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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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 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.     

A Plan for the Development of Fusion Energy

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 dated September 10, 2002 from Dr. Ray Orbach, Director of the DOE's Office of Science. In that letter, Dr. Orbach asked FESAC to develop a plan with the end goal of the start of operation of a demonstration power plant in approximately 35 years. This report, submitted March 5, 2003, presents such a plan, leading to commercial application of fusion energy by mid-century. The plan is derived from the necessary features of a demonstration fusion power plant and from the time scale defined by President Bush. It identifies critical milestones, key decision points, needed major facilities and required budgets. The report also responds to a request from DOE to FESAC to describe what new or upgraded fusion facilities will best serve our purposes over a time frame of the next twenty years.     

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.     

Report of the FEAC Inertial Fusion Energy Review Panel: July 1996

This report presents the results and recommendations of the U. S. Department of Energy Fusion Energy Advisory Committee (FEAC) review of its Inertial Fusion Energy (IFE) program. The subpanel charged with the review was chaired by John Sheffield of Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The FEAC, to which the subpanel reported, was chaired by Robert Conn of the University of California at San Diego.     

Technical Opportunities for International Collaborations by the U.S. Fusion Program

This report was prepared by a Working Group at the request of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fusion Energy Sciences in 1997. The report addresses technical opportunities for mutually beneficial collaboration between the United States and other international fusion research programs. A number of outstanding opportunities are discussed.     

The Report of the Subpanel to FESAC Concerning Alternative Concepts

This is the July 1996 report of a subpanel of the US Department of Energy Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC), charged with reviewing the present status of fusion alternative concept development and the prospects for alternative concepts not only as fusion power systems but also the scientific contributions of alternative concept research to the fusion energy sciences program and to plasma science in general.     

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.     

2002 Fusion Summer Study Executive Summary

The 2002 Fusion Summer Study was conducted July 8–19, 2002, in Snowmass, CO, and carried out a critical assessment of major next steps in the fusion energy sciences program in both magnetic fusion energy (MFE) and inertial fusion energy (IFE). The conclusions of this study were based on analysis led by over 60 conveners working with hundreds of members of the fusion energy sciences community extending over eight months. This effort culminated in two weeks of intense discussion by over 250 U.S. and 30 foreign fusion physicists and engineers present at the 2002 Fusion Summer Study. This is the Executive Summary of the study report. Details are posted at http://web.gat.com/snowmass     

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 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.     

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.     

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.     

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 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.