Overview of the Physics R&D Roadmap for Innovative Confinement Concepts S. Woodruff 14th July 2005 Presenting at the PSI-Center Kick-Off Meeting.

Overview of the Physics R&D Roadmap for Innovative Confinement Concepts

S. Woodruff

14th July 2005

Presenting at the PSI-Center Kick-Off Meeting

Outline

1. Roadmap purpose and outline

2. Grounding the roadmap

3. Planning for the near-term

4. Developing long term vision

1. Roadmap purpose and outline

2. Grounding the roadmap

3. Planning for the near-term

4. Developing long term vision

Roadmaps have been used to help plan largecomplicated R&D activities.

ICC roadmap will be like existing reports, particularly:

- Siemon’s MTF roadmap (20 pages)

- Goldston’s 35 year plan (20 pages)

- DoE Robotics and Intelligent Machines roadmap (100 pages)

- FESAC Priorities Panel report (150 pages)

- FESAC Opportunities in Alternative Confinement concepts (350 pages)

Although, will be slightly different (not commissioned by FESAC, scope broadening with time)

In general, R&D roadmaps serve as pathwaysto the future.

They call attention to needs in scientific development paths and provide a structure for organizing R&D.

They communicate needs and expectations to a wider community.

1) to outline a coherent vision for innovative fusion concepts in general;

2) to the best extent possible, outline the technical challenges posed by each ICC;

3) to draft a coherent plan for addressing these issues bothcomputationally and experimentally.IC

C R

OA

DM

AP

The content and form of the roadmap isdecided on collectively: community effort.

Usually, there is a general section that grounds the activity in the mission of the DoE and OFES, and discuss future plans.

There are usually more specific sections relating to the individual experiments, and time-lines for key issues.

1. DoE/OFES motivation and history, present-day context, cost arguments, key issues, progress, portfolio approach;2. General outline for the development of the ICCs (e.g. adevelopment time-line with decision points (or how one moves from a CE to PoP, and how long does it take)3. Device specific input to be provided by the PIs, outlining key issues and technical challenges for the next 5 years.

ICC

RO

AD

MA

P

PI

AllW

orki

ng I

CC

R&

D R

oadm

ap O

utli

ne

PI

AllW

orki

ng I

CC

R&

D R

oadm

ap O

utli

ne

1. Purpose of roadmap

2. Grounding the roadmap

3. Planning for the near-term

4. Developing long-term vision

Roadmaps start with great certainty: groundedin the DOE goals.

Today, the US Department of Energy (DoE) has set out a number of general goals. Those specifically relating to Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) are:

General Goal 4, Energy Security: Enhance energy security by developing technologies that foster a diverse supply of affordable and environmentally sound energy, improving energy efficiency, providing for reliable delivery of energy, exploring advanced technologies that make a fundamental change in our mix of energy options, and guarding against energy emergencies.

General Goal 5, World Class Scientific Research Capacity: Provide world-class scientific research capacity needed to: ensure the success of Department missions in national and energy security; advance the frontiers of knowledge in physical sciences and areas of biological, medical, environmental, and computational sciences, or provide world-class research facilities for the Nation’s science enterprise.

Roadmaps start with great certainty: groundedin the mission of the OFES.

From the 2004 OFES Program Plan:

Mission: The mission of the Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) program is to provide the national basic research effort to advance plasma science, fusion science, and fusion technology—the knowledge base needed for an economically and environmentally attractive fusion energy source.

Program Goal 04.24.00.00/05.24.00.00: Answer the key scientific questions and overcome enormous technical challenges to harness the power that fuels our sun.

http://www.sc.doe.gov/measures/scprograms/fes/fesplan.html

http://www.ofes.fusion.doe.gov/More_HTML/FESAC_Charges_Reports.html

Many FESAC reports since 1990 lead to the formation of the Innovative Confinement Concepts program…

And established over the course of a decadeof program-planning and restructuring…

