Characteristics and Contributions of the Three Major United States Toroidal Magnetic Fusion Facilities

This is Volume 1 of the report of a panel established by the U.S. Department of Energy Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) and submitted in July 2005. The panel was charged to answer the following questions: What are the unique and complementary characteristics of each of the major U.S. fusion facilities? How do the characteristics of each of the three U.S. fusion facilities make the U.S. toroidal research program unique as a whole in the international program? How well do we cooperate with the international community in coordinating research on our major facilities and how have we exploited the special features of U.S. facilities in contributing to international fusion research, in general, and to the ITER design specifically? How do these three facilities contribute to fusion science and the vitality of the U.S. Fusion program? What research opportunities would be lost by shutting down one of the major facilities?     

Requested Information Provided by the Three Major United States Toroidal Magnetic Fusion Facilities: Report of the 2005 FESAC Facilities Panel, Vol. 2

This is Volume 2 of a report of a panel established by the U.S. Department of Energy Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) charged to review the three major U.S. fusion facilities. The Panel requested input from each of the three major U.S. toroidal magnetic fusion facilities. The request included an invitation to each facility program director to provide a document that addressed in detail the panel charge. This paper consists of the three documents that were received in response to that request.     

The Fusion Energy Option

Presentations from a Fusion Power Associates symposium, The Fusion Energy Option, are summarized. The topics include perspectives on fossil fuel reserves, fusion as a source for hydrogen production, status and plans for the development of inertial fusion, planning for the construction of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, status and promise of alternate approaches to fusion and the need for R&D now on fusion technologies.     

Realizing the Promise of Fusion Energy: Final Report of the Task Force on Fusion Energy, August 1999

In December 1998, Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson asked the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board to form a Task Force on Fusion Energy to conduct a review of the Department's fusion energy technologies, both inertial and magnetic, and to provide recommendations as to the role of these technologies as part of a national fusion energy research program. This report reflects the Task Force's response to the request.     

Report of the U.S. Department of Energy Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) Panel Reviewing the Theory and Computing Program

This Panel was set up by the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) at its November 2000 meeting for the purpose of addressing questions from the Department of Energy concerning the theory and computing/simulation program of the Office of Fusion Energy Sciences. Although the Panel primarily addressed programmatic questions, it acknowledges that the theory and computing in fusion energy sciences has a stellar record of research successes. (A recent FESAC report entitled Opportunities in the Fusion Energy Sciences Program listed a number of theory and computing research highlights.) Last year the National Research Council performed an assessment of the quality of the fusion energy sciences program—including theory and computing—and concluded that the quality of its research is on a par with that of other leading areas of contemporary physical science.     

Two Strategic Decisions Facing Fusion

Two strategic decisions facing the U.S. fusion program are described. The first decision deals with the role and rationale of the tokamak within the U. S. fusion program, and it underlies the debate over our continuing role in the evolving ITER collaboration (mid-1998). The second decision concerns how to include Inertial Fusion Energy (IFE) as a viable part of the national effort to harness fusion energy.     

Spherical Torus Pathway to Fusion Power

Spherical Torus (ST) as an example of confinement concept innovation to enable a potentially attractive pathway to fusion power is discussed. Given the anticipated high performance in small size, the ST plasma could be used to stimulate innovation also in engineering, technology, and material combinations to provide a smarter, cheaper, faster pathway. This pathway could complement the mainline program based on the tokamak in making the desired progress in fusion energy sciences. The ST pathway could include a small VNS (Volume Neutron Source) with low fusion amplification (Q 1–2) for Fusion Energy Development (energy technology) and a small Pilot Plant with high Q (15–30) to practice Fusion Power Demonstration. Success in these steps also enhances the possibility for competitive non-electric applications of interest to society in time scales shorter than electric power generation. The scientific basis for these possibilities will be tested in the U.S. by the Proof of Principle experiment NSTX (National Spherical Torus Experiment) presently being built, and could be completed by a Proof of Performance and Optimization experiment such as a small DTST (Deuterium-Tritium Spherical Torus). Utilization of facilities and equipment already available in the U.S. would minimize the time and cost for these experiments and accelerate the approach to the stage of Fusion Energy Development.     

Fusion and Energy Policy

Presentations from a Fusion Power Associates symposium, Fusion and Energy Policy, are summarized. The topics include an overview of U.S. Department of Energy policies, fusion strategies in Europe and Japan, plans for U.S. participation in the construction of ITER, status of construction of the National Ignition Facility and recent progress in all aspects of magnetic and inertial fusion.     

Review of the magnetic fusion program by the 1986 ERAB Fusion Panel

The 1986 ERAB Fusion Panel finds that fusion energy continues to be an attractive energy source with great potential for the future, and that the magnetic fusion program continues to make substantial technical progress. In addition, fusion research advances plasma physics, a sophisticated and useful branch of applied science, as well as technologies important to industry and defense. These factors fully justify the substantial expenditures by the Department of Energy in fusion research and development (R&D). The Panel endorses the overall program direction, strategy, and plans, and recognizes the importance and timeliness of proceeding with a burning plasma experiment, such as the proposed Compact Ignition Tokamak (CIT) experiment.Presented to the Magnetic Fusion Advisory Committee (La Jolla, California, December 4, 1986)     

Report of the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee Panel on Priorities and Balance

This report presents the results and recommendations of the deliberations of the DOE Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) Panel on Priorities and Balance, which met in Knoxville, TN, 18–21 August 1999. The Panel identified the achievement of a more integrated national program in magnetic fusion energy (MFE) and inertial fusion energy (IFE) as a major programmatic and policy goal for the years ahead.     

