Fusion Energy Sciences Program Update

Transcription

1 U.S. Department of Energy s Office of Science Fusion Energy Sciences Program Update The National Academies Board on Physics and Astronomy April Meeting Dr. Erol Oktay Acting Director, Research Division Office of Fusion Energy Sciences On behalf of Dr. Jim Decker, Acting Associate Director

2 The U.S. Fusion Energy Sciences Program is in transition to a new era The U.S. participation in the multi-national ITER program; The U.S. ITER Project Office (USIPO) moves to ORNL; The establishment of the U.S. Burning Plasma Organization (USBPO); Increased FY 2007 Congressional budget request for the DOE-Science programs; A new OFES leadership is expected in about six months;

3 The conduct of technical work evolving - increased collaborations and cross fertilization Progress in fusion science and technology through increased interactions between experiments, theory, modeling, and sophisticated diagnostics; Coordination of international tokamak research by the International Tokamak Physics Activity (ITPA); New Fusion Science Centers established; Outreach to broader science and technology communities is a priority.

4 There are new opportunities and challenges in this new era Challenge of the ITER Agreement with seven parties for design, construction, operation, and decommissioning over a period of 35 years; ITER will be the first experiment for burning plasma research; Development and validation of integrated predictive computer codes for the future.

5 The U.S. Fusion Program is positioned to meet the ITER challenges and contribute to the nation s scientific culture The Program Mission is still appropriate for the new era: Advance plasma science, fusion science, and fusion technology; the knowledge base needed for an economically and environmentally attractive fusion energy source. ITER is an integral part of the U.S. domestic program; The FES programs providing direct support for ITER: Research on tokamak facilities (DIII-D and C-MOD), Theory and Modeling, Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing (SciDAC) Technology Program International collaborations

6 Major U.S. Magnetic Fusion Facilities DIII-D Tokamak General Atomics Doublet III Started Operations In 1978 National Spherical Torus Experiment Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Torus started Operations in 1999 Massachusetts Institute of Technology C-MOD Started Operations in October 1991 Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory National Compact Stellarator Experiment Alcator C-MOD Fabrication: FY

7 The U.S. Fusion Program also includes other major toroidal configurations National Spherical Torus Experiment (NSTX) at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL); National Compact Stellarator Experiment (NCSX) under construction at PPPL; Madison Symmetric Torus (MST) at the University of Wisconsin

8 The DIII-D tokamak is the largest U.S. magnetic fusion facility Operated by General Atomics at San Diego as a national fusion facility; OFES provides 20% of the DIII-D budget directly to major collaborators; A major contributor to ITER physics design; A major partner in many joint experiments by the ITPA.

9 DIII-D Has New Capabilities to Support ITER and Advanced Tokamak Research After a 12-month shutdown to allow for an extensive set of facility modifications to enhance its scientific capabilities, DIII-D will operate for 12 weeks in FY 2006 and 12 weeks in FY 2007 to carry out research in several key areas of advanced tokamak (AT) science: The rotation of one neutral beam line to inject opposite the other three will enable studies of slowly rotating plasmas, similar to those expected in ITER, A new lower divertor structure will improve pumping and density control in advance Double Null Divertor and ITER Single Null Divertor shapes, Replacement of short pulse microwave sources with long pulse capability will improve current drive and current profile control for AT studies, Neutral beam line in new counter-injection position New water cooled lower divertor shelf First new long pulse tube in its modified socket (below) and a developmental depressed collector tube (right) Over 20 new or improved diagnostic capabilities.

10 C-Mod Well Positioned to Support ITER C-Mod will operate for 14 weeks in FY2006 and 15 weeks in FY 2007 to carry out experiments in several key areas of advanced tokamak research: Clear signatures of LH driven electrons seen at expected power levels Lower Hybrid Current Drive Steady-state scenarios All metal high-z plasma facing components Disruption mitigation Active density control with new cryopump Unique regimes: ITER magnetic field, density, power density, plasma pressure

11 NSTX Has New Capabilities to Support ITER and Future STs NSTX will operate for 11 weeks in FY 2006 and 12 weeks in FY 2007 to carry out research on several key areas of toroidal confinement science: MSE Provides Data Needed to Determine Equil. & q profile Macroscopic stability - resistive wall mode stabilization Turbulence and transport Li wall coating, low recycling regime Waves and energetic particles Solenoid free start-up, ramp-up and sustainment with Coaxial Helicity Injection and Radio Frequency Waves

