U.S. Department of EnergyOffice of Science

Raymond FonckAssociate Director

of Fusion Energy Sciences

Fusion Energy Sciences Update

Presented toNRC Board on Physics and Astronomy

April 27, 2007

www.science.doe.gov/ofes

U.S. Fusion Energy Sciences Program Elements

o Stewardship of Plasma Science

o Joint Program for High Energy Density Laboratory Physics (w/NNSA)

o Fusion Energy Science and Technology

The Center for Magnetic Self-Organizationin Laboratory and Astrophysical Plasmas

• An NSF Physics Frontier Center and NSF/DOE partnership

• Unites laboratory (fusion) physicists and astrophysicists to solve common problems

•Overarching questionsWhy is the universe magnetized?How do magnetic fields affect matter?

• Topics: reconnection, dynamo, momentum transport, ion heating,, magnetic turbulence

• Institutions: Wisconsin, Princeton, Chicago, LANL, U. New Hampshire, Swarthmore, SAIC, LLNL

PlasmaScience

CSMO: Hall Reconnection

An effect beyond the standard MHD model,

alters rate of reconnection - why are solar flares so rapid?

Confirmed in experiment (MRX shown here)

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

arrows = reconnectingfield

colors show quadrupole nature of out-of-plane field,

a signature of Hall reconnection

observed in 3 CMSO experiments and in the magnetosphere!

PlasmaScience

Reports on HEDP Built Support

• Turner’s NRC Report 2003 “Connecting Quarks with the Cosmos”

• Davidson’s NRC Report 2003 “Frontiers in High Energy Density Physics: X-Games of Contemporary Physics”

• Community Workshop Report 2003 on “The Science and Applications of Ultrafast, Ultraintense Lasers”

• Report of the Interagency Working Group on the Physics of the Universe (IWG-POU), “A 21st Century Frontier for Discovery: The Physics of the Universe”

– The field of HEDP is compelling

– “In order to develop a balanced, comprehensive program, NSF will work with DOE, NIST and NASA to develop a science driven roadmap that lays out the major components of a national HEDP program, ….”

•An interagency Task Force on HEDP (TF-HEDP) was chartered to recommend how to address scientific opportunities in HEDP

HEDLP

The Joint Program in HEDLP

• OFES and NNSA ICF Office decided to establish a joint program in High Energy Density Laboratory Plasmas (HEDLP) to address the finding of the interagency TF-HEDP

– The joint program will provide stewardship of HEDLP while maintaining the interdisciplinary nature of this area of science

• Topical research areas include:– Laboratory astrophysics– Compressible dynamics and radiative hydrodynamics– Heavy ions, warm dense matter and strongly coupled plasmas– Dense plasmas in ultrahigh magnetic fields– Laser-plasma interactions– Inertial confinement fusion and fast ignition– HEDLP with ultra-fast and ultra-intense lasers

• Current HEDP program in OFES: Research in fast ignition, laser-plasma interactions, dense plasmas in ultrahigh magnetic fields, heavy ions and strongly coupled plasmas

• Scope and depth of the program will expand and grow with funding

HEDLP

What’s Next for the Joint Program in HEDLP?

• Management plan for the joint program under discussion between OFES and NNSA– Interagency Task Force on HEDP report due soon

• An Advisory Committee will be established

• Series of Workshops initiated

– Help design a compelling research plan for HEDLP

• Budget Request for FY 2009 to be prepared for joint program

• Solicitations to be issued in FY 2008 to compete for FY 2009 funds

HEDLP

Fusion Science Center for Extreme State of Matter and Fast Ignition Physics:

HEDLP

Major Facilities are Presently Based on theTokamak Concept

•Joint ITPA experiments on DIII-D, C-MOD, NSTX, the European tokamaks JET and ASDEX-UG, and the Japanese tokamak JT-60U are investigating the scaling of energy confinement time with plasma pressure in ITER relevant plasmas.

DIII-D completed system upgrades and modifications in 2006 and began research in ITER-relevant low rotation regimes using balanced (co- and counter-current) neutral beam injection. Demonstrated that the threshold for rotational stabilization of the RWM using this method of slowing rotation is much lower than previously attained with magnetic braking techniques.

Alcator C-Mod successfully coupled approximately 850 kilowatts of RF power at the lower hybrid frequency to a 1 MA plasma and sustained nearly all of the current for over one current profile relaxation time. These results are in agreementwith theoretical calculations and imply that lower hybrid power could be used for current profile control in ITER.

NSTX scientists used a set of six non-axisymmetric feedback coils and improved equilibrium coils to carry out studies of error field reduction, plasma rotation control, and active resistive wall mode control in high performance plasmas. They were able to control the resistive wall mode successfully at high normalized pressure at ITER relevant rotation for a plasma skin time.