1990 Alternates Cancelled

1992 FEAC advises program strategy, suggests program for Innovative Fusion Concepts

1995 PCAST (given flat budgets, what is the plan?)

1996 FEAC: A restructured fusion energy science program

1996 Conference report accompanies Energy and Water Subcommittee

1996 OFES Strategic Plan for a restructured fusion energy science program

1996 FESAC: Opportunities in Alternative Confinement Concepts (350 page document)

1997 First ICC Workshop

1999 Snowmass I (Barnes leads EC discussion), Anne’s Policy for ICCs

2002 Snowmass II, Goldston 35 year plan

2004 FESAC Priority Panel Report

A brief history of Innovative Confinement Concepts…

1. Purpose of roadmap

2. Grounding the roadmap

3. Planning for the near-term

4. Developing long term vision

ICC

RO

AD

MA

PTogether we’ll decide on the key issues - which may be different from other roadmaps

Key issues posed as questions in the FESAC Priorities Panel report included, e.g.:

Key physics issues for ICCs might be similar, e.g.:

- How to control particle inventory (+impurities)?

- How are magnetic fields generated?

- What processes dominate energy confinement?

- …?

An example of a key issue time line from The Robotics and Intelligent Machines RM

An example of an integrated time-line from the OFES Program Plan.

1. Purpose of roadmap

2. Grounding the roadmap

3. Planning for the near-term

4. Developing long-term vision

While the details of ICC reactors are unknown,certain characteristics can be discussed…

A discussion of the possible advantages of an ICC reactor would include:

1. General characteristics (simplicity, pulsed vs steady state, attractiveness to utility companies, advantages of a portfolio approach)

2. Cost arguments (development costs, core costs, etc)

Continued concept innovation remainsa necessary component of ICC program.

How does the ICC program respond to thechallenges presented by ITER?

How to develop ICCs in the context of BPX/ITER?

Overlap with ITER? In what regards?

A strength of the ICC program is it’s overlapwith other scientific disciplines.

ICC

RO

AD

MA

PRoadmap will include large technical appendix covering the physics of ICCs.

•Contributions from PI’s relating to the respective devices;

•An outline of the physics of the Innovative Confinement Concepts;

•Detailed cost arguments;

•A bibliography of ICC reactor visions.

Summary

A ~100 page document will be produced by next March that will outline a vision for the ICC program.

To the best extent possible, the advantages and technical challenges posed by each ICC will be outlined.

A coherent near-term plan (5 years) for addressing these issues both computationally and experimentally will be presented.

A longer-term (~15 years) vision for the ICC program will be outlined, including discussion of reactors.

A large technical appendix will contain a summary of the physics of the ICCs.

Roadmap aims to provide a clear path towards DOE and OFES goals

Extra Slides

1. Scope of roadmap (devices to be included…)

2. Timeline for Roadmap

3. Current working outline of roadmap (7/10/2005)

4. Example of PI input (from the 1996 FESAC Opportunities in Alternative Concepts report)

Scope

1. Initially will be limited to UW experiments, but aiming to broaden scope to embrace wider set:

Device Type Location Since StatusSSPX Spheromak LLNL 1999 CEHIT-SI Spheromak U Wash. 2004 CETCS Frc RPPL 1996 CEET Tokamak UCLA 1999 CEHSX Stellarator U Wisc 1999 CELDX Dipole MIT 1999 CEINES-E IEC LANL 2001 CEPFX-I IEC LANL 1999 CEFRX-L FRC LANL 2003 CEPegasus ST UWisc 1998 CEFIREX Frc Cornell 2001 CEMCX Mirror UMD 2001 CEBernouli exp Mirror UTexas 1999 CEZAP Z-pinch UWash 1998 CECTIX CT injection Udavis 1999 BasicMRX reconnection PPPL 1995 BasicSSX Frc/spheromak Swarthmore 1996 BasicBSX Spheromak Caltech 1999 Basic

Timeline

1. Define scope and review compile literature by May

2. Announcement made beginning August

3. 1st draft of general sections in August

4. Satellite meeting at APS

5. Document compiled and iterated before final discussion at the ICC06 meeting

Obtaining device-specific inputE

xam

ple

of F

orm

ulai

c in

put f

rom

PI

Exa

mpl

e of

For

mul

aic

inpu

t fro

m P

I