12 MST conducting world-leading RFP research With joint funding from DOE and NSF, the Madison Symmetric Torus (MST) will carry out experiments in several key areas of reversed field pinch research: Physics of magnetic self-organization Confinement, transport, beta limits, astrophysics links Pulsed reactor scenario development Programmable power supply First application of auxiliary power to RFP Lower Hybrid, electron Bernstein wave, neutral beam, oscillating field Current Drive Novel diagnostic development Fast Thomson scattering Fizeau Effect laser for e - flow velocity Multi-point Charge Exchange Recombination Spectroscopy (CHERS) Oscillating Field Current Drive (OFCD) has already demonstrated 10% CD thus far, with plans to achieve >20% in FY06

13 U.S. Department of Energy Theory World Class Science Office of Science U.S. is the world leader in fusion theory Major effort to develop an integrated simulation of burning plasma Will enable the U.S. to fully mine the burning plasma science in ITER Simulation of turbulence spreading in a collisionless plasma using a massively parallel computer

14 Enabling technology program contributes to ITER and supports current experiments Supports areas outside of US ITER contributions, but still contributes to ITER success (e.g. Tritium in mixed materials, all metal tokamaks) Utilizes ITER as a test bed for technology (e.g. Test Blanket modules) Develops longer range vision (e.g. system studies) and technology for machines beyond ITER

15 International collaboration is a critical element of fusion research in the U.S. The U.S. has a long history of international collaborations in fusion research; Both bilateral and International Energy Agency (IEA) agreements have been effective; JET at the Culham Laboratory in UK and JT-60U at Naka site in Japan are the largest operating tokamaks in the world; Korea, China, Japan, and India are building new superconducting tokamaks; U.S. scientists collaborate with all these programs; A new charge to the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) to evaluate enhanced U.S. collaborations with these programs.

16 The program achieves breadth by research on smaller Innovative Confinement Concepts The fusion program has been rich in different magnetic configurations; The advancement in fusion has been evolutionary, benefiting from innovations in both small scale experiments and in larger tokamaks or stellarators; Most concepts have a toroidal configuration; some are linear; Broad portfolio enriches the scientific content of the program and contributes training of workforce for the future.

17 Innovative Confinement Concepts Helically Symmetric Experiment University of Wisconsin, Madison SSPX HSX MTF Magnetized Target Fusion Los Alamos National Laboratory/AFRL SIHI St eady Inductive Helicity Injection University of Washington, Seattle Sustained Spheromak Plasma Experiment Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory FRC Field Reversed Configuration Formation and Sustainment University of Washington, Seattle LDX Levitated Dipole Experiment Columbia University/MIT

18 The NSF/DOE Partnership in Basic Plasma Science and Engineering Managed under a five year MOU between NSF and DOE; The DOE contribution in FY 2006 is $5.8M matched by the NSF; Currently the DOE is funding 35 universities through this partnership; Center for Magnetic Self-Organization in Laboratory and Astrophysics at the University of Wisconsin; Primarily funded by NSF, with some funding contributions from DOE; Two Fusion Science Centers established in response to National Research Council Recommendations in 2001; The Center for Multi-scale Plasma Dynamics a joint program of University of Maryland and UCLA (with collaborators from MIT, Princeton University, and Univ. of Michigan) Fusion Science Center for Extreme States of Matter and Fast Ignition Physics (University of Rochester)

19 Status of International Negotiations June Fall 2005 Negotiations ending in Dec 2005 Jan/Feb 2006 March Cadarache, France was selected as the host site for ITER. Kaname Ikeda was designated as the Director General Nominee of the ITER Organization. India joined ITER as an equal, non-host partner. Allocation of hardware was finalized among the 7 parties. Text of the International ITER Agreement was completed. A schedule was determined which will lead to signing of the Agreement. DGN Ikeda announced that he has taken up his duties and is finally sitting in his office in Cadarache. Negotiations

20 Spring 2006 Activities Leading to Initialing of the Agreement and Review by Congress April 1, ITER Heads of Delegation met in Japan: to resolve any remaining issues confirm text and call negotiations complete Select Norbert Holtcamp for the position of Principal Deputy Director General Nominee, April 1 through May 24, each party will conduct a domestic review of all texts May 24, Ministerial meeting in Brussels The Agreement and supporting documents are to be initialed by the 7 parties and texts will become fixed U.S. will submit Agreement to Congress (June 2006) for 120-day review per Energy Policy Act requirement. Negotiations

21 US Allocation of Hardware as determined in December 2005 following India joining the ITER Project 7 Central Solenoid Windings 8% Toroidal Field Conductor 15% port-based diagnostics 100% Ion Cyclotron Transmission lines 100% Electron Cyclotron Transmission lines 20% Limiters for Blanket Shield Roughing pumps, standard components Steady-state power supplies Tokamak exhaust processing system Pellet Injector 75% Cooling for divertor, vacuum vessel, scale This list represents a 9.1% hardware contribution to the overall international ITER Project

22 07 Congressional Budget Published Feb 06 The funding profile is a preliminary estimate incorporating the key results of the December 2005 negotiations. Shifts between OPC and TEC funding have been made consistent with the intentions of DOE to provide for R&D and design in support of the MIE project. During FY 2006, several U.S. reviews are scheduled to validate the preliminary cost and schedule profile for the U.S. Contributions to ITER MIE project. International ITER Project activities in FY 2006 will also validate the international cost and schedule which can have an affect on the U.S. Contributions to ITER project.

