|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 115
4
The Plasma Science of
Magnetic Fusion
INTRODuCTION
A New Era in Magnetic Fusion Research
The worldwide magnetic fusion research effort to develop a virtually unlimited,
environment-friendly energy source is entering a new era. The first experiments to
explore magnetically confined fusion burning plasmas will begin in the interna-
tional fusion device ITER1 late in the next decade. This is of enormous scientific
importance. Indeed, it will provide the first opportunity to study the rich and
possibly unexpected physics of burning plasmas. Understanding and controlling
burning plasmas is an essential step in developing fusion as a source of electricity.
In addition to its scientific importance, ITER is expected to be the first magnetic
fusion device to generate substantial levels (as much as 500 MW) of thermal fusion
power for hundreds of seconds—a very significant step for future energy security.
This chapter outlines the recent scientific progress that has brought magnetic fu-
sion to this historic juncture. It also highlights the outstanding plasma science
issues. These issues inform two key strategic questions facing the magnetic fusion
community:
1 The evolution of the worldwide fusion research program to the ITER project and key character-
istics of the ITER device are summarized in Appendix B.
11
OCR for page 116
Plasma science
11
• What plasma science must be developed to maximize the scientific output
of ITER?
• What science and enabling technology must be developed to move beyond
ITER to fusion-generated electricity?
The nonplasma fusion sciences and enabling technologies needed to develop
an electricity-producing fusion power system are beyond the scope of this report;
they are discussed in the report of the Burning Plasma Assessment Committee.2
Magnetic Fusion: A Brief Description
The design and proposed operation of ITER illustrates the key principles, phys-
ical processes, and terminology involved in magnetic fusion. To introduce these
basic ideas and give a context for recent developments, we will refer to the ITER
design. The plasma is contained in a toroidal (doughnut-shaped) steel vacuum
vessel of major radius 6.2 m and minor radius 2 m (Figure. 4.1). Wrapped around
the vessel are superconducting coils that produce a toroidal magnetic field of 5.3 T
(the coils are dark orange). The plasma (pink) consists of electrons, deuterium ions,
and tritium ions. These charged particles carry an electrical current that creates
part of the magnetic field. They travel along and spiral around the magnetic field
lines—see, for instance, Figure 4.2. The radii of the ion spirals, the ion Larmor radii,
are typically a couple of millimeters (in ITER conditions)—a thousandth of the
2-m minor radius. The plasma is collisionless in the sense that a typical charged
particle will circumnavigate the torus hundreds of times in a characteristic collision
length. In the middle of the plasma the particles have temperatures of greater than
100 million degrees (10 kV) and densities of 1020 particles per cubic meter; these
values decrease approaching the vacuum vessel wall.
Deuterium and tritium ions fuse to form a helium nucleus (alpha particle)
with 3.5 MV of energy and a neutron with 14.1 MV of energy. The fusion happens
predominantly in the center of the plasma, where the ions have enough energy
(over 10 kV) to overcome their mutual electrostatic repulsion. Most important
to the burning plasma regime is the confinement of the energetic alpha particles,
since collisional heating from the alphas is used to maintain the high plasma tem-
perature. The neutron produced in the fusion reactions crosses the magnetic field
and deposits four-fifths of the fusion energy in the external structure. In a future
fusion reactor the neutrons will strike lithium nuclei in a blanket surrounding the
plasma, splitting the lithium into helium nuclei and new tritium nuclei for fueling
the plasma. Heat to power turbines and generate electricity will also be extracted
2 NRC, Burning Plasma: Bringing a Star to Earth, Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press,
2004. Hereinafter referred to as Burning Plasma.
OCR for page 117
the Plasma science magnetic fusion 11
of
FIGURE 4.1 Cutaway drawing of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), to be
built over the next decade in Cadarache, France. For the size scale, note the small blue standard person
shown in the lower left portion of the figure. The hot plasma is enclosed in a magnetic doughnut,
whose dominant magnetic field coils encircle the plasma. Detailed characteristics of the ITER device
can be obtained from http://www.iter.org. Published with permission of ITER.
from this blanket. Blanket prototypes will be tested to only a limited extent in ITER,
and ITER will not produce electricity.
