Final Report of the Committee on a Strategic Plan for U.S. Burning Plasma Research (2019) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Appendix C: Strategic Planning for U.S. Burning Plasma Research from 2000 to 2018
Appendix C: Strategic Planning for U.S. Burning Plasma Research from 2000 to 2018
Pages 185-198
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 185... ...
report of the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) , Review of Burning Plasma Physics,1 to the 2015 strategic planning perspective provided to Congress by the DOE Office of Science in response to the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014.2 Background to U.S.
|
From page 186... ...
participation in the full range of activities, proposing and implementing science experiments, reviewing the overall cost of the ITER project, and concluding that ITER is highly likely to proceed to construction. On September 2002, and upon release of the 2002 FESAC report, Raymond Orbach, Director of the DOE Office of Science, tasked the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine7 to "carry out an assessment of a program of burning plasma experiments and its role in magnetic fusion research." The Burn
|
From page 187... ...
, it is imperative to have a strong balanced program that develops fusion science and technology in parallel."11 The committee found a set of overlapping scientific and technological challenges that determined the development path for fusion energy. These challenges are presented in Figure C.1 and comprise research in configuration optimization, burning plasma science, materials testing, fusion component testing, demonstration of environmentally and economically ttractive a fusion energy, and the underlying science and technology programs in basic plasma science, theory and simulation, materials science, and engineering science.
|
From page 188... ...
. In order to demonstrate fusion electricity, materials testing research and fusion component testing should accompany burning plasma research.
|
From page 189... ...
fusion science program." Following this recommendation, DOE's Twenty-Year Outlook14 listed ITER as the highest priority within the Office of Science in 2003 and again in 2007.15 The international agreement to build and operate a burning plasma experiment was finally formalized in Paris with the signing of the "Agreement on the Establishment of the ITER International Fusion Energy Organization for the Joint Implementation of the ITER Project" in November 2006.16 The ITER International Fusion Energy Organization (IO) is a public international organization, with limited privileges and legal immunities, involving the United States with China, the European Union, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and the Russian Federation.
|
From page 190... ...
participation in ITER should be addressed and include "existing gaps in planning for a Demonstration Power Plant, dissemination of information on and the results of ITER research activities to the broader scientific community, and planning for the recruitment and training of young scientists and engineers." Five subcommittees of FESAC provided important strategic guidance for the research needed to advance fusion energy science alongside ITER. These six sub committees completed their reports in the 5 years following the signing of the ITER agreement: • Report of the 2007 FESAC Subcommittee on Priorities, Gaps and Oppor tunities: Towards A Long-Range Strategic Plan for Magnetic Fusion Energy,20 which submitted four recommendations: (1)
|
From page 191... ...
The initial ITER physics basis was published as nine chap ters of Nuclear Fusion in 199926 and represented the combined expert knowledge of the international community for the ITER project. This physics basis was available to the 2004 NAS Burning Plasma Assessment Committee.
|
From page 192... ...
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Energy, 2007, Priorities, Gaps and Opportunities: Towards A Long-Range Strategic Plan for 20 Magnetic Fusion Energy, Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee, October, https://science.energy.gov/~/ media/fes/fesac/pdf/2007/Fesac_planning_report.pdf, Figure 1.
|
From page 193... ...
fusion energy science programs and user facilities have, and may continue to be, cut to pay for increasing ITER costs." The GAO recommended32 that "DOE formally propose the actions needed to set a reliable international project schedule and set a date to complete the U.S. fusion program's strategic plan." In response to cost and schedule concerns, the ITER Council charged an independent team, chaired by William Madia, former director of Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Stanford University vice president for the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, to determine the causes for ITER's cost increases and schedule delays and to make management recommendations.
|
From page 194... ...
Science Challenges and Research Opportunities in Plasma Materials Interactions,38 (2) ntegrated Simulations for Magnetic Fusion Energy Sciences,39 and I (3)
|
From page 195... ...
partnership in the ITER project was still unresolved, and Congress requested "the Secretary of Energy to submit to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a report recommend ing either that the Unites States remain a partner in the ITER project after October 2017 or terminate participation."43 The Secretary's report was delivered to Congress in May 2016 and opened with the statement, "ITER remains the best candidate today to demonstrate sustained burning plasma, which is a necessary precursor to demonstrating fusion energy power."44 The Secretary of Energy recommended that the United States remain a partner in the ITER project through FY2018 and ac knowledged the significant construction progress made at ITER and the substantial improvements of ITER project management, but also noted significant technical and management risks remain. Continued ITER membership of the Unites States past FY2018 awaits determination if project performance will be sustained and whether the larger costs needed for U.S.
|
From page 196... ...
6 . DOE, 2002, Burning Plasma Program Strategy to Advance Fusion Energy, Report of the Panel on a Burning Plasma Program Strategy to Advance Fusion Energy, DOE/SC-0060, Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee, Washington, DC, September; also available as S
|
From page 197... ...
25 . DOE, 2012, Opportunities for and Modes of International Collaboration in Fusion Energy Sciences Research during the ITER Era, DOE/SC-0149, Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee, February, https://science.energy.gov/~/media/fes/pdf/workshop-reports/20120309/Intl_Collab_ Final_SCSC-PRINT.pdf.
|
From page 198... ...
41 . DOE, 2015, Applications of Fusion Energy Sciences Research: Scientific Discoveries and New Technologies Beyond Fusion, Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee, Office of Science, September, https://science.energy.gov/~/media/fes/fesac/pdf/2015/2101507/FINAL_FES_ NonFusionAppReport_090215.pdf.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.