23 The U.S. Burning Plasma Organization (USBPO) working on several tasks The objective is to coordinate U.S. research for ITER support and burning plasmas (both during ITER construction and operation) Prof. Ray Fonck of the Univ. of Wisconsin Director Dr. Tony Taylor - Deputy Director; The USBPO Council provides community input; Prof. Jim VanDam (Texas) Chair Dr. Amanda Hubbard (MIT) - Co-chair, Both the USBPO and USIPO comprise full US involvement in ITER

24 U.S. Burning Plasma Organization Comprised of 3 Elements Council [Community Governance] Directorate [Coordination, Support] Topical Groups Task Groups [Implementation: Working Groups] Entry: Join Topical Groups of Interest

25 U.S. BPO: Help Apply Community Activities & Expertise to BP-Relevant Issues USBPO Campaigns, Tasks (E.G.) Diagnostics Pedestal Tritium Retention Disruption Mitigation RWM BP Planning Alternates Implications ETC Problems to Address. Burning Plasma Regime Long-Pulse Large Scale Macroscopic Stability Wave-Plasma Interactions Alpha Particles Self-Heated Exothermic Strong Couplings Diagnostics Simulation & Modeling Transport & Confinement Knowledge Base & Capabilities Energetic Particles Plasma- Boundary Interfaces Integrated Scenarios Technology Plasma and Engineering Science Topical Areas Operations, Control

26 Most scientists funded by [OFES] do not actively participate in the wider scientific culture. As a result, the flow of scientific information out of and into the field is weak. Nor is the high-quality science in the program widely appreciated outside the field. Indeed, the broader scientific community holds a generally negative view of fusion science. -National Research Council s Assessment of the DOE s Office of Fusion Energy Sciences Program, 2001 The Secretary of Energy must submit to Congress a plan which ensures that communication of scientific results and methods between the fusion energy science community and the broader scientific and technology communities is improved. -Energy Policy Act of 2005, Sec. 972(b)(1)(E)

27 Outreach to Broader S&T Communities a Priority All of fusion will benefit from greater communication with and respect from other areas of science and technology No direct incentive for broader communities to initiate Energy Policy Act requirement and a good idea OFES will track Number of presentations at local colleges, alma maters, and other universities Collaborations with scientists outside of plasma physics Talks at non-plasma specific science meetings Attempts to publish in broader science journals Rejections okay data still useful First annual report from major facilities, ICC, and Theory leaders to be presented at March 2007 budget planning meeting Line in grants and cooperative agreements may be added

28 National Academy of Sciences Report Fusion is part of SC s part of the President s American Competitiveness Initiative and Advanced Energy Initiative

29 Office of Science FY 2007 Office Congressional of Science Budget Request FY 2007 Congressional Budget Request U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science FY 2005 Approp. (dollars in thousands) FY 2007 FY 2006 President's Approp. Request FY 2007 vs. FY 2006 Basic Energy Sciences 1,083,616 1,134,557 1,420, ,423 Advanced Scientific Computing Research 226, , , ,970 Biological and Environmental Research Base program 487, , , ,132 Congressional-directed projects 79, , ,700 Total, Biological and Environmental Research 566, , ,263-69,568 High Energy Physics 722, , , ,405 Nuclear Physics 394, , , ,026 Fusion Energy Sciences 266, , , ,306 Science Laboratories Infrastructure 37,498 41,684 50,888 +9,204 Science Program Direction 154, , , ,759 Workforce Development for Teachers and Scientists 7,599 7,120 10,952 +3,832 Small Business Innovation Research/Technology Transfer 113,621 Safeguards and Security 67,168 68,025 70,987 +2,962 Subtotal, Science 3,640,712 3,596,391 4,101, ,319 Use of prior year balances -5,062 Total, Science 3,635,650 3,596,391 4,101, ,319

30 Science Facility Operations Enabling R&D OFES Total FY 2007 Fusion Energy Sciences Congressional Budget Request ($ Millions) FY 2005 FY 2006 Actual Appropriations FY 2007 Request DIII-D C-Mod NSTX NCSX ITER Non-ITER /31/06