The power balance of the plasma is the key issue for ITER. The plasma will
be heated by up to 80 MW of fusion alpha particle heating, and up to about 100
MW of external heating can be added using injected neutral particle beams and
externally excited plasma waves. To achieve the ITER design goal of Q ≥ 10, where
Q is the ratio of total fusion power (500 MW at ITER) to external heating power,
only 40-50 MW of external heating is expected to be needed. Heat is lost from the
OCR for page 118
Plasma science
11
(b) ST (c) AT (d) CS
(a) RFP
Magnetic field lines
Self Organization External Organization
Device Simplicity Intrinsic-Steady State
Externally Driven Device Complexity
FIGURE 4.2 The magnetic topology of the main U.S. magnetic fusion concept improvement experiments in
decreasing order of plasma self-organization. (a) Reversed-field pinch (RFP), a high β (pressure) device where
the fields are created mainly by plasma currentsfig rearranged by a self-organizing dynamo. (b) Spherical torus
and 4-2 a,b,c
(ST), also very high β, which has seen rapid development in the last decade (see Figure 4.3). (c) Advanced to-
kamak (AT), with research in the figure go having shown that with certain current5.5 inchesplasma shapes
Let this last decade out into the wider margin of profiles and
the tokamak can have considerably enhanced β, transport barriers (regions where turbulence is suppressed),
and self-generated bootstrap currents driven by the pressure gradient; these achievements should be exploited
in advanced scenarios on ITER. (d) Compact stellarator (CS). Two features of stellarators—inherent steady-state
operation of stellarators and the recent findings that high-β instabilities may be more benign than in tokamaks—
are clear potential advantages that may outweigh the added complexity of three-dimensional field configurations.
The field is mainly produced by external coils. Courtesy of D.A. Spong, Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
plasma in several ways but predominantly via small-scale plasma turbulence in
the hot core. The typical time for energy to be lost, the energy confinement time,
is more than 3 sec. ITER is projected to be firmly in the burning plasma regime,
where the fusion self-heating exceeds the external heating. Ignition, where the self-
heating is sufficient to supply all the energy to sustain the plasma and Q becomes
infinite, may be approached but it is not an ITER goal.
ITER has been designed by extrapolation from existing experiments. Key pro-
cesses limit the performance, and these can be roughly split into four interrelated
areas of research:
• Macroscopic stability and dynamics. The fusion power increases roughly
with the square of the plasma pressure. It is therefore desirable, in ITER and
future fusion reactors, to maximize the plasma pressure. However, when
the plasma pressure exceeds a critical value proportional to the magnetic
pressure, macroscropic instabilities degrade or destroy the plasma. Some
instabilities develop in hundreds of microseconds and smash the plasma
OCR for page 119
the Plasma science magnetic fusion 11
of
against the wall. Others that grow on a longer timescale change the magnetic
topology into one where the field lines wander across some or all of the
plasma. The loss of heat along the wandering field lines caused by the slower
instabilities leads to undesirable cooling of the plasma. In large devices the
faster instabilities damage the external structure. Research is focused on
(1) trying to raise the critical pressure to attain better fusion performance,
(2) understanding the limits so that they can be avoided, and (3) developing
methods to control the slower instabilities.
• Cross-field transport from microscopic processes. The free energy available
from the large pressure and temperature gradients can drive a wide variety
of small-scale microinstabilities and microturbulence in the plasma. The
electric fields of this turbulence cause particle orbits to cross the magnetic
field and transport heat and particles from the hot core to the colder
edge much faster than the plasma transport induced by particle collisions.
Reducing the plasma turbulence would decrease heat loss and allow for
smaller burning plasmas. Research is focused on (1) understanding and
predicting the turbulence, (2) elucidating the transport mechanisms for
heat, particles, and momentum, and (3) finding regimes of low heat loss
from the combination of collisional and turbulent processes.
• Boundary physics. The edge of the plasma is a very complex region where
the plasma transitions from the hot plasma core to a colder partially ion-
ized plasma. Heat and particles are transported through the edge to the
surrounding chamber walls or specialized high-heat-flux surfaces via vari-
ous collisional, intermittent (bursty), and turbulent processes. To control
the outflow, the outer shells of field lines are steered onto the specialized
high-heat-flux surfaces. This is called the “divertor.” The power onto the
material surfaces in ITER is near the limit materials can stand without rapid
erosion. Research is focused on (1) understanding the edge turbulence and
transport, (2) controlling instabilities in the edge, and (3) spreading the heat
loads over larger areas of material surfaces.
