. Wong (GA), S. Willms (LANL), A.Ying (UCLA), R. Nygren (SNL), P. Fogarty.
Rev. 0 CONFIDENTIAL Mod.19 02/00 Rev.2 Mobile Terminals S.p.A. Trieste Author: M.Fragiacomo, D.Protti, M.Torelli 31 Project Idea Feasibility.
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.
ExCo Meetings of IEA Large Tokamak Facilities and Poloidal Divertor IAs GA, San Diego; Jan 2-3, 2008 Dr. Erol Oktay Acting Director ITER and International.
February 5-6, 2004 HAPL meeting, G.Tech. 1 HAPL Blanket Strategy A. René Raffray UCSD With contributions from M. Sawan and I. Sviatoslavsky UW HAPL Meeting.
EFDA EUROPEAN FUSION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 16th TOFE Madison, Sept , EUROPEAN TECHNOLOGICAL EFFORT IN PREPARATION OF ITER CONSTRUCTION ROBERTO.
HAPL's Potential Tritium Issues Kirk L. Shanahan (ed.) Defense Programs Technology Section Savannah River National Laboratory Aiken, SC HAPL Review, Oct.
Thoughts on Fusion Competitiveness Initiative Farrokh Najmabadi, George Tynan UC San Diego University Fusion Initiatives Meeting, MIT 14-15, February 2008.
Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy Raymond L. Orbach Director Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy Presentation to BESAC December 6, 2004.
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.
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.
U.S. Fusion Energy Sciences Program Fusion Program Summary for Program Leaders February 7, 2005 E xcellent S cience in S upport of A ttractive E nergy.
Base Breeding Blanket and Testing Strategy In FNF Conclusions Derived from Previous FNST Workshop, August 12-14, 2008.
Materials Integration by Fission Reactor Irradiation and Essential Basic Studies for Overall Evaluation Presented by N.Yoshida and K.Abe At the J-US Meeting,
FIRE Engineering John A. Schmidt NSO PAC Meeting February 27, 2003.
Future Direction of the U.S. Fusion Materials Program Dr. Pete Pappano US Department of Energy Fusion Energy Sciences Fusion Power Associates Annual Meeting.
Department of Energy Office of Science  FY 2007 Request for Office of Science is 14% above FY 2006 Appropriation  FY 2007 Request for HEP is 8% above.
Advanced Design Activities in US Farrokh Najmabadi University of California, San Diego Japan/US Workshop on Fusion Power Plants & Related Technologies.
Developing Technology for Inertial Fusion Energy David H. Crandall Advisor to the Under Secretary for Science On National Security and Inertial Fusion.
Administration Perspective on ITER and Fusion Energy Patrick Looney Assistant Director Physical Science and Engineering Office of Science and Technology.
March 3-4, 2005 HAPL meeting, NRL 1 Assessment of Blanket Options for Magnetic Diversion Concept A. René Raffray UCSD With contributions from M. Sawan.
1 Discussion with Drs. Kwon and Cho UCLA-NFRC Collaboration Mohamed Abdou March 27, 2006.
Material System Thermomechanics Interactions (cont’d) International Collaboration: Role / Impact / Recognition - Serves a unique role in IEA program on.
HAPL June 20-21, Overview of Chamber/Blanket Work Presented by A.R. Raffray UCSD With contributions from CTC Group and MWG Blanket contributions:
Highlights of US ITER TBM Technical Plan and Cost Estimates (and Impact of International Collaboration) Mohamed Abdou and the U.S. Team TBWG-17 Presented.
US Participation in the
Overview of Fusion Blanket R&D In Japan
Sequential Phase II Awards at the Department of Energy
VLT Meeting, Washington DC, August 25, 2005
Mohamed A. Abdou Summary, Approach and Strategy (M. Abdou)
Presented at the ITER TBM Meeting, February 23-25, 2004, at UCLA
TRL tables: power conversion and lifetime
TWG goals, approach and outputs
Budgets for MFE Chamber Technology
Presentation transcript:

Fusion Energy Sciences Program Department of Energy Perspective February 23, E xcellent S cience in S upport of A ttractive E nergy US Department of Energy by Sam Berk OFES Team Leader for Technology

/14/04 05

Fiscal Year US Fusion Program Budget History (in 2005 $M) Fiscal Year Budget (FY 2005$ in Millions) /14/

FY 2005 Fusion Program Congressional Budget Request ($M) FY 2004 Approp. Science Facility Operations Technology SBIR/STTR OFES Total DIII-D C-Mod NSTX NCSX IFE/HEDP FY 2005 Cong FY 2003 Actual /13/04

o+$1 M for MST oNo $3 M increase for SciDAC/FSP as planned oNo increase of $0.8 M for NCSX research in support of construction oAll other programs funded at about FY 2004 appropriations level Summary of US Fusion Program FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request ITER oDirect Funding of $7 M: $1 M for procurement of S/C wire and $6 M in reserve to be allocated following decision on organization to host US Project Office and other decisions o$38 M designated for support of US preparations toward ITER tasks o+$4 M for ITER direct funding oOperation of facilities reduced from FY 2004 plan of 18 weeks each to 14 weeks each (-$3.2 M) oNCSX kept at FY 2004 level instead of the planned $4.8 M increase oFunding for ORNL move stretched out Facilities Operations ($85.5 M, +$1 M) oFusion Technologies closed out in FY 2004: all IFE work brought to conclusion and ITER- relevant parts of MFE work moved to Plasma Technologies oAll areas of Plasma Technologies: increased budgets and redirection toward ITER oFIRE program completed with Physics Validation Review in FY 2004 oMaterials research reduced $.2 M Technology ($27.8 M, +$.4 M) Science ($150.8 M, +$.1 M)

Major Fusion Facilities Operating Times FY 2005 Congressional FY 2002 FY 2004 Appropriations Years Weeks DIII-DC-MODNSTX /13/04 Full Utilization Level FY 2003 Actual 4* *NSTX operating time was reduced due to the failure of one of the magnetic coils in February. Operations are expected to begin again this month. 14

Fusion Program Resources in Preparation for ITER ($M) Elements FY 2004 Approp. Fusion Plasma Theory and Computation (SciDAC) DIII-D Experimental Program Alcator C-Mod Experimental Program ITER Project (Direct Funding) Plasma Technology Total /13/04 FY 2005 Cong

Technology FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request ($M) FY 2004 Approp. Plasma Technologies Fusion Technologies Advanced Design Materials Research Total FY 2005 Cong FY 2003 Actual 01/13/04

ITER TBM-Related Funding ($M) FY 2004 Approp. FY 2005 Cong. 01/13/04 Fusion Technologies MFE Chamber Technologies Plasma Technologies Plasma Chamber Systems Current source of funding: Future source of funding:

Office of Science “These Department of Energy facilities are used by more than 18,000 researchers from universities, other government agencies, private industry and foreign nations.” - Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham 20 Year Facilities Plan

DOE Office of Science Strategic Plan February Strategic Goals for Fusion Program –First goal: Demonstrate with burning plasmas the scientific and technological feasibility of fusion energy (through ITER project) –Fourth goals: Develop new materials, components, and technologies needed to make fusion energy a reality Strategic Timeline –Toward 4 th goal (materials, components, and technologies): “By 2013, deliver to ITER for testing the blanket test modules needed to demonstrate the feasibility of extracting high-temperature heat from burning plasmas and for a self-sufficient fuel cycle”

