1. The Energy Challenge – Fusion Energy Farrokh Najmabadi Prof. of Electrical Engineering Director of Center for Energy Research UC San Diego November 21, 2007

2. Fusion is one of very few non-carbon based energy options  DT fusion has the largest cross section and lowest temperature (~100M o C). But, it is still a high-temperature plasma!  Plasma should be surrounded by a Li-containing blanket to generate T. Or, DT fusion turns its waste (neutrons) into fuel!  Through careful design, only a small fraction of neutrons are absorbed in structure and induce radioactivity.  For liquid coolant/breeders (e.g., Li, LiPb), most of fusion energy is directly deposited in the coolant simplifying energy recovery  Practically no resource limit (10 11 TWy D; 10 4 (10 8 ) TWy 6 Li)  DT fusion has the largest cross section and lowest temperature (~100M o C). But, it is still a high-temperature plasma!  Plasma should be surrounded by a Li-containing blanket to generate T. Or, DT fusion turns its waste (neutrons) into fuel!  Through careful design, only a small fraction of neutrons are absorbed in structure and induce radioactivity.  For liquid coolant/breeders (e.g., Li, LiPb), most of fusion energy is directly deposited in the coolant simplifying energy recovery  Practically no resource limit (10 11 TWy D; 10 4 (10 8 ) TWy 6 Li) D + 6 Li  2 4 He + 3.5 MeV (Plasma) + 17 MeV (Blanket) D + T  4 He (3.5 MeV) + n (14 MeV) n + 6 Li  4 He (2 MeV) + T (2.7 MeV) n T

3. Two Approaches to Fusion Power – 1) Inertial Fusion  Inertial Fusion Energy (IFE) Fast implosion of high-density DT capsules by laser or particle beams (~30 fold radial convergence, heating to fusion temperature). A DT burn front is generated, fusing ~1/3 of fuel (to be demonstrated in National Ignition Facility in Lawrence Livermore National Lab). Several ~300 MJ explosions with large gain (fusion power/input power).  Inertial Fusion Energy (IFE) Fast implosion of high-density DT capsules by laser or particle beams (~30 fold radial convergence, heating to fusion temperature). A DT burn front is generated, fusing ~1/3 of fuel (to be demonstrated in National Ignition Facility in Lawrence Livermore National Lab). Several ~300 MJ explosions with large gain (fusion power/input power).

4. Two Approaches to Fusion Power – 2) Magnetic Fusion  Rest of the Talk is focused on MFE  Magnetic Fusion Energy (MFE) Strong magnetic pressure (100’s atm) to confine a low density but high pressure (10’s atm) plasma. Particles confined within a “toroidal magnetic bottle” for 10’s km and 100’s of collisions per fusion event. At sufficient plasma pressure and “confinement time”, the 4 He power deposited in the plasma sustains fusion condition.  Magnetic Fusion Energy (MFE) Strong magnetic pressure (100’s atm) to confine a low density but high pressure (10’s atm) plasma. Particles confined within a “toroidal magnetic bottle” for 10’s km and 100’s of collisions per fusion event. At sufficient plasma pressure and “confinement time”, the 4 He power deposited in the plasma sustains fusion condition.

5. Plasma behavior is dominated by “collective” effects  Pressure balance (equilibrium) does not guaranty stability. Example: Interchange stability  Pressure balance (equilibrium) does not guaranty stability. Example: Interchange stability  Impossible to design a “toroidal magnetic bottle” with good curvatures everywhere.  Fortunately, because of high speed of particles, an “averaged” good curvature is sufficient.  Impossible to design a “toroidal magnetic bottle” with good curvatures everywhere.  Fortunately, because of high speed of particles, an “averaged” good curvature is sufficient. Outside part of torus inside part of torus Fluid Interchange Instability

6. Tokamak is the most successful concept for plasma confinement R=1.7 m DIII-D, General Atomics Largest US tokamak  Many other configurations possible depending on the value and profile of “q” and how it is generated (internally or externally)

