fusion 2020 white paper part ii

8/6/2019 Fusion 2020 White Paper Part II

1/15

Fusion Energy: An Opportunity forAmerican Leadership and Security

Introduction

Electricity is the lieblood o the American economy. From Silicon Valley to Detroit, Wall Street to MainStreet, I innovators, small and large scale manuacturing companies and investors depend on reliablaordable access to electricity to power job growth, innovation, and prots.

In the coming years, increasing demand or electricity will need to be met with a commitment to moaordable, sustainable, and secure orms o energy production. By 2050, every power plant in the

United States will reach the end o its liespan and need to be replaced.

Te pending recapitalization o American power utilities represents a challenge and an opportunity.But even more undamentally, it is a choice: between business as usual with its unsustainable, uncleanunsae, and costly hallmarks, or we can set a new course to rmly establish American leadership in clsustainable energy production.

Wind and solar, together with eciency and conservation measures, will certainly be a part o the newenergy paradigm. But none o these will meet the increasing need or baseline powerthe power avaiable 24 hours every day, regardless o the weather.

Tis new course should include usion, the energy that powers the stars. During the last 30 years, ther

has been great and generally unrecognized progress toward achieving controlled usion energy.

Fusion power is sae and clean, and when commercialized, will solve many o the worlds energy problems.

Te primary obstacle to realizing usions potential is the integration o technologies into a power planscale acility. Te leaders o the main U.S. national labs state that they are now ready to start buildingU.S. pilot plants to nd ways to overcome those obstacles.

China, Japan, South Korea, and the European Union are pushing orward with aggressive eorts toresolve these challenges and secure leadership in the energy technology o the uture. In contrast, U.Seorts, although very signicant, have been crippled or decades by severe unding constraints.

Clear plans and recommendations or U.S. leadership have not been implemented.

Te implications o delay are clear. We are in danger o alling behind.

Establishing a national priority level o eort or usion, together with support or a balanced energyportolio, can reestablish American preeminence, achieve absolute energy independence, and developnext generation energy or the world.

White

PaPer


2/15

2

AMERICAN SECURITY PROJECT

Key Facts

We know usion works.Fusion is taking place in laboratories all over the world, including in theUnited States. It is the process that powers the Sun and all the stars.

Te key step, through engineering, is to turn this science act into a commercial product.

At the heart o usion energy is the worlds most amous equation, E = mc2 which captures the relation-ship o mass and energy.

Te process is very dierent rom a nuclear reactor, which splits large atoms to create energy but leaveslong-lived radioactive byproducts. Fusion combines small atoms together. In doing so, energy is re-leased and the byproduct is simply helium gas.

Commercial usion energy plants would use relatively tiny amounts o uel to generate millions owatts o electrical power.

Fusion is sustainable: the uel is extracted rom seawater and lithium. Due to the amount o uel re-quired, the supply o these basic ingredients is essentially limitless.

Fusion is sae: there is no chain reaction and there is no possibility o a meltdown. Unlike a nuclear s-sion reaction, control o usion is as simple as ficking a switch. When you turn it o, the reaction stops.Tere is no spent uel.

Fusion is clean: there are no pollutants released in the air and no carbon is released.

Not only will usion giveAmerica energy independence, it will also create a large number o jobs.

Te United States runs the risk o losing the race to commercialize usion to China or South Korea,due to lack o political will. America could be orced to buy its energy rom oreign countries that maynot share its values or have its interests at heart.

Tere will need to be mass recapitalization o the energy generation market, as each present power plantin the U.S. will need to be replaced by 2050. Te question is:what will those plants be using or uel

in 2050?


3/15

3


Potential Strategic Gains or the United States

With the political will and the right investment, the potential strategic gains or the U.S. in the aggressivedevelopment and deployment o usion power plants are extraordinary. Tese would include:

Clean, sae, sustainable, and aordable electricity generation in the U.S. and the world;

Energy independence and associated reedom rom oreign countries or our energy supplies;

ransition to an electricity-generating economy to power our cars and trucks;

Elimination o the actinides in spent nuclear-uel by building usion/ssion hybrid plants (using thehigh neutron elds rom usion to transmute the actinides in spent uel and thereby render the spentuel non-toxic within 200 years not tens o thousands o years);

Te two-old boost to the U.S. economy o reducing our huge trade imbalance by eliminating the costo importing oil and making the U.S. a world-leader in the energy market by providing usion generat-ing plants or the whole world;

Creation o a large number o jobs in building and maintaining commercialized usion power plants;

Demonstration o how U.S. leadership in technology can be leveraged to drive leadership in energy; and

Increase interest and high-paying jobs or young people going into scientic and engineering elds.


