comments on fesac charge #2 (perspective on a flat mfe budget for 10 years
DESCRIPTION
Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years. S. Prager Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory In consultation with R. Goldston , H. Neilson, J. Menard, R. Wilson, M. Zarnstorff. An MFE domestic program at flat-funding (~ $260M, excluding GPS, HEDP). Criteria: - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Comments on FESAC charge #2(perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years
S. PragerPrinceton Plasma Physics Laboratory
In consultation with R. Goldston, H. Neilson, J. Menard, R. Wilson, M. Zarnstorff
![Page 2: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
An MFE domestic program at flat-funding (~ $260M, excluding GPS, HEDP)
Criteria:
• World-leading research on important topics Focus on original, important, selected, exciting activities where the US can lead or be at the world forefront
• Linked/preparatory to ITER and a fusion roadmap to DEMO Maintain ability to contribute to ITER and breakout into fusion energy development program
![Page 3: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Therefore,
• Choose work with breakthrough potential
• Do not choose development work that is incremental or secondary to similar but larger efforts elsewhere (except in some cases to maintain core capability needed for breakout to fusion development program)
• Choose activities over full range of three topic categories• Confinement (high performance, steady-state, burning)• Plasma-material interface• Harnessing fusion power
![Page 4: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
1. Plasma confinement (high performance, steady-state, burning plasmas)
Fusion simulation program
Examples of research activities for US leadership in 10 yrs (~ $15M to ~ $50M blocks)
(listed in unprioritized order)
![Page 5: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
1. Plasma confinement (high performance, steady-state, burning plasmas)
Fusion simulation program Magnet development
High field, high Tc superconductorspotentially significant implications for tokamak,
stellaratore.g., reduction in size
Examples of research activities for US leadership in 10 yrs (~ $15M to ~ $50M blocks)
(listed in unprioritized order)
![Page 6: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
1. Plasma confinement (high performance, steady-state, burning plasmas)
Fusion simulation program Magnet development
Tokamak facility (AT or ST)investigating novel features (e.g, new divertors,
new PFCs)preparing for ITER, FNSFmaintaining tokamak operational expertise
Examples of research activities for US leadership in 10 yrs (~ $15M to ~ $50M blocks)
(listed in unprioritized order)
![Page 7: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
1. Plasma confinement (high performance, steady-state, burning plasmas)
Fusion simulation program Magnet development
Tokamak facility (AT or ST) Stellarator program
steady-state, disruption-free, good confinement novel designs for US researchnew confinement sciencepreparing for FNSF
Examples of research activities for US leadership in 10 yrs (~ $15M to ~ $50M blocks)
(listed in unprioritized order)
![Page 8: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
1. Plasma confinement (high performance, steady-state, burning plasmas)
Fusion simulation program Magnet development
Tokamak facility (AT or ST)Stellarator program
Examples of research activities for US leadership in 10 yrs (~ $15M to ~ $50M blocks)
(listed in unprioritized order)
Perhaps support ≤ 2 confinement facilities by end of decade(AT, ST, stellarator)
![Page 9: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
1. Plasma confinement (high performance, steady-state, burning plasmas)
Fusion simulation program Magnet development
Tokamak facility (AT or ST)Stellarator programInternational collaboration on SC facilities
~ maintain scientific balance of trade
Examples of research activities for US leadership in 10 yrs (~ $15M to ~ $50M blocks)
(listed in unprioritized order)
![Page 10: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
1. Plasma confinement (high performance, steady-state, burning plasmas)
Fusion simulation program Magnet development
Tokamak facility (AT or ST)Stellarator programInternational collaboration on SC facilities (quid pro quo)Exploratory fusion concepts
re-evaluate opportunities
Examples of research activities for US leadership in 10 yrs (~ $15M to ~ $50M blocks)
(listed in unprioritized order)
![Page 11: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
New divertor geometries(e.g, snowflake, super-X)
Examples of research activities for US leadership in 10 yrs (~ $15M to ~ $50M blocks)
(listed in unprioritized order)
2. Plasma-material interface
![Page 12: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
New divertor geometriesLiquid metals
unique advantages as first wallUS at forefront, can leadsome synergies with blanket liquid metal
issues
Examples of research activities for US leadership in 10 yrs (~ $15M to ~ $50M blocks)
