The DOE Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (SEAB) Fusion Task Force (FPN99-15, FPN99-19, FPN99-22, FPN99-27) has issued a draft of its Preliminary Report. A public meeting is scheduled to discuss the draft, on the morning of July 9 (FPN99-27) at the Crowne Plaza Hotel, 14th and K Sts NW, Washington, DC.

A PDF file of this report has been posted on the SEAB web site and may be downloaded from http://www.hr.doe.gov/seab.

All persons interested in commenting on the draft in written form or at the July 9th SEAB Task Force on Fusion Energy meeting DC may do so according to the following guidelines from the Public Notice for the July 9 meeting:

"Members of the public will be heard in the order in which they sign up at the beginning of the meeting. The Task Force will make every effort to hear the views of all interested parties. Written comments may be submitted to Skila Harris, Executive Director, Secretary of Energy Advisory Board, AB-1, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20585."

SYNOPSIS

In its draft report, the Task Force states, "It is the Task Force's view that the threshold scientific question -- namely, whether a fusion reaction producing sufficient net energy gain can be sustained and controlled -- can and will be solved.

"Nonetheless, there remain significant barriers to the realization of fusion as a significant contributor to the worldâs energy supply. Progress requires advancing fundamental scientific knowledge (from controlling turbulence, to optimizing the magnetic-field configuration, to enhancing the fusion power gain), resolving very difficult materials issues (e.g., developing a vessel that can withstand high temperatures and intense neutron flux), finding answers to difficult engineering challenges (e.g., constructing a reliable and repairable system), and proving economic feasibility (solving these problems in a manner that does not make fusion prohibitively expensive). Many years of persistent effort will be required to overcome these challenges.

"In spite of the extended effort and expense that will be required, the fusion program deserves continued support because of its unique energy potential. Constraints on supply and limits on the atmospheric loading of combustion products will eventually require that we diminish our reliance on fossil fuels. Because of this reality, the Department is wisely advancing a portfolio of energy technologies to meet future energy needs. Indeed, in light of the promise of fusion and the risks arising from increasing worldwide energy demand and from eventually declining energy supply, we simply cannot afford to fail to pursue fusion energy aggressively."

Magnetic Fusion

With respect to the Magnetic Fusion Energy (MFE) program, the Task Force said that they endorse the "revised focus of the program" away from a "nearly exclusive focus on the achievement of fusion energy in tokamaks to a broader program that would also explore scientific foundations and other confinement approaches." They said "OFES (DOE Office of Fusion Energy Sciences) has begun to expand the fusion portfolio and it should be encouraged to continue this effort." They said, "It is our view that the Department must participate in international activities that enhance our fusion effort. Communication with the Congress on these points is essential."

Inertial Fusion

With respect to Inertial Fusion (IFE), the Task Force noted that current thinking "favor an ion-beam driver," but they said, "Given the immature state of the technology, however, it is not appropriate at this time to select only one driver technology for continued exploration." They also said, "There is a need for more detailed engineering studies of IFE."

Balance and Funding

With respect to "balance and funding," the Task Force said, "OFES alone can not dictate the overall direction of the (fusion) effort and, as a result, it should not be expected that the overall fusion program will be balanced solely in terms of the energy objective. Rather, OFES should be expected to use its program to leverage activities undertaken elsewhere (in the world and in DOE Defense Programs) to assure effective collaboration and coordination and to establish world leadership in selected niche areas." They said, "In light of the promise of fusion, the Task Force concludes that the overall funding for fusion energy is now subcritical." They said, "Given the large DP (DOE Defense Programs) program in inertial fusion research, only a relatively modest increase in the OFES budget is needed to support the IFE activities that should be funded by the OFES program." They said, "Since the present funding is barely adequate to sustain the restructured MFE program, and since OFES is the sole steward of MFE, increases in IFE funding within OFES should come from an increment to the present budget. Moreover, DP should dedicate a small amount of funds to energy-specific or dual-purpose activities, consistent with its mission statement, so as to exploit the synergy between the defense work and IFE science."

Strategy, Management, and Structure

The Task Force states, "While very significant progress in scientific understanding of plasma and fusion device behavior has been achieved, the DOE fusion program finds itself at a crossroads. The program is perceived to lack a strategy and programmatic focus. In fact, the restructuring may have created an impression of ambivalence about whether energy or science should dominate the agenda. The frequent instructions by Congress to the Department should be seen as signs that Congress does not have confidence in the program." The Task Force notes that "As a result of the many thoughtful reviews of the program, augmented (by) the community's efforts, progress on developing a programmatic strategy is underway." They say, "Efforts to define a sensible path leading to a substantial energy contribution from fusion should be given continuing emphasis." They say, "It is crucial that this planning encompass the identification and timely resolution of the important engineering and economic problems that must be overcome if fusion energy is to be a practical energy source."

The Task Force says, "Moreover, to achieve its goal, the program must be nurtured through strong management -- a management that leads the effort toward the fusion energy goal at reasonable pace, with sufficient budget, with solid accountability, and high-quality science and technology." They say, "Management should seek to restore credibility by articulating clear and sensible milestones and goals and to deliver them." They state, "Given constrained budgets, the wide variety of options, and the linkages of one issue to another, increasingly sophisticated management of the program will be required."

The Task Force calls for "the application of new management tools and techniques." They say, "Given the complex nature of the fusion effort, an integrated program planning process is an absolute necessity." They say, "Proper management of the fusion program requires a comprehensive planning system that: provides visibility of program activities; provides the means to manage by performance; encourages fundamental, innovative scientific research; drives resource planning; provides linkage of accomplishments to goals; establishes accountability; describes activity interrelationships, and aids in integration among the base programs in OFES and DP and the fusion energy goal of practical fusion energy."

The Task Force states, "Management of the fusion energy effort is complicated by the fact that there is a separation of the magnetic (fusion program) and main locus of the inertial confinement effort being in different parts of the Department. This structure no doubt serves as an impediment to the establishment of a coherent and integrated program to pursue fusion energy. Although practical constraints no doubt inhibit major shifts in structure, coordination might be achieved by giving both the responsibility and authority for integration of the "virtual" combined program to a Deputy Undersecretary (who may already be dealing with other energy technology programs)."

Other Issues

The Task Force also commented on the following "Other Issues:" Materials, Plasma Science, Manpower, Engineering and Computer Simulation. With respect to Engineering, they stated, "While, given the state of knowledge, the program should now focus on developing the scientific underpinnings for fusion energy, the engineering challenges are also immense and early planning for them is warranted."

Conclusion

In a Conclusion section, the Task Force states, "The fusion program is in a state of transition and extensive self-examination in the aftermath of the restructuring and as a result of declining funding. Nonetheless, the Task Force believes that the foundation for a vibrant and valuable program is being created. Given the promise of the technology and the significant scientific advances, continuing support and efforts to strengthen the program are warranted."