Fusion Power by Magnetic Confinement Program Plan

This report has been available previously only as Volume I of a 5-volume U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration Report ERDA-76/110 (1976). It was the first comprehensive U.S fusion development plan. It treats the technical, schedular and budgetary projections for the development of fusion power using magnetic confinement. It provided the basis for the U. S. fusion facility and funding commitments during the latter half of the 1970's and is published now to archive its historical significance.     

Perspectives on Magnetized Target Fusion Power Plants

One approach to Magnetized Target Fusion (MTF) builds upon the ongoing experimental effort (FRX-L) to generate a Field Reversed Configuration (FRC) target plasma suitable for translation and cylindrical-liner (i.e., converging flux conserver) implosion. Numerical modeling is underway to elucidate key performance drivers for possible future power-plant extrapolations. The fusion gain, Q (ratio of DT fusion yield to the sum of initial liner kinetic energy plus plasma formation energy), sets the power-plant duty cycle for a nominal design electric power [e.g. 1,000 MWe(net)]. A pulsed MTF power plant of this type derives from the historic Fast Liner Reactor (FLR) concept and shares attributes with the recent Inertial Fusion Energy (IFE) Z-pinch and laser-driven pellet HYLIFE-II conceptual designs. Work supported by the Office of Science, OFES, through Los Alamos National Laboratory, under DOE contract W-7405-ENG-36.     

Enabling Technology in Support of Fusion Science

This paper summarizes remarks made at Fusion Power Associates annual meeting, July 17, 2000 in San Diego. It describes the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Fusion Enegy Sciences programs in plasma and fusion technology in support of the U. S. fusion energy sciences program.     

Fusion technology for a magnetic fusion production reactor

The tandem mirror and tokamak are being considered as candidate fusion drivers for a materials production reactor that could be implemented in the 1990s. This report considers, in detail, the required performance characteristics of the fusion plasma and the major technological subsystems for each fusion driver. These performance characteristics are compared with the present state of the art, corresponding development needs are identified, and technology program requirements, in addition to those now being supported by the Department of Energy, are pointed out. The tandem mirror and tokamak fusion drivers are also compared with regard to their required advancements in plasma performance and technology development.This paper represents work carried out from 1980 to 1982 and was in draft form in 1982. It was received for publication with only minor editing of its 1982 version, explaining the fact that some of the material is dated.     

Report of the FESAC Panel on a Burning Plasma Program Strategy to Advance Fusion Energy

This panel was set up by the U.S. Department of Energy's Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee in response to a request from the department to prepare a strategy for the study of burning fusion plasmas. Experimental study of a burning plasma has long been a goal of the U.S. science-based fusion energy program. There is an overwhelming consensus among fusion scientists that we are now ready scientifically, and have the full technical capability, to embark on this step. The fusion community is prepared to construct a facility that will allow us to produce this new plasma state in the laboratory, uncover the new physics associated with the fusion burn, and develop and test new technology essential for fusion power. Given this background, the panel has produced a strategy to enable the United States to proceed with this crucial next step in fusion energy science. The strategy was constructed with awareness that the burning plasma program is only one major component in a comprehensive development plan for fusion energy. A strong core science and technology program focused on fundamental understanding, confinement configuration optimization, and the development of plasma and fusion technologies essential to the realization of fusion energy. The core program will also be essential to the successful guidance and exploitation of the burning plasma program, providing the necessary knowledge base and scientific workforce.     

Fusion in the Era of Burning Plasma Studies: Workforce Planning for 2004–2014

This is the final report of a panel set up by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) in response to a charge letter from Dr. Raymond Orbach (Appendix A), asking FESAC to addressed the issue of workforce development in the U.S. fusion program. This report, submitted to FESAC March 29, 2004 and subsequently approved by them (Appendix B), presents FESAC's response to that charge.     

Report of the First Fusion Energy Sciences Committee of Visitors

This is the final report of a Committee of Visitors (COV) set up by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) in response to a charge letter from DOE Office of Science Director Raymond Orbach (Appendix A). In that letter, Dr. Orbach asked FESAC to assess matters pertaining to program decisions for the DOE's fusion theory and computation programs. This report, submitted to FESAC on March 29, 2004, and subsequently approved by them (Appendix B), presents FESACs response to that charge.     

数据融合理论及其在禁核试核查中的应用研究

数据融合旨在将来自多传感器或多源的信息进行协同分析,通过一系列的融合处理,从而得出更为准确可信的结论。概述了数据融合的研究近况,从系统的角度提出了数据融合的定义,初步探讨了其理论模型。在介绍禁核试核查背景的基础上,给出了禁核试核查数据融合的基本概念,理论框架及研究内容。     

Report on the Fifth Symposium on Current Trends in International Fusion Research

The Fifth Symposium on Current Trends in International Fusion Research was held on 24–29 March 2003 in Washington, USA in co-operation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Well-known scientists in their field of interest in fusion research were invited to present review papers. The presentations covered a broad range of fusion topics, including inertial confinement fusion, electrostatic confinement, various magnetic confinement schemes, and hybrid schemes. Each session chairman composed a session report, which John Pucadyil used to create this Report on the Fifth Symposium.     

The Engineering Test Facility

The vehicle by which the fusion program would move into the engineering testing phase of fusion power development is designated the Engineering Test Facility (ETF). The ETF would provide a test-bed for reactor components in the fusion environment. In order to initiate preliminary planning for the ETF decision, the Office of Fusion Energy established the ETF Design Center activity to prepare the design of the ETF. This paper describes the design status of the ETF.