7. T3 Tokamak achieved the first high temperature (10 M o C) plasma R=1 m 0.06 MA Plasma Current

8. JET is currently the largest tokamak in the world R=3 m 4 MA Plasma Current

9. Fusion Energy Requirements:  Heating the plasma for fusion reactions to occur to 100 Million Celsius (routinely done in present experiments)  Confining the plasma so that alpha particles sustain fusion burn Energy Replacement time of about 1 s Plasma density of 10 21 /m 3 (Air Density is 3X10 25 /m 3 ) Progress in confinement is measured by “Fusion Triple Product” = (plasma temperature)X(energy replacement time)X(plasma density)  Extracting the fusion power and breeding tritium Co-existence of a hot plasma with material interface Developing power extraction technology that can operate in fusion environment  Heating the plasma for fusion reactions to occur to 100 Million Celsius (routinely done in present experiments)  Confining the plasma so that alpha particles sustain fusion burn Energy Replacement time of about 1 s Plasma density of 10 21 /m 3 (Air Density is 3X10 25 /m 3 ) Progress in confinement is measured by “Fusion Triple Product” = (plasma temperature)X(energy replacement time)X(plasma density)  Extracting the fusion power and breeding tritium Co-existence of a hot plasma with material interface Developing power extraction technology that can operate in fusion environment

10. Progress in plasma confinement has been impressive 500 MW of fusion Power for 300s Construction will be started shortly in France 500 MW of fusion Power for 300s Construction will be started shortly in France Fusion triple product n (10 21 m -3 )  (s) T(keV) ITER Burning plasma experiment

11. Large amount of fusion power has also been produced ITER Burning plasma experiment DT Experiments DD Experiments

12. We have made tremendous progress in understanding fusion plasmas  Substantial improvement in plasma performance though optimization of plasma shape, profiles, and feedback. Achieving plasma stability at high plasma pressure. Achieving improved plasma confinement through suppression of plasma turbulence, the “transport barrier.” Progress toward steady-state operation through minimization of power needed to maintain plasma current through profile control. Controlling the boundary layer between plasma and vessel wall to avoid localized particle and heat loads.  Substantial improvement in plasma performance though optimization of plasma shape, profiles, and feedback. Achieving plasma stability at high plasma pressure. Achieving improved plasma confinement through suppression of plasma turbulence, the “transport barrier.” Progress toward steady-state operation through minimization of power needed to maintain plasma current through profile control. Controlling the boundary layer between plasma and vessel wall to avoid localized particle and heat loads.

13. Fusion: Looking into the future

14. ITER will demonstrate the technical feasibility of fusion energy  Power-plant scale device. Baseline design: 500 MW of fusion power for 300s Does not include breeding blanket or power recovery systems.  ITER agreement was signed in Nov. 2006 by 7 international partners (US, EU, Japan, Russa, China, Korea, and India)  Construction will begin in 2008.  Power-plant scale device. Baseline design: 500 MW of fusion power for 300s Does not include breeding blanket or power recovery systems.  ITER agreement was signed in Nov. 2006 by 7 international partners (US, EU, Japan, Russa, China, Korea, and India)  Construction will begin in 2008.

15. ARIES-AT is an attractive vision for fusion with a reasonable extrapolation in physics & technology Competitive cost of electricity (5c/kWh); Steady-state operation; Low level waste; Public & worker safety; High availability. Competitive cost of electricity (5c/kWh); Steady-state operation; Low level waste; Public & worker safety; High availability.

16. ITER and satellite tokamaks will provide the necessary data for a fusion power plant DIII-D DIII-DITER SimultaneousMax BaselineARIES-AT Major toroidal radius (m) 1.71.76.2 5.2 Plasma Current (MA) 2.253.015 13 Magnetic field (T) 2 25.3 6.0 Electron temperature (keV) 7.5*16*8.9** 18** Ion Temperature (keV) 18*27*8.1** 18** Density (10 20 m -3 ) 1.0*1.7*1.0** 2.2** Confinement time (s) 0.40.53.7 1.7 Normalized confinement, H89 4.54.5 2 2.7  (plasma/magnetic pressure) 6.7%13%2.5% 9.2% Normalized  3.96.01.8 5.4 Fusion Power (MW) 500 1,755 Pulse length300 S.S. DIII-D DIII-DITER SimultaneousMax BaselineARIES-AT Major toroidal radius (m) 1.71.76.2 5.2 Plasma Current (MA) 2.253.015 13 Magnetic field (T) 2 25.3 6.0 Electron temperature (keV) 7.5*16*8.9** 18** Ion Temperature (keV) 18*27*8.1** 18** Density (10 20 m -3 ) 1.0*1.7*1.0** 2.2** Confinement time (s) 0.40.53.7 1.7 Normalized confinement, H89 4.54.5 2 2.7  (plasma/magnetic pressure) 6.7%13%2.5% 9.2% Normalized  3.96.01.8 5.4 Fusion Power (MW) 500 1,755 Pulse length300 S.S. * Peak value, **Average Value

17. The ARIES-AT utilizes an efficient superconducting magnet design  On-axis toroidal field:6 T  Peak field at TF coil:11.4 T  TF Structure: Caps and straps support loads without inter-coil structure;  On-axis toroidal field:6 T  Peak field at TF coil:11.4 T  TF Structure: Caps and straps support loads without inter-coil structure; Superconducting Material  Either LTC superconductor (Nb 3 Sn and NbTi) or HTC  Structural Plates with grooves for winding only the conductor. Superconducting Material  Either LTC superconductor (Nb 3 Sn and NbTi) or HTC  Structural Plates with grooves for winding only the conductor.

