1 Fusion Fire Powers the Sun Can we make Fusion Fire on earth?

2 AES, ANL, Boeing, Columbia U., CTD, GA, GIT, LLNL, INEEL, MIT, ORNL, PPPL, SNL, SRS, UCLA, UCSD, UIIC, UWisc FIRE Collaboration Creating and Controlling a Fusion Fire in the Laboratory Dale Meade Princeton, Plasma Physics Laboratory Division of Plasma Physical Society Korean Physical Society Jeju, Korea October 23, 2004

3 Topics to be Discussed Need for Fusion Vision for Magnetic Fusion Power Plant Requirements and Critical Issues for Magnetic Fusion Recent Progress Requirements for a Fusion Fire Test Status of Plans for Building a Fusion Fire Concluding Remarks

4 The Case for New Sources of Energy Increasing evidence that release of greenhouse gases is causing global climate change World population increases and demand for economic development require a large increase in worldwide energy production –Most population growth is in urban areas Implies need for large, centralized power generation –Worldwide oil and gas production is near peak or past Secure energy supply with low cost and wide availability is needed for all countries A portfolio of alternative energy sources is required including fusion.

5 Fusion Reactions

keV Is optimum ~ (plasma pressure) 2 Need keV

7 Toroidal Magnetic Confinement Charged particles have helical orbits in a magnetic field; they describe circular orbits perpendicular to the field with gyro-radius r l =v  /Ω, where Ω=qB/mc “TOKAMAK” (Russian abbreviation for “toroidal chamber” with magnetic fields); includes an induced toroidal plasma current to form, heat and confine the plasma

8 What is Inside a Tokamak?

9

10 High Power Density P f /V~ 6 MW -3 ~10 atm  n ≈ 4 MWm -2 High Gain Q ~ n  E T ~ 6x10 21 m -3 skeV P  /P heat = f  ≈ 90% Steady-State ~ 90% Bootstrap ARIES Economic Studies have Defined the Plasma Requirements for an Attractive Fusion Power Plant Plasma Exhaust P heat /R x ~ 100MW/m Helium Pumping Tritium Retention Plasma Control Fueling Current Drive RWM Stabilization Significant advances are needed in each area. High gain, high power density and steady-state are the critical issues.

11 Critical Issue #1- High Fusion Gain (confinement): FIRE and ITER Require Modest (2.5 to 4.5) Extrapolation Tokamaks have established a solid basis for confinement scaling of the diverted H-Mode. B  E is the dimensionless metric for confinement time projection n  E T is the dimensional metric for fusion - n  E T =  B 2  E =  B. B  E ARIES-RS Power Plants require B  E only slightly larger than FIRE due high  and B. ARIES-RS (Q = 25)

12

13 ARIES and SSTR/CREST studies have determined requirements for an attractive power plant. 12 ITER would expand region  to  N ≈ 3 and f bs ≈ 50% at moderate magnetic field. FIRE would expand region to  N ≈ 4 and f bs ≈ 80% at reactor-like magnetic field. Attractive Reactor Regime Needs Highish  and B Modification of JT60-SC Figure Existing experiments, KSTAR, EAST and JT-SC would exp- and high  N region at low field. EAST JT60-SC KSTAR

14 Critical Issue #2 - High Power Densities: Requires Significant (x10) Extrapolation in Plasma Pressure

15 Steps to a Fusion Demo Today’s Tokamaks Advanced Tokamaks Long Pulse Burning Plasma Tokamaks Fusion Demo Fusion Fire

16 KSTAR Tokamak Taejon, S. KOREA New Generation Advanced Tokamak Latest physics ideas in design and systems to control plasma Long pulses up to 300s Superconducting coils but without a burning plasma Comparable in size to largest experiments of today first plasma tests in late 2006 R = 1.8 m, B= 3.5 T, Ip = 2 MA,

17 Two Furnaces for Testing a Fusion Fire ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) Discussions started in 1985 Demonstrate scientific and technical feasibility of fusion Six party international partnership (JA,EU,RF,US,CN,ROK) To be built in Japan or France (Cost ~ $5B) Under negotiation ( decision expected by December 2004) FIRE (Fusion Ignition Research Experiment) Lowest cost approach for creating and controlling fusion fire International Collaboration lead by the US To be built in the US (Cost ~ $1B) Under design as back up, put forward if no ITER decision

18 The Fusion Fire Step to a Fusion Power Plant

19

20 Fusion Development Considerations for FIRE Address key physics issues for an advanced reactor burning plasma scenarios similar to ARIES controlled burn of high power density plasma with Q >5, f BS ≈ 80% Focus technology on areas coupled to the plasma high power density plasmas plasma facing components plasma control technologies Limit scope/size/cost of the device size comparable to today’s largest tokamaks to reduce cost only integrate items that are strongly coupled: plasma-PFCs These are some of the biggest challenges for fusion, success in these areas would lead to an attractive Demo.

