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.     

A Review of the U.S. Department of Energy's Inertial Fusion Energy Program

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. Ray Orbach (Appendix A). In that letter, Dr. Orbach asked FESAC for an assessment of the present status of inertial fusion energy (IFE) research carried out in contributing programs. These programs include the heavy ion (HI) beam, the high average power laser (HAPL), and Z-Pinch drivers and associated technologies, including fast ignition (FI). This report, presented to FESAC on March 29, 2004, and subsequently approved by them (Appendix B), presents FESAC's response to that charge.     

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.     

Nonelectric Applications of Fusion

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. James Decker, Acting Director of the DOE Office of Science. In that letter, Dr. Decker asked FESAC to consider whether the Fusion Energy Sciences program should broaden its scope and activities to include non-electric applications of intermediate-term fusion devices. This report, submitted to FESAC July 31, 2003, and subsequently approved by them (Appendix B), presents FESAC's response to that charge.     

Fusion Simulation Project: Integrated Simulation and Optimization of Magnetic Fusion Systems

This is the final report of a panel established as a subcommittee of the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Fusion Energy Sciences Committee (FESAC) on Integrated Simulation and Optimization of Magnetic Fusion Systems (ISOFS). The report was requested by the DOE in February 2002 and the approved report was transmitted to the DOE by the FESAC in December 2002. The report addresses the challenge of how to develop fully integrated capability for predicting the performance of externally-controlled systems including turbulent transport, macroscopic stability, wave-particle physics, and multi-phase interfaces.     

Report of the Integrated Program Planning Activity for the U.S. Department of Energy Fusion Energy Sciences Program

This report of the Integrated Program Planning Activity (IPPA) has been prepared in response to a recommendation by the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board that, Given the complex nature of the fusion effort, an integrated program planning process is an absolute necessity. We therefore undertook this activity to integrate the various elements of the program, to improve communication and performance accountability across the program, and to show the interconnectedness and interdependency of the diverse parts of the national Fusion Energy Sciences Program. This report is based on the September 1999 Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee's (FESAC) report Priorities and Balance within the Fusion Energy Sciences Program. In its December 5, 2000, letter to the Director of the Office of Science, the FESAC reaffirmed the validity of the September 1999 report and stated that the IPPA presents a framework and process to guide the achievement of the 5-year goals listed in the 1999 report. The report also outlines a process for establishing a database for the fusion research program that will indicate how each research element fits into the overall program. This database will also include near-term milestones associated with each research element and will facilitate assessments of the balance within the program at different levels.     

Recommendations on the Nature and Level of U.S. Participation in the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) Extension of the Engineering Design Activities

The Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Energy Research chartered through the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) a panel to address the topic of U.S. participation in an ITER construction phase, assuming the ITER Parties decide to proceed with construction. Given that there is expected to be a transition period of 3 to 5 years between the conclusion of the Engineering Design Activities (EDA) and the possible construction start, the DOE Office of Energy Research expanded the charge to include the U.S. role in an interim period between the EDA and construction.This panel has heard presentations and received input from a wide cross-section of parties with an interest in the fusion program. The panel concluded it could best fulfill its responsibility under this charge by considering the fusion energy science and technology portion of the U.S. program in its entirely. Accordingly, the panel is making some recommendations for optimum use of the transition period considering the goals of the fusion program and budget pressures.     

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.     

Report of the U.S. Department of Energy Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee Panel on Burning Plasma Physics

This is the report of a panel set up by the U.S. Department of Energy Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) in response to a charge letter on October 5, 2000, from Dr. Mildred Dresselhaus, then Director of the DOE's Office of Science. In that letter, Dr. Dresselhaus asked the FESAC to investigate the subject of burning plasma science. The report addresses several topics, including the scientific issues to be addressed by a burning plasma experiment and its major supporting elements, identification of issues that are generic to toroidal confinement, and the role of the Next-Step Options (NSO) Program.     