(listed in unprioritized order)
2. Plasma-material interface
![Page 13: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
New divertor geometriesLiquid metalsTungsten development
studies in plasma test stands and confinement facilities
high temperaturedeveloping new tungsten alloys(not obvious can be at world forefront)
Examples of research activities for US leadership in 10 yrs (~ $15M to ~ $50M blocks)
(listed in unprioritized order)
2. Plasma-material interface
![Page 14: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
New divertor geometriesLiquid metalsTungsten development
Examples of research activities for US leadership in 10 yrs (~ $15M to ~ $50M blocks)
(listed in unprioritized order)
2. Plasma-material interface
3. Harnessing fusion powerModified US accelerator neutron source
e.g, ORNL, LANL for fusion relevant neutrons,
joining IFMIF
![Page 15: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
New divertor geometriesPlasma test standsLiquid metalsTungsten development
Examples of research activities for US leadership in 10 yrs (~ $15M to ~ $50M blocks)
(listed in unprioritized order)
2. Plasma-material interface
3. Harnessing fusion powerModified US accelerator neutron sourceBlanket studies
possible niche is DCLLsome synergy with liquid lithium PFC(not obvious can be at world forefront)
possibly needed capability for breakout potential
![Page 16: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Scoping/conceptual design studies Fusion Nuclear Science Facility
(FNSF) Toroidal facility for plasma-
materials interface Stellarators
Roadmapping and socioeconomic studies Considering the international
context, possible international
collaboration on FNSF/DEMO
Examples of research activities for US leadership in 10 yrs (~ $15M to ~ $50M blocks)
(listed in unprioritized order)
4. Scoping studies for activities after 2020
![Page 17: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Some strategic issues
• Workforce- key to maintain and evolve workforce, nondisruptively- what core capabilities to emphasize? (among plasma, material science, technology?)- influenced by potential areas of world leadership- an answer: maintain plasma science workforce at world forefront,build materials/technology workforce in selected areas
• Impact on fusion roadmap
![Page 18: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
How will this charge affect the“standard” roadmap discussed in the US
![Page 19: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Impact on roadmapOne scenario:
• Engineering design of FNSF not affordable in next ten years(~ $50M per year in second five-year period?)
• Delays FNSF start to ~ 2032 (10 year design/construction), DEMO to ~ 2047 if place FNSF and DEMO in series
• Therefore, consider option to proceed straight to DEMO, with FNSF mission as phase I(similar to plans of other ITER parties)
• Orient research program to solving long-range issues for fusion, emphasizing innovative solutions
![Page 20: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Possible path• Proceed for 5 years along path to either FNSF or DEMO
• Develop physics basis (AT, ST, stellarator) and materials basis to FNSF or DEMO
• In ~ 5 years, proceed toward FNSF (possibly with international collaboration) if US funding situation changes dramatically or proceed straight to DEMO
2012 ~ 2017
FNSF
DEMO
New US facility?
Eng’g design(begin 2017)
![Page 21: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
A sample “new” lean OFES program in ~ 8 years Plasma confinement $170M
magnet developmnt (hi Tc SC, hi B) ~ 2 confinement facilities (AT, ST, stellarator)
int’l collab on SC facilities (quid pro quo)exploratory fusion concepts
FSP/theory
Plasma-material interface $40M
new divertor geometries plasma test stands liquid metals
Harnessing fusion power $30M Modified accelerator neutron source
Blanket studies (DCLL)
Scoping studies $15M scoping/design for next-step facilities roadmapping/socioeconomic
TOTAL $275M (incl. $20M “other”)
![Page 22: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
• Even without any “competitive-scale” facility, minimal set of opportunities barely fits within a flat budget
• At $40M - $50M less:
eliminate whole research areas(PMI or confinement facility or FNS),huge negative impact on workforce and US core capabilities,impede ability for breakout to fusion development program(an assessment of core capabilities might be useful)
![Page 23: Comments on FESAC charge #2 (perspective on a flat MFE budget for 10 years](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062410/5681555e550346895dc32806/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
An MFE domestic program at flat-funding (~ $260M, excluding GPS, HEDP)
Criteria:
• World-leading research on important topics Focus on original, important, selected, exciting activities where the US can lead or be at the world forefront
• Linked/preparatory to ITER and a fusion roadmap to DEMO Maintain ability to contribute to ITER and breakout into fusion energy development program