FusionScience

Multi-scale Nonlinear Turbulence Coupling andAnd Shear Flows Regulate Confinement Properties

NSTX µw scattering

L-Modek−4.3

k−3.0

H-Mode

ITG

Sup

pres

sed

ETG

Exc

ited?

Toka

mak

MeasuringRange

Minor Radius (r/a)0.4 0.46 0.57 0.63 0.70 0.82 0.85 1.0

1234

+

_

~

567

1.0x10 -1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

V θ Power Spectra

403020100

r/a=0.8 r/a=0.85 r/a=0.92

GAM

ZMFZonal Flow

Freq. (KHz)

DIII-D Turbulence Imaging:

FusionScience

"Spontaneous" Plasma Rotation with No External Momentum Input?

•Spontaneous/intrinsic toroidal rotation and enhanced confinement regimes

•Rotation increases with stored energy or pressure.

•For ITER, possibly high enough for resistive wall mode suppression.

•At present, there is no quantitative theoretical explanation.

•Needs pre-ITER resolution

•Connections to momentum transport and self-generated rotation in turbulent astrophysical and geophysical systems

FusionScience

Quantitative Models of Wave-Particle Interactionsof High Interest for Burning Plasma Regime

FusionScience

ITER will demonstrate scientific and technological feasibility of fusion

• ITER (“the way” in Latin) is essential next step in development of fusion

– Today: 10 MW(th) for 1 sec with gain ~ 1– ITER: 500 MW (th) for >400 sec with gain

=10

• The world’s biggest fusion energy research project (“burning plasma”)

– 15 MA plasma current, 5.3 T magnetic field, 6.2 m major radius, 2.0 m plasma minor radius, 840 m3 plasma volume, superconducting

– 10B Euros to build and then operate for 20 years (first plasma in 2016)

• An international collaboration– 7 international partners, representing 50%

of world’s population

New features in a burning plasma

• Strong coupling– Transport, stability, boundary physics,

energetic particles, heating, etc., will be strongly coupled nonlinearly due to the fusion self-heating

• Size scaling– Turbulence and confinement depends

on normalized gyroradius ρ* = ρ/a– ITER: reactor size scale for 1st time

• Large population of high-energy alpha particles– Affect stability and confinement

Cross sections of present EU D-shape tokamaks compared to the cross section of ITER

U.S. ITER Project Status

• Much was accomplished in 2006-2007:

– The seven-party ITER Agreement was signed and is being provisionally applied => we now have a project to build (the hardest part)!

– All requirements of Energy Policy Act of 2005 satisfied for ITER participation

– The international ITER Organization (IO) was formally established on December 1st, and began staffing up at the Cadarache site. The Garching and Naka EDA sites were closed.

– The U.S. ITER Project Office team (ORNL/PPPL/SRNL) became fully operational, with the central office located at Oak Ridge.

– DOE/SC (Lehman) conducted status reviews, focused mainly on cost, in February and September 2006. It was noted that, “the U.S. ITER Project has made good organizational progress—a very competent and experienced team is on board.”

– USBPO & ITPA organized to engage research community in ITER

ITER = an international project

• Implementing agreement signed November 21, 2006, betweenEU, Japan, Russia, USA, Korea, China, India– Signing ceremony hosted by President Chirac at Elysée Palace– Dr. Raymond Orbach (Under-Secretary for Energy) signed on – behalf of the US

The ITER Organization (IO) 2006 / 2007

David

Campbell

Assistant DDG

Pascale

Amenc-Antoni

Assistant DDG

• International organization– Challenging– Template for future efforts

National Organization to Oversee the US burning plasma effort

DOE Office of Fusion Energy SciencesSC Assoc Director

ITER and International DivisionResearch Division

US ITER Project OfficeN. Sauthoff, Director

US ITER Chief Scientist(USBPO Director)

US ITER Chief Technologist

(VLT Director)

USBPO DirectorateDirector

Deputy DirectorAss’t Director for ITER Liaison

Research Committee

USBPO Council(12 members)

Topical GroupMHD Stability

Topical GroupConfinement/Transport

Topical GroupBoundary

Topical GroupWave Interactions

Topical GroupEnergetic Particles

Topical GroupIntegrated Scenarios

Topical GroupFusion Engineering

Topical GroupModeling/Simulation

Topical GroupOperation/Control

Topical GroupDiagnostics

US Burning Plasma Organization

USBPO Starting Research Planning forU.S. ITER Participation

• Ongoing activity - to coordinate with IO and Parties

• FY07 ITER Physics Tasks– 76 submitted, 14 selected by USBPO to work on (work is underway)