31 Fusion Energy Sciences ($ in thousands) Science FY 2005 Sept AFP FY 2006 Appropriations FY 2007 Request Enabling R&D FY 2005 Sept AFP FY 2006 Appropriations FY 2007 Request DIII-D Research C-MOD Research International Collaborations Diagnostics Other SBIR/STTR (science) Subtotal Tokamaks NSTX Research Experimental Plasma Research HEDP ATLAS MST Research NCSX Research Subtotal Alternates Research 24,042 8,636 5,116 3,894 5, ,052 15,992 21,656 14,640 (0) 6, ,484 24,412 8,510 4,826 3,763 5,006 6,945 53,462 15,845 21,778 15,856 (990) 6, ,550 24,300 8,890 5,064 3,854 3,730 7,262 53,100 16,696 19,990 11,949 (0) 6, ,302 Engineering Research Plasma Technologies (MFE) Advanced Design & Analysis (MFE) Enabling R&D for ITER Materials Research (MFE) Enabling R&D Total Total Fusion Energy Sciences DIII-D Alcator C-Mod NSTX NCSX 18,403 2, ,338 28, ,947 55,751 22,038 34,387 18,273 14,205 2,489 3,449 7,043 27, ,644 54,692 21,717 33,985 17,770 12,945 2,550 23,000 4,687 43, ,950 56,662 22,831 35,118 16,597 Theory Advanced Computing/SciDAC 24,928 25,749 4,033 4,222 23,900 6,970 ITER (Preparations & MIE) Non-ITER 5, ,496 25, ,494 60, ,950 General Plasma Science 12,176 13,760 13,941 Science Total 148, , ,213 Facility Operation DIII-D Alcator C-Mod NSTX NCSX Facility Ops times in weeks Other GPE GPP ITER Preparations U.S. Contributions to ITER (MIE) 31,709 13,402 18,495 17,500 16/18/18 1, ,643 5, ,280 13,207 18,140 17,019 7/14/11 1, ,791 5,835 15,866 32,362 13,941 18,422 15,900 12/15/12 2, , ,000 Facility Operations Total 89, , ,555

32 Research Division Dr. James Decker Acting Associate Director of Science for Fusion Energy Sciences Al Opdenaker Shahida Afzal Suellen Velthuis Executive Assistant Systems Studies, Budget Administrative Specialist (Personnel) Steve Eckstrand, Gene Nardella, & Erol Oktay, Acting Directors (2 months each) Marty Carlin, Administrative Specialist (Programmatic) Terry Jones John Sauter Administrative Specialist (Procurement) Program Analyst Samuel Barish Stellarator Program Manager, HBCU Curt Bolton Theory Team Leader, U. of Texas Helimac Michael Crisp General Plasma Science, Atomic Theory Rostom Dagazian SciDAC, Theory, MHD, RF Physics Steve Eckstrand NSTX, Fusion Simulation Project, Columbia U. Vacant University Toroidal Expts Office of Fusion Energy Sciences Mark Foster DIII-D Site Rep. T.V. George Heating and Fueling, Facility Upgrades John Mandrekas + Modeling and Simulation Darlene Markevich Diagnostics, Junior Faculty, Education/Outreach Gene Nardella** Technology, SBIR/STTR Erol Oktay** DIII-D, International Tokamaks, Burning Plasma Adam Rosenberg Alcator C-Mod, MST, LDX Barry Sullivan NCSX Project Management, ESH, Fac. Ops. Upgrades Francis Thio HEDP, Innovative Confinement Concepts Team Leader Principal Acting Division Director *M&O Contractor + IPA (Georgia Inst. of Tech.) **Dual Capacity ( ) Area of Emphasis Visual Information Specialist ITER & International Division Michael Roberts, Director Sandy Newton, Administrative Specialist (International) Warren Marton U.S. ITER Program Manager Sharon Stevens Assistant ITER Program Manager John Glowienka * ITER Support Gene Nardella** ITER Technology Officer Erol Oktay** ITER Science Officer Marvin Singer* ITER Agreement Issues Princeton Site Office Jerry Faul Manager Oak Ridge Office Vacant ITER Federal Project Director Debra Frame International Administration 04/08/06

33 New Charge to FESAC Evolution of the Fusion Energy Sciences Program

34 Magnetic Fusion Research is a Worldwide Activity: Optimizing the Configuration for Fusion C-Mod, Tokamak MIT JET, Large Tokamak EU W7-X, Large Superconducting Stellarator EU National Spherical Torus Experiment PPPL (also MAST EU) KSTAR, EAST, SST-1 Superconducting Tokamaks, Korea, China, India DIII-D, Tokamak General Atomics LHD, Large Superconducting Stellarator JA JT-60U, Large Tokamak JA