21 Advanced Toroidal Physics (100% Non-inductively Driven AT-Mode) Q~ 5 as target, higher Q not precluded f bs = I bs /I p ~ 80% as target, ARIES-RS/AT≈90%  N ~ 4.0, n = 1 wall stabilized, RWM feedback Quasi-Stationary Burn Duration (use plasma time scales) Pressure profile evolution and burn control~ 20 to 40  E Alpha ash accumulation/pumping~ 4 to 8  He Plasma current profile redistribution~ 2 to 5  CR Divertor pumping and heat removal~ 15 to 30  divertor First wall heat removal> 1  first-wall FIRE Physics Objectives Burning Plasma Physics (Conventional Inductively Driven H-Mode) Q~10 as target, higher Q not precluded f  = P  /P heat ~ 66% as target, up to Q = 25 TAE/EPMstable at nominal point, access to unstable

22 Fusion Ignition Research Experiment (FIRE) R = 2.14 m, a = m B = 10 T, (~ 6.5 T, AT) I p = 7.7 MA, (~ 5 MA, AT) P ICRF = 20 MW P LHCD ≤ 30 MW (Upgrade) P fusion ~ 150 MW Q ≈ 10, (5 - 10, AT) Burn time ≈ 20s (2  CR - Hmode) ≈ 40s (< 5  CR - AT) Tokamak Cost = $350M (FY02) Total Project Cost = $1.2B (FY02) 1,400 tonne LN cooled coils Mission: to attain, explore, understand and optimize magnetically-confined fusion-dominated plasmas

23 FIRE is Based on ARIES-RS Vision 40% scale model of ARIES-RS plasma ARIES-like all metal PFCs Actively cooled W divertor Be tile FW, cooled between shots Close fitting conducting structure ARIES-level toroidal field LN cooled BeCu/OFHC TF ARIES-like current drive technology FWCD and LHCD (no NBI/ECCD) No momentum input Site needs comparable to previous DT tokamaks (TFTR/JET). T required/pulse ~ TFTR ≤ 0.3g-T

24 No He Pumping Needs He pumping technology

25 “Steady-State” High-  Advanced Tokamak Discharge on FIRE time,(current redistributions)

26 FIRE AT Mode Pulse Length is not Limited by Cu Coils Q = 5 Nominal operating point Q = 5 P f = 150 MW, P f /V p = 5.5 MWm -3 (ARIES) ≈ steady-state 4 to 5  CR Physics basis improving (ITPA) required confinement H factor and  N attained transiently C-Mod LHCD experiments will be very important First Wall is the main limit not TF Improve cooling revisit FW design Opportunity for additional improvement.

27 ITER and FIRE Advanced Tokamak Operating Modes Pose Challenges for Plasma Technology Technology Items Existing Toks ITER-ATFIRE-ATARIES- RS/AT B(T) I p (MA) Fusion Power Density (MWm -3 ) FW -  N (MW/m -2 ) FW - P rad (MWm -2 ) First WallC, BeBe Mo Div Target (MWm -2 ) Divertor TargetC, (Mo,W)C,W?WW Pulse Length(s,  cr ) Typical 5, 2 (max = 5 hrs) 3000, 840, 5months Cooling Divertor, First Wall Inertial(SS) inertial Steady steady Steady inertial Steady steady

28 Status and Plans for FIRE FIRE has made significant progress in increasing physics and engineering capability since the Snowmass/FESAC recommendations of FIRE successfully passed the DOE Physics Validation Review (PVR) in March “ The FIRE team is on track for completing the pre-conceptual design within FY 04. They will then be ready to launch the conceptual design. The product of their work, and their contributions to and leadership within the overall burning plasma effort, is stellar. ” - PVR Panel Most of the FIRE resources were transferred to US - ITER activities in late The resources remaining in 2005 will focus on development of advanced capabilities for ITER - e.g., integrated AT modes, high power PFCs. The present US plan assumes that a decision to construct ITER is imminent. If an agreement on ITER is not attained, FIRE is ready, to be put forward as recommended by FESAC.

29 ITER has been designed, now ready to build Toroidal Field Coil Nb 3 Sn, 18 coils Poloidal Field Coil Nb-Ti, 6 coils Central Solenoid Nb 3 Sn, 6 modules Blanket Module 421 modules Vacuum Vessel 9 sectors Cryostat 24 m high x 28 m dia. Port Plug 6 heating 3 test blankets 2 limiters rem. diagnostics Divertor 54 cassettes

Sharing of construction costs has been agreed CN: magnet supports,feeders, correction coils, conductors, blanket (0.2), cryostat, gas injection, casks (0.5), HV substation, AC/DC (0.35), diag. EU: TF(0.5), conductors, cassette and outer target, vac.pumps, div. RH, casks (0.5), isotope sep., IC, EC, diag. JA: TF(0.5), conductors, inner target, blanket RH, EC, diag. KO: conductors, vessel ports (0.67), blanket (0.2), assembly tools, thermal shield, T storage, AC/DC (0.65), diag. RF: PF1, conductors, vessel ports (0.33), blanket (0.2), port limiters, flexibles, dome and PFC tests, Discharge circuits, EC, diag. US: CS(0.5), conductors, blanket (0.1), vac.pumps, pellet inj., vessel/in- vessel cooling, tok exh. proc., IC, EC, diag. PartyShareTotal CN-KO-RF- US 10% each40% JA + EU Host: 36%+A Non-Host: 10%+B (A+B=14%) 60% Host provides Buildings and Utilities. Remaining allocation (A+B) depends on site and final agreement. Fund (10%): Feeders, Shielding, viewing, NB RH, Hot cell eq., cryo dist., CODAC, installation and test, other sundry items

31 ITER site needs to be decided Cadarache (France) or Rokkasho (Japan)?

32 Concluding Remarks Magnetic Fusion has made remarkable progress during the past decade and has achieved: fusion fuel temperatures of 500 million degrees C fusion power production of 16 million watts fuel density x confinement ≈ 50% of that needed for ignition better understanding of plasma confinement and stability More important than ever to find out if fusion can be an energy source for the world. Magnetic Fusion is now ready to take the crucial step of: building and testing a fusion fire in the laboratory two attractive options (ITER and FIRE) are available a decision on ITER is expected within months if a decision can not be reached on ITER, FIRE could be built to create, control and optimize a fusion fire in the laboratory. Thanks for your interest. More info at

We will also need fusion at night..

34