18. Use of High-Temperature Superconductors Simplifies the Magnet Systems  HTS does offer operational advantages: Higher temperature operation (even 77K), or dry magnets Wide tapes deposited directly on the structure (less chance of energy dissipating events) Reduced magnet protection concerns  HTS does offer operational advantages: Higher temperature operation (even 77K), or dry magnets Wide tapes deposited directly on the structure (less chance of energy dissipating events) Reduced magnet protection concerns Inconel strip YBCO Superconductor Strip Packs (20 layers each) 8.5 430 mm CeO 2 + YSZ insulating coating (on slot & between YBCO layers)  Epitaxial YBCO Inexpensive manufacture would consist on layering HTS on structural shells with minimal winding!  Epitaxial YBCO Inexpensive manufacture would consist on layering HTS on structural shells with minimal winding!

19. DT Fusion requires a T breeding blanket  Requirement: Plasma should be surrounded by a blanket containing Li D + T  He + n n + 6Li  T + He  Through careful design, only a small fraction of neutrons are absorbed in structure and induce radioactivity Rad-waste depends on the choice of material: Low-activation material Rad-waste generated in DT fusion is similar to advanced fuels (D-3He) For liquid coolant/breeders (e.g., Li, LiPb), most of fusion energy (carried by neutrons) is directly deposited in the coolant simplifying energy recovery  Issue: Large flux of neutrons through the first wall and blanket: Need to develop radiation-resistant, low-activation material: Ferritic steels, Vanadium alloys, SiC composites  Requirement: Plasma should be surrounded by a blanket containing Li D + T  He + n n + 6Li  T + He  Through careful design, only a small fraction of neutrons are absorbed in structure and induce radioactivity Rad-waste depends on the choice of material: Low-activation material Rad-waste generated in DT fusion is similar to advanced fuels (D-3He) For liquid coolant/breeders (e.g., Li, LiPb), most of fusion energy (carried by neutrons) is directly deposited in the coolant simplifying energy recovery  Issue: Large flux of neutrons through the first wall and blanket: Need to develop radiation-resistant, low-activation material: Ferritic steels, Vanadium alloys, SiC composites

20. Outboard blanket & first wall ARIES-AT features a high-performance blanket  Simple, low pressure design with SiC structure and LiPb coolant and breeder.  Innovative design leads to high LiPb outlet temperature (~1,100 o C) while keeping SiC structure temperature below 1,000 o C leading to a high thermal efficiency of ~ 60%.  Simple manufacturing technique.  Very low afterheat.  Class C waste by a wide margin.  Simple, low pressure design with SiC structure and LiPb coolant and breeder.  Innovative design leads to high LiPb outlet temperature (~1,100 o C) while keeping SiC structure temperature below 1,000 o C leading to a high thermal efficiency of ~ 60%.  Simple manufacturing technique.  Very low afterheat.  Class C waste by a wide margin.

21. Modular sector maintenance enables high availability  Full sectors removed horizontally on rails  Transport through maintenance corridors to hot cells  Estimated maintenance time < 4 weeks  Full sectors removed horizontally on rails  Transport through maintenance corridors to hot cells  Estimated maintenance time < 4 weeks ARIES-AT elevation view

22. Advances in fusion science & technology has dramatically improved our vision of fusion power plants Estimated Cost of Electricity (c/kWh)Major radius (m)

23. After 100 years, only 10,000 Curies of radioactivity remain in the 585 tonne ARIES-RS fusion core. After 100 years, only 10,000 Curies of radioactivity remain in the 585 tonne ARIES-RS fusion core.  SiC composites lead to a very low activation and afterheat.  All components of ARIES-AT qualify for Class-C disposal under NRC and Fetter Limits. 90% of components qualify for Class-A waste.  SiC composites lead to a very low activation and afterheat.  All components of ARIES-AT qualify for Class-C disposal under NRC and Fetter Limits. 90% of components qualify for Class-A waste. Ferritic Steel Vanadium Radioactivity levels in fusion power plants are very low and decay rapidly after shutdown Level in Coal Ash