Fusion Energy Sciences Budget Tokamak $86.9 General Plasma Science $11.7 Other* $13.6 Alternates $88.5 FY 2005 Cong. $264.1 M NCSX $16.7 Technology $27.8 Theory & SciDAC $28.6 IFE/HEDP $13.9 NSTX $ /20/04 ITER $7.0 Other Alts $24.3 $246.9 M Tokamak $82.8 General Plasma Science $9.0 Other* $12.4 Alternates $76.7 FY 2003 Actual Technology $38.3 Theory & SciDAC $27.7 IFE $17.0 NSTX $30.1 NCSX $11.7 Other Alts $22.1 Tokamak $89.6 General Plasma Science $11.7 Other* $13.8 Alternates $88.5 FY 2004 Approp. Technology $27.4 Theory & SciDAC $28.6 IFE/HEDP $15.1 NSTX $34.6 NCSX $16.7 Other Alts $23.2 $262.6 M ITER $3.0 *SBIR/STTR GPP/GPE ORNL Move Reserve Environmental Monitoring ($ in Millions)

*NSF/NIST/NAS/AF/Undesignated funds Institution Types FY 2005 Congressional $264.1M Fusion Energy Sciences Funding Distribution Universities 28% Industry 22% Other* 5% Laboratory 45% Functions Science 54% Facility Operations+ 30% Technology 10% SBIR/STTR 3% +Includes NCSX Project ITER Direct 3%

Shifts in Priorities and Directions for Blanket R&D Shift focus of blanket R&D from science of higher risk concepts (APEX Project for advanced, innovative, and revolutionary) to development issues of lower risk concepts (conventional and evolutionary) that will be basis for Test Blanket Modules (TBMs) in early ITER operation Maintain some effort on higher risk concepts that might be tested as TBMs in later stages of ITER operation

Changing Views on Prospects for Blanket Structural Materials Recent change in structural materials R&D portfolio balance due to: –Concerns about prospects for developing insulator coatings to control MHD effects in V/Li blanket –More positive outlook on prospects of developing advanced (nanocomposited) ferritic steels that can operate at much higher temperatures than present-day steels

Past Allocation Present Allocation Target Future Allocation Structural Material Class Funding Allocation V alloys: > ½ FS: < ¼ SiC: ¼ V alloys: < 1/2 and declining FS: > 1/4 with AFS research increasing SiC: ¼ About 1/3 for each if prospects for insulator coatings improves Reduce V alloys further if prospects for insulator coatings does not improve Changing Views on Prospects for Blanket Structural Materials Change in Portfolio Allocation

US Priorities for Coolant /Breeder Choices with LA F/M Steel Solid Breeder: He-cooled ceramic breeder Liquid Breeder: Evaluating options –Molten Salt (self-cooled and separately cooled) and PbLi (separately cooled)

Recent US Developments Related to Blanket & Materials R&D Reduced budgets for blanket R&D Shifts in priorities and directions for blanket R&D Changing views on prospects for blanket structural materials

Recent US Developments Related to Blanket & Materials R&D Reduced budgets for blanket R&D Shifts in priorities and directions for blanket R&D Changing views on prospects for blanket structural materials

Shifts in Priorities and Directions for Blanket R&D Shift focus of blanket R&D from science of higher risk concepts (APEX Project for advanced, innovative, and revolutionary) to development issues of lower risk concepts (conventional and evolutionary) that will be basis for Test Blanket Modules (TBMs) in early ITER operation Maintain some effort on higher risk concepts that might be tested as TBMs in later stages of ITER operation

Changing Views on Prospects for Blanket Structural Materials Recent change in structural materials R&D portfolio balance due to: –Concerns about prospects for developing insulator coatings to control MHD effects in V/Li blanket –More positive outlook on prospects of developing advanced (nanocomposited) ferritic steels that can operate at much higher temperatures than present-day steels

Past Allocation Present Allocation Target Future Allocation Structural Material Class Funding Allocation V alloys: > ½ FS: < ¼ SiC: ¼ V alloys: < 1/2 and declining FS: > 1/4 with AFS research increasing SiC: ¼ About 1/3 for each if prospects for insulator coatings improves Reduce V alloys further if prospects for insulator coatings does not improve Changing Views on Prospects for Blanket Structural Materials Change in Portfolio Allocation

US Priorities for Coolant /Breeder Choices with LA F/M Steel Solid Breeder: He-cooled ceramic breeder Liquid Breeder: Evaluating options –Molten Salt (self-cooled and separately cooled) and PbLi (separately cooled)