• Wave–particle interactions. Plasma waves carrying energy and momentum
can propagate through magnetically confined plasmas. Ions or electrons
moving at roughly the speed of the wave exchange energy and momentum
with it. Radio frequency waves are launched into fusion plasmas to heat
and drive currents by this wave–particle interaction mechanism. Energetic
particles, particularly alpha particles from fusion reactions in ITER, can
impart energy to waves and destabilize them inside the plasma. Such insta-
bilities may then eject the alpha particles from the plasma before they slow
down and deposit their fusion energy in the plasma. Research is focused on
(1) perfecting techniques to deliver heat and current to precise positions
in the plasma with externally launched waves and (2) understanding and
preventing the energetic particle instabilities.
OCR for page 120
Plasma science
120
In a fusion burning plasma, all the processes described above are closely inter-
related: macroscopic instabilities change the magnetic configuration in which the
cross-field transport, boundary, and wave–particle effects take place; the cross-field
transport, boundary, and wave–particle heating effects (from both external sources
and fusion-produced alpha particles) determine the internal pressure and magnetic
field profiles; and so on. The scientific challenge in ITER will be to explore the
exothermic fusion burning plasma regime in which plasma self-heating dominates
the plasma dynamics. This highly nonlinear regime will probably lead to many new
and exciting discoveries. Research on fusion burning plasmas will be focused on
(1) determining how the large alpha particle component and heating changes the
plasma behavior, (2) exploring plasma transport at the larger plasma scale rela-
tive to microturbulence eddy scales, and (3) controlling the highly nonlinear and
interconnected burning plasma regime.
The success of the ITER burning plasma experiment depends on continuing to
improve understanding and predictive capability. Such improvements would build
on the scientific advances outlined in the section on recent progress and future op-
portunities, later in this chapter. The required progress in these key areas will not
be possible without a significant expansion of our plasma diagnostic capabilities.
Quite simply, we cannot understand what we cannot measure. Existing theoretical
models are not yet sufficient to accurately predict many aspects of burning plasma
regimes. National initiatives focused on enhancing analytic theory, improving
computational algorithms, and making dramatic improvements in the diagnostics
deployed at existing facilities would make possible further breakthroughs in our
understanding of the key burning plasma physics issues. Such initiatives would
allow the United States to retain its leading role in plasma science within the
international magnetic fusion program. ITER needs a deeper understanding of
these key plasma physics issues; the party that comes to the ITER table with this
expertise will have a strong position in the international magnetic fusion program
for at least 15 years.
Concept Improvement Is Important for ITER and Beyond
At this time the tokamak is the logical choice of configuration in which to
study burning plasmas—an essential step on the road to fusion power (see Burning
Plasma for more details). The tokamak configuration has achieved the best overall
fusion performance thus far and has been used in the design of ITER. However, it
is clear that devices with considerably better performance are possible even though
they have not yet been fully explored or perhaps even identified. The integrity and
the insulating quality of the confining magnetic field may be improved by chang-
ing the configuration to a modified (“advanced tokamak”) configuration or from
a tokamak to something else. Principal among the alternatives are the tokamak
variants—spherical torus, stellarator, and reversed-field pinch (Figure 4.2 and
OCR for page 121
the Plasma science magnetic fusion 121
of
Table 4.1). The list also includes many other less-developed concept exploration
ideas.
These concept improvements must develop further during the ITER era and
provide a basis for going beyond ITER to commercial fusion power. The goal is to
be in a position to define an optimal fusion energy system for the post-ITER phase
of magnetic fusion energy development—a demonstration electricity-producing
power plant. Thus a key component of the U.S. fusion program, the importance
of which this committee reaffirms, is the study of plasma confinement in tokamak
variants and nontokamak magnetic confinement devices.