24. Fusion Core Is Segmented to Minimize the Rad-Waste  Only “blanket-1” and divertors are replaced every 5 years Blanket 1 (replaceable) Blanket 2 (lifetime) Shield (lifetime)

25. Waste volume is not large  1270 m 3 of Waste is generated after 40 full-power year (FPY) of operation. Coolant is reused in other power plants 29 m 3 every 4 years (component replacement), 993 m 3 at end of service  Equivalent to ~ 30 m 3 of waste per FPY Effective annual waste can be reduced by increasing plant service life.  1270 m 3 of Waste is generated after 40 full-power year (FPY) of operation. Coolant is reused in other power plants 29 m 3 every 4 years (component replacement), 993 m 3 at end of service  Equivalent to ~ 30 m 3 of waste per FPY Effective annual waste can be reduced by increasing plant service life.  90% of waste qualifies for Class A disposal

26. Fusion: Why is taking so long?

27. There has been no urgency in developing new sources of energy  Proposed fusion development plan in 1976 aimed at fielding a fusion Demo by 2000.  Recent DOE Fusion Development Plan (2003) aimed at fielding a fusion Demo by 2030.  The required funding to implement the plans were not approved.  Proposals for fielding a burning plasma experiments since mid 1980s.  Fusion program was restructured in mid 1990s, focusing on developing fusion sciences (with 1/3 reduction in US funding). Fielding a fusion Demo is NOT the official goal of DOE at present  Large interest and R&D investment in Europe and Japan (and China, India, Korea)  Proposed fusion development plan in 1976 aimed at fielding a fusion Demo by 2000.  Recent DOE Fusion Development Plan (2003) aimed at fielding a fusion Demo by 2030.  The required funding to implement the plans were not approved.  Proposals for fielding a burning plasma experiments since mid 1980s.  Fusion program was restructured in mid 1990s, focusing on developing fusion sciences (with 1/3 reduction in US funding). Fielding a fusion Demo is NOT the official goal of DOE at present  Large interest and R&D investment in Europe and Japan (and China, India, Korea)

28. Development of fusion has been constrained by funding! $M, FY02 1980 FED ITER Demo Current cumulative funding ~ 1 week of world energy sale

29. In Summary, …

30. In a CO 2 constrained world uncertainty abounds  No carbon-neutral commercial energy technology is available today. Carbon sequestration is the determining factor for fossil fuel electric generation. A large investment in energy R&D is needed. A shift to a hydrogen economy or carbon-neutral syn-fuels is also needed to allow continued use of liquid fuels for transportation.  Problem cannot be solved by legislation or subsidy. We need technical solutions. Technical Communities should be involved or considerable public resources would be wasted  The size of energy market ($1T annual sale, TW of power) is huge. Solutions should fit this size market 100 Nuclear plants = 20% of US electricity production $50B annual R&D represents 5% of energy sale  No carbon-neutral commercial energy technology is available today. Carbon sequestration is the determining factor for fossil fuel electric generation. A large investment in energy R&D is needed. A shift to a hydrogen economy or carbon-neutral syn-fuels is also needed to allow continued use of liquid fuels for transportation.  Problem cannot be solved by legislation or subsidy. We need technical solutions. Technical Communities should be involved or considerable public resources would be wasted  The size of energy market ($1T annual sale, TW of power) is huge. Solutions should fit this size market 100 Nuclear plants = 20% of US electricity production $50B annual R&D represents 5% of energy sale

31. Status of fusion power  Over 15 MW of fusion power is generated (JET, 1997) establishing “scientific feasibility” of fusion power Although fusion power < input power.  ITER will demonstrate “technical feasibility” of fusion power by generating copious amount of fusion power (500MW for 300s) with fusion power > 10 input power.  Tremendous progress in understanding plasmas has helped optimize plasma performance considerably. Vision of attractive fusion power plants exists.  Transformation of fusion into a power plant requires considerable R&D in material and fusion nuclear technologies (largely ignored or under-funded to date). This step, however, can be done in parallel with ITER  Over 15 MW of fusion power is generated (JET, 1997) establishing “scientific feasibility” of fusion power Although fusion power < input power.  ITER will demonstrate “technical feasibility” of fusion power by generating copious amount of fusion power (500MW for 300s) with fusion power > 10 input power.  Tremendous progress in understanding plasmas has helped optimize plasma performance considerably. Vision of attractive fusion power plants exists.  Transformation of fusion into a power plant requires considerable R&D in material and fusion nuclear technologies (largely ignored or under-funded to date). This step, however, can be done in parallel with ITER

32. Thank you! Any Questions?