4/15

4


What is Fusion Energy?

At the heart o usion energy is the worlds most amousequation, E = mc2. Te basic uel or usion is deuterium,a orm o hydrogen easily separated rom ordinary water.

Fusion energy is obtained by orcing together atomicnuclei rom deuterium and tritium (another orm ohydrogen). Tis releases energy due to the slightly smallermass o the helium nucleus produced.

Te amount o energy available through usion isextraordinary.

A single gram o uel can yield 90,000-kilowatt hours oenergy. Put another way, it would take 10 million pounds

o coal to yield as much energy as one pound o usionuel.

Tis energy will be available as heat to make steam to run a conventional electric generator.

How is Fusion Energy Practically Obtained?

Fusion has been repeatedly achieved in experiments ranging rom a table-top apparatus to devices yieldingshort pulses o up to 15 million watts o power.

However, or practical electric generation purposes, two mainstream approaches have evolved. Each othese is designed to get the uel nuclei close enough together and moving ast enough to use into one newnucleushelium, the same gas that lls a childs balloon.

In a Magnetic Fusion Energy (MFE) machine,strong magnetic elds suspend the reactingparticles in a doughnut-shaped (toroidal)chamber. Such machines, called tokamaks,have been built over many years in severalcountries and great advances have recently beenmade in this technology.

Te second mainstream approach uses multiple high-energy laser beams to heat andcompress a tiny pellet o uel. Tis Inertial Fusion Energy (IFE) technique is nowcoming to ruition as a nearly all-American project in Caliornia.

Ignition experiments planned or this year and next are expected to yield pulses


5/15

5


o usion energy greater than that used by the huge laser array to trigger themthis would be the rstachievement o breakeven and energy gain.

Te U.S. has led the usion eld or decades, and is now in a position to capitalize on the culmination oover 50 years o eort.

For both these approaches, clear pathways exist or the development o commercial utility-scale powerplants.

According to the U.S. usion program scientic leaders, the rst such plants could be operational within 15years i there was the will to drive orward.

Such next-generation power sources, built in conjunction with other nearer-term energy sources, couldchange the world.

Are We Ready to Proceed?

In 1980, Congress passed an authorization bill that envisioned a demonstration usion power plant by theyear 2000. Tis visionary program was never unded and subsequently died.

It may be argued that it was premature. In the thirty years since, and particularly in the last decade,dramatic progress has been made in both the theoretical and practical aspects o usion energy.

In the United States, the Department o Energy (DOE) has sponsored this eort. More broadly, nationallaboratories rom Argentina to Uzbekistan are involved in usion research.

Magnetic Fusion Energy (MFE)

okamak MFE reactors have been running and creatingbrie usion conditions in the United States and elsewhereor more than 30 years. Teir properties are becomingbetter understood every day, thanks in part to Americanadvances in supercomputing.

In China and South Korea, new superconducting MFEmachines (designed with American help) now surpass anysuch devices now available in America.

A major international research machine, the IER,is now being built in France to test scaling-up tokamakdesigns to power plant size (though not power plantunction).

PPPL LTX--A view through the Princeton Plasma PhysicsLaboratorys Lithium Tokamak Experiment (LTX) by ElleStarkman/Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Ofce oCommunications


6/15

6


When ully operational beginning in 2027, IER, apurely research device, should produce 500 megawatts ousion power or periods o minutesabout 5 to 10 timesthe power input. Te total project cost is estimated inexcess o $20 billion.

Te United States has just 9% and $2.8 billion lietimeparticipation in this program, the same as South Korea orIndia.

However, the preliminary design o an American magneticpilot plant (PILO) is underway.

Tis high-duty cycle plant, with net power production,could become operational beore IER begins pulsed operation with usion uel.