• ITER design review– Last baseline design was established in 2001; this is now being updated– US scientists submitted 13 Issue Cards– ITER set up 8 Working Groups with members from the 7 partner teams– US experts for the “urgent issues” have been identified– “Baseline Design 2007” to be submitted to ITER Council Nov. 29, 2007

• US Burning Plasma Organization (USBPO):– Integrated on national level with the International Tokamak Physics

Activity (ITPA) expert topical groups – Coordinates with US Virtual Laboratory for Technology

ITER-related Research Activities Increasing

An Opportunity for Growth… and a Challenge

Fusion is part of SC’s part of the

American Competitiveness

Initiative

Fusion is part of SC’s part of the

American Competitiveness

Initiative(& Advanced

Energy Initiative)

National Academy ofSciences Report:

FES Program Must Compete in ACI World

• Domestic fusion activities will evolve to compete in this new era– Participation in ITER sets a new scale for fusion science

• Fusion plasma environment and corresponding new physics regime

• Collaborative world-wide program– Requires a world-leading domestic fusion science program– Promoting Plasma Science and HEDLP

• Significant challenges need to be addressed– Workforce issues over decades– Aging facilities in MFE; NNSA facilities in HEDLP– “Grid-locked” funding profile– Continuing community development towards science focus

• Need to establish new strategic plan for FES– New Initiatives need definition

FES Program Profoundly Influenced by NRC Studies

• 1995: Plasma Science: From Fundamental research to TechnologicalApplications

– FES takes stewardship of plasma science; NSF-DOE plasma joint program

• 2001: An Assessment of the Dept. of Energy’s Office of Fusion Energy Sciences Program

– Fusion Centers of Excellence; increased emphasis on outward communications

• 2003: Frontiers in High Energy Density Physics – The X-games of Contemporary Science

– HEDLP as an emerging field; joint NNSA/DOE HEDLP program

• 2004: Burning Plasma – Bringing a Star to Earth– Rejoin ITER; moving to priorities and science-based planning

• 2007: Plasma 2010 Decadal Study– ?

• 2008: Research Planning for ITER Era– ?

Working Towards a Strategic Plan…

o Vision:– The FES Program supports world-leading science and technical research to

develop the knowledge base for an attractive fusion energy source, and supports leading research in the fundamental areas of Plasma Physics and High Energy Density Physics

o Goals:– Steward the field of Plasma Physics as a fundamental physical science– Collaboratively steward High Energy Density Laboratory Physics (HEDLP) as an

emerging new field of physics – Create the knowledge base that society/industry can use to develop a 1st-

generation fusion energy facility on the ITER timeframe– Development of fusion science to ensure success and facilitate future 2nd-

generation fusion energy concepts

o Achieving these Goals:– Where are we now: what elements do we have in place?– What more do we need?

FESAC Charge: ID Long-Range Opportunities

Office of ScienceFY 2008 Congressional Budget Request

(B/A in thousands)

FY 2005 Approp.

FY 2006 Approp.

FY 2007 Request to Congress

FY 2007 vs. FY 2006

FY 2008 Request to Congress

Basic Energy Sciences………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………1,083,616 1,110,148 1,420,980 +310,832 +28.0% 1,498,497 +77,517 +5.5%Advanced Scientific Computing Research………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………226,180 228,382 318,654 +90,272 +39.5% 340,198 +21,544 +6.8%Biological & Environmental Research

BER Base Program………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………487,474 435,476 510,263 +74,787 +17.2% 531,897 +21,634 +4.2%Congressionally-directed projects………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………79,123 128,601 —— -128,601 -100.0% —— —— ——

Total, Biological & Environmental Research………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………566,597 564,077 510,263 -53,814 -9.5% 531,897 +21,634 +4.2%High Energy Physics………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………722,906 698,238 775,099 +76,861 +11.0% 782,238 +7,139 +0.9%Nuclear Physics………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………394,549 357,756 454,060 +96,304 +26.9% 471,319 +17,259 +3.8%Fusion Energy Sciences………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………266,947 280,683 318,950 +38,267 +13.6% 427,850 +108,900 +34.1%Science Laboratories Infrastructure………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………37,498 41,684 50,888 +9,204 +22.1% 78,956 +28,068 +55.2%Science Program Direction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………154,031 159,118 170,877 +11,759 +7.4% 184,934 +14,057 +8.2%Workforce Development for Teachers & Scientists………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………7,599 7,120 10,952 +3,832 +53.8% 11,000 +48 +0.4%S&S………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………67,168 68,025 70,987 +2,962 +4.4% 70,987 —— ——Use of prior year balances………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………-5,062 —— —— —— —— —— —— ——SBIR/STTR (from SC programs)………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………77,842 81,160 —— -81,160 -100.0% —— —— ——

Subtotal, Science………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3,599,871 3,596,391 4,101,710 +505,319 +14.1% 4,397,876 +296,166 +7.2%SBIR/STTR (transferred from other DOE programs)………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………35,779 35,653 —— -35,653 -100.0% —— —— ——

Total, Science………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3,635,650 3,632,044 4,101,710 +469,666 +12.9% 4,397,876 +296,166 +7.2%

FY 2008 vs. FY 2007

††

†

†† A portion of Stanford Linear Acceleration Center linac operations transfers from High Energy Physics to Basic Energy Sciences in FY 2007 and FY 2008. Excluding the linac operations funding, the remainder of the High Energy Physics budget increases by 12.6% in the FY 2007 request and a further 3.7% in FY 2008.