Scientific Challenges,Opportunities and Priorities for the U.S. Fusion Energy Sciences Program

In October 2003, Dr. Raymond Orbach, Director of the Department of Energy’s Office of Science, issued a charge to the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) “to identify the major science and technology issues that need to be addressed, recommend how to organize campaigns to address these issues, and recommend the priority order for these campaigns.” The sections in this report document the results of the Panel’s work. The first two sections describe the concepts of the overarching themes, topical scientific questions, and campaigns. The next six sections (Sections 3–8) describe in detail the six scientific campaigns. Section 9 describes some important enabling research activities necessary for the campaigns. Sections 10–12 describe the overarching themes, which provide a crosscutting perspective of the activities in the six campaigns. Finally, the Panel’s recommendations are set forth in Section 13. The charge letter to the panel is provided as Appendix A; the FESAC response letter is provided as Appendix D.     

Report of the Fusion Simulation Project Steering Committee

The Fusion Simulation Project (FSP) is envisioned as a 15 year, $20M/year multi-institutional project to develop a comprehensive simulation capability for magnetic fusion experiments with a focus on the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER). The FSP would be able to contribute to design decisions, experimental planning and performance optimization for ITER, substantially increasing ITERs likelihood of success and its value to the US Fusion Program. The FSP would be jointly supported by the DOE Office of Fusion Energy Sciences and the DOE Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research. The potential for developing this simulation capability rests on the exponential growth of computer power over the last 50 years, the progress in physics understanding developed by the international fusion program and the continued progress in computational mathematics that enables the use of the new ultra-scale computers to solve difficult mathematical problems. The initial concept for the FSP was developed by the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee Integrated Simulation and Optimization of Fusion Systems Subcommittee (J. Dahlburg and J. Corones, et al., J. Fusion Energy, 20(4), 135–196.). The DOE asked the FSP Steering Committee to develop a project vision, a governance concept and a roadmap for the FSP. The Committee recommends that the FSP consist of three elements: a production component, a research and integration component, and a software infrastructure component. The key challenge is developing components that bridge the enormous distance and time scales involved with the disparate physics elements of tokamak performance. The committee recommended that this challenge be met through Focused Integration Initiatives that would first seek to integrate different physics packages with disparate distance and time scales. An example is the integration of Radio Frequency (RF) Current Drive and Magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) components to produce an integrated capability to simulate the use of RF current drive to suppress MHD instabilities. This report also defines the requirements for a governance structure. The FSP Steering Committee judged that the project begin with a conceptual design phase lasting one or two years and be followed by a staged ramp-up over a few years to the full funding level.     

Possible Pathways for Pursuing Burning Plasma Physics and Fusion Energy Development

This report has been prepared in response to a request from the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Fusion Energy Sciences to consider possible alternatives on reduced cost options for next-step devices. A central focus of next-step devices is the study of burning plasmas, which explore the impact of substantial fusion energy production via the deuterium-tritium reaction.An important part of the U.S. Fusion Energy Sciences Program is its participation in the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) program. Taking into account the international situation and U.S. domestic issues, the ITER process is exploring reduced-cost options to the present ITER device. A Special Working Group, reporting to the ITER Council, has been formed to explore these issues on behalf of the ITER Parties, i.e., the European Union, Russian Federation, Japan, and the United States. This report and its related activities will aid the United States in the international process.This report is the result of a broad-based U.S. community effort to discuss, debate, and work together on the crucial issues involved in considering next-step options. The main content of this report is based on three potential pathways identified at a broadly attended community Forum for Next-Step Fusion Experiments (University of Wisconsin, Madison, April 1998) organized principally by the University Fusion Association and by the work of the ITER Steering Committee—US (ISCUS) on reduced cost ITER options. The Madison Workshop was followed by a smaller Workshop on Next-Step Options (University of California, San Diego, June 1998) to focus on preparing this report. A broadly-announced Website was established to facilitate access to documents related to this process.     

The reversed-field-pinch (RFP) fusion neutron source: A conceptual design

The conceptual design of an ohmically heated, reversed-field pinch (RFP) operating at 5-MW/m² steady-state DT fusion neutron wall loading and 124-MW total fusion power is presented. These results are useful in projecting the development of a cost effective, low-input-power (206 MW) source of DT neutrons for large-volume (10 m³), high-fluence (3.4 MW yr/m²) fusion nuclear materials and technology testing.Work supported by U.S. DOE.     