Tis development team, based at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, is ready to move orward rapidly,

given unding.

Inertial Connement Fusion (ICF)

At Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Caliornia, DOE-sponsored work under the banner o the National Nuclear Security

Administration (NNSA) has brought the National Ignition Facility(NIF) into operation.

Construction was completed in 2009, ollowing an investment oroughly $3.5 billion.

Te demonstrations in the NIF are being used as the basis ordesign o a laser-driven power plant known as LIFE (LaserInertial Fusion Energy). A board o executives rom utilitycompanies across the U.S. is guiding this project.

Te NIF is within months (not years) o achieving ignition andnet energy gain. Tis will beat IER by at least 15 years.

A rst-generation LIFE acility would deliver 400 MW o net

electricity to the grid. Te technology is scalable to 1500 MW enough to power a city.

LIFE could start construction tomorrow and be operational within12 years. Tis team is ready to proceed, given unding.

NIF Laser Bay--Seen rom above, each o NIFs twoidentical laser bays has two clusters o 48 beamlinesone on either side o the utility spine running downthe middle o the bay. Credit: Lawrence LivermoreNational Laboratory

Lasers-Eye View o the NIF Target--A view o acryogenically cooled NIF target as seen by the laserthrough the hohlraums laser entrance hole.


7/15

7


Supporting echnologies:

Because a usion power plant will subject its components to unprecedented thermal, magnetic, electrical,and radiation demands, the widespread deployment o usion would benet greatly rom rapid access to aComponent est Facility (CF).

Tough not designed to yield net power, such a device would develop and rene materials and technologiesor the long-term deployment o usion energy.

Tis CF can be operational in ve years. eams at Oak Ridge, Sandia, and General Atomics have designsready to proceed, given unding.

Although a small number o specic laboratories are named above, it should be noted that signicant usionresearch is ongoing across America.

A major usion eort would be truly a national employment program. Te National Ignition Facility, orexample, involved 3,000 vendor partners rom 47 U.S. states.

What will American Fusion Leadership Cost?

o achieve a usion power demonstration o the kind described above would require a total investment oapproximately $30-40 billion invested over a period o about 15 years.

Tis breaks out approximately as:

$15 billion or an American magnetic pilot plant (PILO) and Component est Facility (CF); $10 billion or Laser Inertial Fusion Energy (LIFE); and $10 billion or associated and necessary research and development activities.

In addition, the United States has a commitment o an additional $2.8 billion to support our small ractiono the IER program.

In constant dollars, the above investment is less than one-third the cost o the Apollo program that put aman on the moona program that, it should be noted, once involved ully six percent o all the scientistsand engineers in the country.

Te sum is less than invested recently to maintain the viability o General Motors, and only about 10% o

the cost o saving the nations banks.

It would be invested over a period o years, but would require a stable unding platorm to enable rationalplanning and sta recruitment and development.


8/15

8


Are Tere Reasons or Immediate Action?

Apart rom the obvious need or energy independence achieved rom clean and inexhaustible sources, thereare two additional issues calling or action: American competitiveness and nuclear prolieration.

China has a major program in usion based on the EAS superconducting tokamak and plans or breakevenmachines. Tey have announced a ast-track goal o net-power demonstration acilities in the 2021-2040time rame, and the enrollment 1,000 graduate students in usion studies. In America there are barely 400.

South Korea has the superconducting KSAR tokamak and has announced plans to supply power to theirgrid in the 2040s. Japan, with its J60-SA, likewise intends to lead the world. Te Europeans have IERand an active public support organization.

By inaction, the United States will accept a position in the second tier; a customer, not a seller o usionenergy technology.

Te second and very strong reason or rapid action is based on recent analysis rom Lawrence LivermoreLaboratory o the consequences o increasing dependence on conventional ssion power on worldwidestocks o plutonium.

Increasing energy demand, and the relative cheapness o nuclear power even compared to coal, may drivenations toward uranium and ssion.

Experience shows that countries with ssion nuclear reactors will tend toward reprocessing uel and puriyingplutonium.

According to one report, a ten-year delay in commercialization o usion power, or moving rst

implementation rom the 2030s to the 2040s, would result in the additional availability o 800,000-4,000,000 kilograms o plutonium by the year 2100. Just 8 kilograms is enough to make a bomb.

