October 2, 1997

FPN97-25 Fusion Program Notes


Pathways to Fusion Power

Fusion Power Associates Symposium
Snowmass Colorado, August 27-29, 1997

Top Level Summary
Prepared by Stephen O. Dean,
in collaboration with the symposium speakers

The symposium covered seven topics. The following is a top level summary of thoughts expressed on these topics. Though obviously not all of the 65 participants would agree on everything, what follows attempts to express what appeared to be a broad consensus.

TOPIC 1: What is our view of the future marketplace?

The marketplace for electric power in the U. S. is expected to become increasingly competitive in the near- and mid- term. Current conceptual designs of fusion power plants project cost of electricity higher than today's sources and hence could not compete today on economic grounds. In the long-term, projections are difficult. Factors like global warming or regional availability of fuels favor technologies like fusion. Although the opportunity for fusion to compete commercially is decades into the future, it is not too early for the fusion community to seek closer ties with its future customers. At a minimum, their interest is required for political support. However, their technical experience would also be valuable for guiding our R&D program. It is also important to note that market forces vary around the world and, in many other countries, the power industry is more government-controlled than the future projections for the U. S. A favorable trend in the U. S. is the emergence of large nuclear power plant operating companies. These companies may be more receptive to new nuclear technologies like fusion.

TOPIC 2: Will fusion enter the marketplace as an Electric Power Producer or as a supplier of some other needed product?

There are a range of possible commercial and military applications for both fusion itself and for technologies developed for fusion. Some of these might provide early demonstrations of the utility of fusion and/or fusion technologies. It is important to seek out such applications in the near- and mid- term, in view of the economics of the electric power market. Here again, it is important that there be early dialogue with potential customers, for the reasons given above for the electric power market.

TOPIC 3: Can other fuel cycles compete with the D-T fuel cycle?

Material presented at the symposium indicate that, on a physics basis, it will be difficult for other fuel cycles to compete with the D-T cycle. And, as indicated above, even the D-T cycle will have difficulty competing with other technologies on economic grounds. Nevertheless, advanced fuels may possess engineering, safety and/or environmental advantages and hence merit an active ongoing research effort, emphasizing concepts that might be uniquely matched to such cycles.

TOPIC 4: The Tokamak Path to Commercial Fusion

The development of the tokamak science and technology base has been a great success story and will benefit the evolution of any magnetic concept. Improvements in the conventional tokamak as well as more significant departures, such as the Spherical Torus, may well lead to commercial success. ITER represents an opportunity to leverage off the mainstream of the world fusion effort in both fusion science and fusion technology. If ITER proceeds into construction, the U. S. should attempt to be a significant participant.

TOPIC 5: Inertial Pathways to Commercial Fusion

The inertial fusion community has done outstanding science and technology work in the pursuit of its concepts and has provided a potential path to commercialization. However, additional work, not now pursued under weapons sponsorship, is required for commercial application. In view of the opportunity for leverage provided by the construction of the National Ignition Facility, the Office of Fusion Energy Sciences should actively develop the energy-related technologies for inertial fusion. All should strive to break down the barriers that separate the fusion community into inertial and magnetic "camps."

TOPIC 6: Promising (non-tokamak magnetic) Pathways to Commercial Fusion

There are a large number of concepts and variations on concepts and, despite FEAC and FESAC reviews of overall alternate concept policy, no agreed upon procedure is yet in place for setting priorities among them. Such a procedure should be established. Some alternates benefit from the extensive tokamak database more than others and hence progress on these concepts can be expedited. On the other hand, risk is reduced if some concepts explored are "orthogonal" to the toroidal magnetic concepts.

Although the DOE Office of Fusion Energy Sciences has announced plans to increase the level of effort on alternates, only modest increases have materialized thus far and the process for determining a new program balance is unclear. Though many concepts can apparently be explored at modest levels initially, the budgetary impact in future years of initiating a large number of concepts does not appear to have been thought through.

TOPIC 7: Do fusion power plants really require Low Activation Materials?

Materials are important to the commercial success of many technologies, especially nuclear technologies. Fusion will require advanced materials that function in a unique environment. A materials development program is thus essential for fusion. "Low activation" is a desirable attribute for fusion materials, but other attributes may be more important for both technical feasibility and economics. Therefore, a comprehensive program, which takes into account system tradeoffs, is required.

SYMPOSIUM SPEAKERS:

Mohamed Abdou
J. W. Anderson
David Baldwin
Roger Bangerter
Everett Bloom
Ed Cheng
Don Dautovich
John Davis
John DeLooper
Rob Goldston
Rich Hawryluk
Bill Hogan
Rush Holt
Jerry Kulcinski
Grant Logan
Kathy McCarthy
Dale Meade
Tom Mehlhorn
Georg Miley
Ron Miller
Farrokh Najmabadi
Bill Nevins
Steve Payne
Martin Peng
John Perkins
Miklos Porkolab
John Santarius
John Sethian
John Sheffield
Dice Siemon
Ron Stambaugh
Keith Thomassen
Mark Tillack
Les Waganer
Clement Wong


For more information, contact: Stephen O. Dean