† The FY 2008 President’s Budget Request and the material presented here assume the requested level for FY 2007, as the timing of FY 2007 appropriations did not allow their inclusion.

††

5-Year Plan Sent to Congress

440,933479,912496,248407,038427,850318,950318,950FES Total

86,653130,000

224,280

83,674181,964

214,274

84,126209,321

202,801

80,484*214,500

2,264190,274

68,699160,00015,900

183,251

63,85760,00015,822

179,271

64,72560,00015,900

178,325

Facility OperationsITER TPCNCSX MIECore Research

CONGMar AFPCONG

FY 2012FY 2011FY 2010FY 2009FY 2008FY 2007FY 2007

*NCSX Starts Operations. Beginning in FY 2010 NCSX will run only on odd years and NSTX will run only on even year.

ITER Funding Profile

116,900—116,9002013

1,122,00043,7701,078,230Total

30,000—30,0002014

130,000—130,0002012

181,964—181,9642011

209,321821208,5002010

214,5006,000208,5002009

160,00010,500149,5002008

60,00023,00037,0002007

19,3153,44915,8662006

U.S. Contributions to ITER - Annual Profile($ in Thousands – in as spent dollars)

Total Project Cost (TPC)

Other Project Costs (OPC)

Total Estimated

Cost (TEC)Fiscal Year

Fusion Energy Sciences($ in thousands)

FY 2007 CONG

FY 2006Actuals

FY 2008CONG

24,2748,4904,9513,7634,223

(4,223)0

45,701

15,53921,38915,4706,445

75159,594

24,9474,220

14,180

148,642

30,78013,03218,681

7/14/1117,0193,538

5,29415,866

104,210

ScienceDIII-D ResearchC-MOD ResearchInternational CollaborationsDiagnosticsOther

HBCU, Education, Outreach ReservesSBIR/STTR (science)

Subtotal Tokamaks

NSTX ResearchExperimental Plasma ResearchHEDPMST ResearchNCSX Research

Subtotal Alternates Research

TheoryAdvanced Computer/SciDACGeneral Plasma Science

Science Total

Facility OperationsDIII-DAlcator C-ModNSTXNCSXITERFacility Ops times in weeksNCSX MIEGPP/GPE/ORNL MoveACXITER PreparationITER MIE TEC Costs

Facility Operations Total

24,3008,8905,0643,854

10,992(3,730)(7,262)53,100

16,69619,99011,9496,970

69756,302

23,9006,970

13,941

154,213

32,36213,94118,422

12/15/12/015,9003,930

37,000121,555

25,2649,1335,2023,959

12,893(5,700)(7,193)56,451

16,10620,63812,2816,970

71656,711

24,5527,160

14,655

159,529

34,40514,32219,972

15/15/12/015,9002,905

149,500237,004

FY 2007 CONG

FY 2006Actuals

FY 2008CONG

14,7872,5297,0663,449

27,831

280,683

55,05421,52234,220

110,796

19,315261,368

Enabling R&DPlasma TechnologiesAdvanced DesignMaterials ResearchITER MIE OPC

Enabling R&D Total

Total Fusion Energy Sciences

RecapDIII-D Res+OpsC-Mod Res+OpsNSTX Res+OpsNCSX Res+OpsITER Res+OpsFacility Res+Ops Total

ITER TPCTotal, Core R&D Total

12,9452,5504,687

23,00043,182

318,950

56,66222,83135,118

114,611

60,000258,950

13,4522,5504,815

10,50031,317

427,850

59,66923,45536,078

716

119,918

160,000267,850

A Few Summary Thoughts

o Budget is maintained for immediate future, but need to craft a coherent vision with a matching strategy to be competitive in the new ITER and NIF eras

o Embarking on new strategic planning for whole program

o Complement ITER with leading domestic program in international context

o Research Planning along science themes needed

o FESAC charges, Workshops, Working Groups, etc.

o Stewardship of general plasma science and HEDLP are core interests

o General plasma science and DOE/NSF partnership (Plasma 2010)

o New Joint Program for HEDLP (w/NNSA) (DOE Workshops)