Leakage o just one one-hundredth o one percent o this plutonium will create an unacceptable addedrisk o nuclear terrorism. In this country, loss o such a magnitude has already been documented. Te majorimplications or national security need no emphasis.

What Does Industry Say?

Te Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), which brings together scientists and engineers to conduct

research and analysis relating to the generation, delivery, and use o electricity, takes usion seriously.

EPRI is presently examining the most viable methods or early (10-15 year) demonstration o usion power.

EPRIs members represent more than 90 percent o the electricity generated and delivered in the United


9/15

9


States. Principals o several o these companies have been instrumental in the design o the LIFE pilotacility.

What are the Potential Strategic Gains?

At the strategic level, creation o a national priority eort or rapid development and deployment o usionenergy will constitute a rearmation o American technological preeminence in the world.

It will demonstrate that American exceptionalism is not just a slogan, but is expressed in action.

Success will establish absolute energy independence or this country.

Te result will have a direct impact on the lives o people everywhere. As exportable technology, usion willallow rapid access to low-cost, carbon-ree, and nuclear prolieration-ree energy to all nations.

What are the Potential echnical & Commercial Gains?

Te development o usion energy will be accompanied by major scientic and engineering achievements.

Tese include advances in superconductors or application to a wide range o industrial processes, compactsuper-power lasers and new high-eciency semiconductor light sources, large- and small-scale robotics, andmajor advances in supercomputing and modeling as applied to fuid fows and heat transer in any system.

In system dynamics and project management, the usion program will demand exceptional skills and requirethe training o a cadre o leaders.

Young people just entering high school will see a great uture in science and engineering as applied to localand national needs and choose careers accordingly.

Indeed, in a dozen years, these young workers could take their places as team members with advanceddegrees or as technicians with skills appropriate to this new era.

What is the Department o Energy Doing Now?

Te United States Department o Energy (DOE) is the major under o usion energy research through boththe Oce o Fusion Energy Sciences (OFES), largely directed to Magnetic Fusion Energy (MFE), and theNational Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), largely directed to Inertial Connement Fusion (ICF).

Te lack o DOE political will, strategic push, and planning has had a major impact on slowing o U.S.commercialization.

Under OFES, Americas major MFE resources, ALCAOR C-Mod at MI, NSX at Princeton, and


10/15

10


DIII-D at General Atomics in San Diego, are presently only unded or 50% utilization.

At DIII-D there is a reported our-year experimental backlog due to unding constraints. Other acilitieshave been closed or lack o unding.

Overall the OFES usion budget is less, in constant dollars, than in the 1980s.

In 2003, OFES commissioned its Fusion Energy Science Advisory Committee (FESAC) to prepare a Planor the Development o Fusion Energy. FESACs thoughtul 82-page report, delivered in March o 2003,

was never implemented.

In February 2007, the DOE Oce o Science asked FESAC to review the issues arising in the path toDEMO [i.e. a demonstration usion power plant]. Te then undersecretary also indicated that a secondrequest would be orthcoming or a long term strategic plan.

FESAC responded with a thorough 209-page report entitled, Priorities, Gaps and Opportunities in

October 2007.

Te recommendations in this report have not been implemented.

No strategic plan has yet been requested.

Indeed, the Department o Energy guidance has asked that the American program be slowed so as notto get ahead o the international program.

Progress under the NNSA has been more ocused, but there is no budget as yet to move orward with LIFEor energy applications.

Te National Ignition acility (NIF) was begun in 1997 and construction o this, the worlds most powerullaser system, was completed in 2009. Tis project was designed to study usion reactions related tomaintenance o the American nuclear deterrent.

A program o experiments directed toward ignition o a uel pellet by 2012 is now underway. DOE hasasked the National Academy o Science to study whether there is a uture in this approach to powerproduction. Teir report is not expected or two years.

What is the Environmental Impact o Fusion?

Fusion energy seems nearly ideal rom an environmental viewpoint. Fusion systems have no chain reactionor meltdown risk. Tey produce no long-lived radioactive waste stream. Tey produce no greenhouse gases.

Fusion plants would take no more space than conventional coal- or gas-ueled acilities, and they can belocated near population centers where power is needed. Tus they need no long-distance transmission lines.