Report of panel 2: Post-TFTR initiatives

Conclusion The Panel finds that the steady-state/advanced-to-kamak mission is a critical element in the U.S. fusion strategy as established by FPAC. An attractive SS/AT device can be constructed for about the $400M FY'92 guideline proposed by the SEAB-TF. The design and construction of such a facility should proceed on a schedule to enter operation in 1990–00. Adequate funding for peak construction years should become available following the D-T operation of TFTR. In all its phases, the new device should be managed as a national facility.This report was prepared by a panel established by, and reporting to, the Fusion Energy Advisory Committee (FEAC). The report of this panel should not be construed as representing the views, official advice or recommendations of FEAC.This document uses SS/AT to identify the mission and TPX to identify a generic facility addressing the mission.     

Radiation γ annealing of Silicon Carbide irradiated in a BOR-60 reactor

The results of irradiating at 400–800°C silicon carbide, having the -SiC cubic modification, in different channels of the BOR-60 reactor, where the radiation composition factor was varied over the range 2.3–6.5, are discussed. The expansion of the crystal lattice of -SiC in the saturation stage is taken as the measure of damage. Data on isochronous annealing are used to investigate the energy spectrum for activation of annealing of defects - the smearing at high and low energy under the influence of radiation. The results are compared with data from similar irradiation of silicon carbide in MR and BR-10 and with data on the influence of radiation on other materials and their properties.Translated from Atomnaya Ènergiya, Vol. 97, No. 4, pp. 275–280, October, 2004.     

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.     

The “18 Year” Alternative: A Business Proposal to Develop Commercial Fusion Energy by 2021—The Fusion Power Corporation

This policy essay asserts that the 35 year plan recently adopted by the U.S. Department of Energy's Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee is too risk averse and too costly. An alternative 18 year schedule is proposed. All dollar amounts shown below are undiscounted, and are only intended to be indicative of approximate future costs.     

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 Science Research Plan for the Major U.S. Tokamaks

This is the May 1996 report of a subpanel of the US Department of Energy Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC), charged with conducting a review of the progress, priorities and potential near-term contributions of TFTR, DIII-D and Alcator C-MOD (and other facilities as appropriate) as part of the transition to a Fusion Energy Sciences Program and produce an optimum plan for obtaining the most scientific benefit from them.     

D-T experiments on TFTR

Temperatures, densities and confinement of deuterium plasmas confined in tokamaks have been achieved within the last decade that are approaching those required for a D-T reactor. As a result, the unique phenomena present in a D-T reactor plasma (D-T plasma confinement, alpha confinement, alpha heating and possible alpha driven instabilities) can now be studied in the laboratory. Recent experiments on the Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor (TFTR) have been the first magnetic fusion experiments to study plasmas with reactor fuel concentrations of tritium. The injection of 20 MW of tritium and 14 MW of deuterium neutral beams into the TFTR produced a plasma with a T/D density ratio of 1 and yielded a maximum fusion power of 9.2 MW. The fusion power density in the core of the plasma was 1.8 MW m^–3 approximating that expected in a D-T fusion reactor. In other experiments TFTR has produced 6.4 MJ of fusion energy in one pulse satisfying the original 1976 goal of producing 1 to 10 MJ of fusion energy per pulse. A TFTR plasma with T/D density ratio of 1 was found to have 20% higher energy confinement time than a comparable D plasma, indicating a confinement scaling with average ion mass, A, of _E. The core ion temperature increased from 30 keV to 37 keV due to a 35% improvement of ion thermal conductivity. Using the electron thermal conductivity from a comparable deuterium plasma, about 50% of the electron temperature increase from 9 keV to 10.6 keV can be attributed to electron heating by the alpha particles. At fusion power levels of 7.5 MW, fluctuations at the Toroidal Alfvén Eigenmode frequency were observed by the fluctuation diagnostics. However, no additional alpha loss due to the fluctuations was observed. These D-T experiments will continue over a broader range of parameters and higher power levels.Work supported by U.S. Department of Energy Contract No. DE-AC02-76-CHO-3073.