Presentation on theme: "1 Update on Metrics for MFE/IFE Progress toward ARIES Dale Meade Fusion Innovation Research and Energy® Princeton, NJ ARIES Pathway Project Meeting January."— Presentation transcript:
1 Update on Metrics for MFE/IFE Progress toward ARIES Dale Meade Fusion Innovation Research and Energy® Princeton, NJ ARIES Pathway Project Meeting January 26, 2011 UCSD, La Jolla, CA
How should we Communicate Progress in Fusion? There have been recent National Energy Policy reports (DOE Energy policy report and a Holdren level report by PCAST) that have barely mentioned fusion. I am of the view that the key audience for us are the scientific advisors and gate keepers that provide input to middle and higher level Energy Policy decisions in the government. A good example is the National Academy Panel to review IFE. The recent upsurge in IFE communication has complicated the issue because IFE uses similar terminology but several key details are different, especially the burn dynamics and power plant requirements. What is the best way for MFE and IFE to communicate progress toward the goal of a fusion based power plant similar to ARIES?
Nationa Academy Committee to Review IFE Ronald C. Davidson, Co-Chair, Princeton University Gerald L. Kulcinski,† Co-Chair, University of Wisconsin-Madison Charles Baker, University of California, San Diego [Retired] Roger Bangerter, E. O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory [Retired] Riccardo Betti, University of Rochester Jan Beyea, Consulting in the Public Interest Robert L. Byer, Stanford University Franklin Chang-Diaz, Ad Astra Rocket Company Steven C. Cowley, United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority David Hammer, Cornell University Joseph S. Hezir, EOP Group, Inc. Kathyrn McCarthy, Idaho National Laboratory Lawrence T. Papay, PQR, LLC Ken Schultz, General Atomics Andrew M. Sessler, E. O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory John Sheffield, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Thomas Anthony Tombrello, Jr, California Institute of Technology Dennis G. Whyte, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Jonathan S. Wurtele, University of California, Berkeley Rosa Yang, Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. Adrian Zaccaria, Bechtel Group, Inc.
Laser Energy ~ 1 MJ ~600J, Q ~6x10 -4
x 6 if 50/50 DT => 140J, Q ~ 1.4x10 -4
Q ~ 10 ITER Lawson Diagram as a Metric for Fusion Progress Study A. Wootton, J Perkins Budapest EPS Review Paper Lawson for IFE W. Nevins Lawson for Advanced Fuels with self-consistent f.p. accumulation
Betti Approach and diagram
Caution: W hot spot = Kinetic energy of the ablating layer ≈ 2% of W laser
Fusion Gain and Conversion Efficiencies must be defined Self-Consistently within a Closed Power Cycle (e.g., Lawson -1957) New title on John Perkin’s VG
MFE/IFE - Two Very Different Approaches Thermonuclear Burn dynamics are very different Extremely transient burn vs quasi-steady state burn Hot spot ignition with propagation vs no burn propagation Ignition at Q ~ 0.5 vs Ignition at Q >30 Power Plant requires Q ~120 vs Q ~ 30 Power Handling Requirements are very different Large transient heat loads every pulse vs an occassional disruption Chamber clearing at high rep rate vs impurity removal with divertor
Fusion Energy per Pulse as a Metric for Progress dmeade NIF Initial Results 2010 (Goal) Indirect Drive
14 TFTR/JET ActualNIF Planned Average Fusion Power as a Metric for Progress D-T Fusion Gain, Q Fusion Energy/pulse MJ Day (TFTR) ~ 5,000 W Day (JET) ~ 5,000 W Day (ITER) ~ 100 MW First D-T ~2011 Fusion Gain, Q ~10 Fusion Energy/pulse20 MJ Day ~70 W dmeade: 2010
15 Economic Competitiveness is the Metric for Chu and Koonin Chu at PPPL Oct “A nuclear power plant at 6-9$B is problematic for the nuclear power industry. With ITER costing ~ $20B, what are the propects for magnetic fusion?” Koonin made a similar comment at the March 2010 FESAC meeting. We responded by citing the ARIES study results. How do we strengthen our response to this question? Related to the Mountain of Death problem mentioned before?
16 To Do List The average power metric may be a useful approach, need to try it out on the intended audience. Will be working to get a suitable MFE/IFE progress figure that could go into the NAS-IFE report. Will be working on a figure or representation that could be put into a broader energy report that would compare fusion with other carbon free or advanced energy sources.