11/15

11


Because they can produce base-load power, no energy storage system is required.

Te uel supply or a one billion watt (1 Gw) plant would amount to less than two pounds per day.

Image Sources: US Department o Energy


12/15

12


What are the Objections to a Fusion Program?

Fusion is always 50 years in the uture.Fity years o research and development have led to utility-scale plants now being built or on the drawing

board. Commercialization is going to begin in 30 years, even i not in America. Other countries arent

waiting.

We dont need it. Tere is lots o coal, gas, oil and uranium, not to mention solar and wind, etc.Fossil uels are not limitless and have considerable downsides in both extraction and use. Many countrieshave little or none o their own, and competition or increasingly scarce supplies destabilizes the world.

Solar and wind are important in the shorter term, but never or base-load powerthe power that is alwayson.

Dependence on ssion power leads to risk o both accident and uncontrolled prolieration.

Fusion power can never be commercially competitive.Economic studies both in the U.S. and Europe have concluded that usion electricity will be costcompetitive as soon as available.

(See European Fusion Development report EFDA-RP-RE-5.0.) Te scale o Asian eorts in usion attests toa clear appreciation o commercial practicality.

Fusion is just too expensive to develop. I it werent then industry would be doing it.A world-class eort is not nearly in the expense class o recent government anti-recession programs.

Te money will be spent over 15 years, supporting American skills, jobs, energy independence, and world

leadership.

Industry does not have the mechanisms, resources, or regulatory structure to do the development job.

Going to the moon cost about $140 billion in todays dollars, yielding untold wealth in industrialtechnologybeyond international prestige.

America is too ar behind already, why try?We have a clear choice now beore us as a nationleadership, or second-rate status. We have leadership inthe science underpinning one key route to usion, and are recognized experts across the board. But we lackthe programs to capitalize on this.

We can be creators and exporters in this, the largest market in the world, or we can be ollowers andcustomers sending overseas not our products, but our treasure.

We have allen ar behind in both solar and wind.


13/15

13


We have a solid basic position now in usion, but are at immediate risk o being overtaken.

Te American temperament wants a new Apollo, not capitulation.

Te American public is not ready or such a challenge.Te American people are worried that we have lost our position in the world; that we have given up thecan-do spirit that made this country great.

Many doubt that our political leadership still believes in American exceptionalism. In energyin usionwe can regain our position.

Te public is ready, but it has not been challenged.

Fusion is too risky. It may never reach the goal.Tis was said o going to the moon. Tis was said o the Manhattan Project. In act, the biggest risks arethat someone else will succeed beore us.

Fusion has now become a worldwide race.

Te question is not whether, but when and where. No one knows now just what commercial plants willlook like, but then again, todays aircrat dont look much like the Wright Flyer, either.

Tere can be no better statement about risk than that provided in the October 2007 FESAC reportsummary:

Te main risk aced is delay in deployment o usion energy due to unoreseen technical dicultiesin carrying out the plan, to costs which make the rst generation o usion reactors economically

uncompetitive or to insurmountable problems along the development path chosen. At somepoint delay is equivalent to ailure, as government and industry conclude that no solution will beorthcoming. Tat is, a program carried out so slowly and deliberately as to never make a wrongstep may carry more risk than one which tries to move more boldly and accepts that it willmake some mistakes and ollow some blind paths. Te principal strategy to mitigate risk isto implement a sufciently broad program so that alternative approaches or technologies areavailable at each step (p 202) [emphasis added].


14/15

14


Resources:

Website:www.usion2020.orgwitter: @usion2020

Princeton Plasma Physic Laboratoryhttp://www.pppl.gov

National Ignition Facilityhttps://lasers.llnl.gov

Academy o Engineering Challenges or the Futurehttp://www.engineeringchallenges.org

DOE Map o U.S. usion sites: http://www.sc.doe.gov/oes/Maps/FusionInstitutionsMapH-2.pd

Online Reerences:

PILO, LIFE, Materials testing acility http://re.pppl.gov/pa09_Goldston_Pilot_Plant.pd

https://lasers.llnl.gov/about/missions/energy_or_the_uture/lie/

http://re.pppl.gov/pa10_LIFE_Dunne.ppt

http://re.pppl.gov/pa10_FNSP_Abdou.ppt

FESAC Plan 2003http://www.oes.usion.doe.gov/More_HML/FESAC/DevReport.pd

FESAC Priorities, Gaps, and Opportunities 2007 http://www.science.doe.gov/oes/FESAC/Oct-2007/FESAC_Planning_Report

International activities: http://nds121.iaea.org/physics/index.php

http://re.pppl.gov/pa_annual_meet.html

European activities, IER and economics assessment http://usionorenergy.europa.eu

http://re.pppl.gov/pa10_IER_Status_Campbell.ppt

http://www.hiper.org
http://www.fusion2020.org/http://twitter.com/fusion2020http://www.pppl.gov/https://lasers.llnl.gov/http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/http://www.sc.doe.gov/ofes/Maps/FusionInstitutionsMapH-2.pdfhttp://fire.pppl.gov/fpa09_Goldston_Pilot_Plant.pdfhttps://lasers.llnl.gov/about/missions/energy_for_the_future/life/http://fire.pppl.gov/fpa10_LIFE_Dunne.ppthttp://fire.pppl.gov/fpa10_FNSP_Abdou.ppthttp://www.ofes.fusion.doe.gov/More_HTML/FESAC/DevReport.pdfhttp://www.science.doe.gov/ofes/FESAC/Oct-2007/FESAC_Planning_Reporthttp://nds121.iaea.org/physics/index.phphttp://fire.pppl.gov/fpa_annual_meet.htmlhttp://fire.pppl.gov/fpa_annual_meet.htmlhttp://fire.pppl.gov/fpa_annual_meet.htmlhttp://fusionforenergy.europa.eu/http://fire.pppl.gov/fpa10_ITER_Status_Campbell.ppthttp://www.hiper.org/http://www.hiper.org/http://fire.pppl.gov/fpa10_ITER_Status_Campbell.ppthttp://fusionforenergy.europa.eu/http://fire.pppl.gov/fpa_annual_meet.htmlhttp://nds121.iaea.org/physics/index.phphttp://www.science.doe.gov/ofes/FESAC/Oct-2007/FESAC_Planning_Reporthttp://www.ofes.fusion.doe.gov/More_HTML/FESAC/DevReport.pdfhttp://fire.pppl.gov/fpa10_FNSP_Abdou.ppthttp://fire.pppl.gov/fpa10_LIFE_Dunne.ppthttps://lasers.llnl.gov/about/missions/energy_for_the_future/life/http://fire.pppl.gov/fpa09_Goldston_Pilot_Plant.pdfhttp://www.sc.doe.gov/ofes/Maps/FusionInstitutionsMapH-2.pdfhttp://www.engineeringchallenges.org/https://lasers.llnl.gov/http://www.pppl.gov/http://twitter.com/fusion2020http://www.fusion2020.org/


15/15

Building a New American Arsenal

Te American Security Project (ASP) is a bipartisan initiative to educate the

American public about the changing nature o national security in the 21stcentury.

Gone are the days when a nations strength could be measured by bombers

and battleships. Security in this new era requires a New American Arsenal

harnessing all o Americas strengths: the orce o our diplomacy; the might o

our military; the vigor o our economy; and the power o our ideals.

We believe that America must lead other nations in the pursuit o our

common goals and shared security. We must conront international

challenges with all the tools at our disposal. We must address emerging

problems beore they become security crises. And to do this, we must orge a

new bipartisan consensus at home.

ASP brings together prominent American leaders, current and ormer

members o Congress, retired military ocers, and ormer government

ocials. Sta direct research on a broad range o issues and engages and

empowers the American public by taking its fndings directly to them.

We live in a time when the threats to our security are as complex and diverse

as terrorism, the spread o weapons o mass destruction, climate change,

ailed and ailing states, disease, and pandemics. Te same-old solutions

and partisan bickering wont do. America needs an honest dialogue about

security that is as robust as it is realistic.

ASP exists to promote that dialogue, to orge consensus, and to spur

constructive action so that America meets the challenges to its security while

seizing the opportunities the new century oers.

www.americansecurityproject.org

fusion 2020 white paper part ii

Documents