Overview talks were presented on "Overview of LHD Experiments and Helical Reactor Design," by Akiko Sagara; on "Progress of the EU Power Plant Study," by David Massonier; and "Overview of US Power Plant Studies," by Farrokh Najmabadi. A talk was also presented, and a paper distributed, on "Design Windows and Roadmaps for Laser Fusion Reactors," by Yashuji Kozaki. Other noteworthy talks were given on "System Studies for EU Power Plant Studies," by Ian Cook and on "Future Trend of Compact Tokamak Power Reactor," by Satoshi Nishio. There was a special session on Socio-economics, with talks by Steve Dean, Satoshi Konishi, Ron Miller and G. C. Tosato. Other sessions dealt with detailed design issues.

The Japanese Helical Reactor, which is designed based on data from the billion dollar class LHD (Large Helical Device), is 10m major radius, 1m minor radius plasma, producing 1 GW of fusion power. It has a neutron wall loading of about 2 MW per meter-square and a divertor heat load of 4.4 MW per meter square. It is fueled by pellet injection and gas puffing. Sagara said that recent experiments in LHD achieved 13.5 MW of heating power from a combination of neutral beams, ECH and ICH sources and that the electron temperature has reached 10 keV and ion temperature of 2 keV at a density of 5 x 10(18) m3, with an energy confinement time of 0.06 sec. In other discharges, ion temperatures of 5 keV, densities of 10(20), confinement times of 0.36 sec and betas of 3.2% have been reached, albeit not simultaneously. He said that discharges as long as 2 minutes have been produced and that no disruptions have ever been seen.

David Massonier stated that the EU power plant studies were being conducted "to establish coherence and priorities within the EU fusion programme." After a year of preparatory work, design studies began in earnest in July 2001. Four 1.5 Gigawatt electric point designs are being evaluated: In models A and B, ITER physics rules are used. Model A uses water as coolant and lithium lead in the blanket, while Model B uses helium as coolant in a pebble bed configuration. In models C & D, more advanced physics assumptions are used. Model C uses dual coolant of helium and lithium lead, while model D is self-cooled with lithium lead. The net reactor efficiencies of the four models are 27%, 43%, 44%, and 61%, respectively. The designs of models A and B are near final, while the designs of models C and D have only recently started. The main emphasis in the studies is on the physics assumptions, the divertor design, maintenance and balance of plant. They have concluded that highly efficient (70%) current drive systems are required. The have not computed cost of electricity. They expect to complete the designs in about one year from now.

Najmabadi stated that in FY 2002, magnetic fusion energy (MFE) power plant studies constitute about 30% of the US power plant studies effort, while inertial fusion energy (IFE) power plant studies constitute 70%. He noted that the IFE studies were not point design but analysis of critical design issues. The MFE studies are concerned with system level examination of the reversed field pinch. He stated that they were preparing to carry out a design study of a compact stellarator power plant. The IFE studies, to be completed by the end of FY 2002, are looking at three classes of chamber options: dry wall, wetted wall, and thick liquid wall. Also, six classes of targets are being evaluated. Details are included in his presentation, posted on the web site.

Kozaki indicated that he expected approval for Japan to construct a fast ignition laser facility called FIREX. The cost estimate for FIREX is about one-tenth the cost of the US. National Ignition Facility (NIF). A working committee, with Ken Tomabechi as chair, has been formed to plan this next step in the Japanese inertial fusion program. FIREX, as envisioned, would be an 80 kJ laser and produce about a 1 MJ fusion pulse. According to the plan presented, FIREX, whose purpose would be to study burning pellet physics and ignition, would be followed by construction of a steady burning facility called IFER, with laser energy of about 200 KJ and produce about 20 MJ per pulse at a 1 Hz rate. IFER would be followed by a demonstration power plant. IFER would operate around 2015-2020, according to the plan. For a copy of the paper, contact Y. Kozaki (kozaki@ile.osaka-u.ac.jp).

Cook, speaking on behalf of David Ward, provided more details on the four EU power plant models presented by David Massonier. He said that "All the plant models should have good safety and environmental characteristics" and "all are 1500 MWe. He said, Models A & B are "based on limited extrapolations in physics and technology, with a focus on credibility," that Model D is "advanced in all respects" and that Model C is "intermediate." Models A & B would use a low-activation martensitic steel, whereas Models C & D would use SiC as a structural material in the blanket. Models A & B have major radius of about 10 meters, while Models C & D have major radii of 7.5 and 6.1 meters, respectively. All have aspect ratio of three. He said that "It is becoming apparent that acceptable power stations can be accessed by a "fast track" route: through ITER, without major materials advances" and that "The potential remains for a more advanced second generation of power stations."

Nishio said, "the lower aspect ratio, the better reactor; the higher field, the better reactor." He presented a design for a spherical torus power plant called "Vector."

During the socio-economic session, Dean recommended that the "systems analyses efforts should be expanded to provide a broad range of studies" dealing with the following three questions: (1) can radioactivity be reduced by considering other (than DT) fuel cycles, (2) can complexity be reduced by considering concepts with cylindrical reactor chambers, and (3) can competitiveness be improved by considering non-electric applications? He said he thought the three main socio-economic issues for fusion were radioactivity, complexity as it affects maintenance, and competitiveness.

Konishi said, "Fusion will need a clear target of social eligibility and market share in the future." He said, "Fusion can be introduced into the market in 2050 when competitive cost of electricity (65 mil per kw-hr) is achieved," and that "construction speed, particularly initial tritium limits the growth (of market share)." He estimated that fusion could achieve 30% of global electricity production by 2100, with a global "cost savings" of $500 billion, which would "dwarf the development cost" of fusion.

Miller described the many issues and sources of information that go into computing the economics of future fusion systems and the uncertainties that result from social factors. He particularly noted technological uncertainties (such as siting requirements and implications of enhanced security to technology), economic uncertainties (such as cost of financing, and costs associated with regulation), environmental health uncertainties (such as global climate related restrictions and ecological concerns), and social/public acceptance uncertainties (such as changes in social value priorities and weapons proliferation concerns). He noted a paper to be presented the following week at the fusion technology conference by Cook, Miller and Ward: "Prospects for Economic Fusion Electricity." In that paper, the authors conclude "With modest physics optimization and anticipated near-term materials, the internal costs of fusion electricity would be about fifty percent more expensive than electricity from fossil fuels (not counting the costs of pollution abatement) and roughly comparable to renewables." They also state, "Fusion has small external costs, along with wind, about an order of magnitude lower than fossil." They say that in the second half of the next century, "the overall cost of fusion electricity is likely to be comparable with that from other environmentally responsible sources of electricity."

Tosato said, "Fusion R&D is unique as to internal scientific and technical challenges, but externally it faces known and common problems." He noted that "venture capital currently does not focus on the energy industry," and of what little there is ($600 million out of $38 billion), about 80% is concerned with oil and gas. He noted that the energy industry is among the lowest investors in R&D, devoting about 1% of sales, compared with about 14% for software and pharmaceutical industries. He described a process in Europe in which several groups of 6-8 people each met for 3 hour sessions to discuss fusion socio-economics. He said that managers and young people tended to believe that fusion would be a future energy option, with science teachers and environmentalists tending to think not. He said that among the groups, "solar is the preferred option for the future." He also described some 1-2 day public awareness workshops in Italy. The interest from these groups focussed on the need for local participation in the decision making process. He also described a process underway to compute both the direct costs of fusion electricity and the external costs of fusion and other energy sources. He referred interested parties to the EFDA web site: www.efda.org