While the fusion potential of a given concept is a complicated question, two
TABLE 4.1 Characteristics of Major Magnetic Confinement Experimental Devices Around the World
Year of Minor Magnetic
Device Name Location First Plasma Radius (m) Field (T) Type of Device
United States
DIII-D San Diego, Calif. 1986 0.67 2.4 Comprehensive tokamak
MST Madison, Wisc. 1988 0.52 0.5 Reversed-field pinch
C-Mod Cambridge, Mass. 1991 0.22 8.0 High-magnetic-field tokamak
NSTX Princeton, N.J. 1999 0.65 0.5 Spherical torus
Foreign
T-10 Russia 1975 0.35 3 Comprehensive tokamak
JET U.K. 1983 1.25 3.4 Comprehensive tokamak
FTU Italy 1989 0.30 8.0 High-magnetic-field tokamak
JT-60U Japan 1990 1.00 4.0 Comprehensive tokamak
ASDEX-U Germany 1991 0.50 3.9 Comprehensive tokamak
Tore Supra France 1997 0.70 4.5 Superconducting tokamak
MAST England 1998 0.65 0.6 Spherical torus
LHD Japan 1998 0.60 3.0 Superconducting stellarator
RFX-mod Italy 2004 0.47 0.7 Reversed-field pinch
EAST China 2006 0.40 3.5 Superconducting tokamak
Being built
KSTAR South Korea 2008 0.50 3.5 Superconducting tokamak
SST-1 India 2008 0.20 3.0 Superconducting tokamak
NCSX Princeton, N.J. 2009 0.30 1.7 Compact stellarator
JT-60SA Japan 2011 1.10 2.7 Superconducting tokamak
W-7X Germany 2012 0.35 3.0 Superconducting stellarator
World project
ITER France 2016 2 5.3 Superconducting fusion burning tokamak
NOTE: Plasma minor radius is half the width of the plasma in the horizontal midplane. Magnetic field strength is in tesla. Since
fusion power is proportional to the fusion reaction rate integrated over the volume, the fusion potential is given approximately
by the product of the square of plasma pressure β (β = nT/(B2/2µo)), the fourth power of the magnetic field B (in tesla), and
the plasma volume (in cubic meters). Detailed parameters of these facilities and many other smaller devices are available
from the following Web sites:
• U.S. facilities, at http://www.science.doe.gov/ofes/majorfacilities.shtml
• European facilities, at http://www.edfa.org/eu_fusion_programme/r-experimental_facilities.htm
• World Survey of Activities in Controlled Fusion Research, at http://nds121.iaea.org/physics/
• http://www.fusion.org.uk/links/
OCR for page 122
Plasma science
122
simple considerations point to the direction of improvement. Raising the pressure
limit for a given magnetic field and increasing the plasma volume increases the fu-
sion power for a given cost of magnet coils (the parameter β, the ratio of plasma
pressure to magnetic pressure quantifies this). It is also desirable to reduce the
turbulence so that the same confinement could be reached in a smaller device or
with weaker field. Progress in demonstrating these advantages has been achieved
over the past decade (Figure 4.3). Many magnetic confinement concepts are being
pursued in the United States and worldwide (Table 4.1). At the present time, how-
ever, the four concepts shown in Figure 4.2 are thought to offer the most significant
potential advantages over the conventional tokamak.
However, concept improvement has two other important roles. First, it gener-
ates new ideas and regimes to be explored on ITER. Second, it enhances the under-
standing of plasmas by broadening available plasma conditions and challenging the
predictive models. Like all the areas discussed in this chapter, concept improvement
would benefit greatly from a program to develop a new generation of diagnostic
tools and predictive models.
The critical long-term goal of the concept improvement program is to identify
and develop a more efficient magnetic configuration for the post-ITER phase of
magnetic fusion research. But, the burning plasma and concept improvement parts
of the fusion program are not, of course, separate in a scientific sense. Indeed, over
the past decade, U.S. leadership in a number of scientific areas has contributed
significantly to making ITER smaller, more efficient, and less expensive. This was
done by helping redefine ITER’s scientific goals, advocating significant science-
driven changes in the engineering design, and by developing and pushing several
modes of advanced tokamak operation pioneered in U.S. fusion experiments. The
path beyond ITER to an optimal reactor is clearly predicated on understanding the
basic plasma processes and thereby improving the science-based predictive capa-
bility. The concept improvement program plays an important role in improving
this capability both for specific concepts and for magnetic confinement in general.
One reason for this is that innovative concepts explore a broader range of plasma
conditions. Also, some basic plasma processes are best studied in a particular
configuration, yet the knowledge gained has application in all. A good example
is the reversed-field pinch, where three-dimensional magnetic reconnection and
magnetic turbulence are prevalent and therefore easier to study.
The United States is well positioned to continue to lead in scientific under-
standing and innovation in magnetic fusion research. A balanced, forward-looking
plan that focuses on further improving our predictive capability for the plasma
physics processes that limit fusion reactor performance would naturally emphasize
improved diagnostics, continued exploration of tokamak-variant and nontokamak
configurations, and a healthy theory program. An innovation-focused plan would
also make allowance for new discovery. Because the United States will not have to
OCR for page 123
the Plasma science magnetic fusion 12
of
FIGURE 4.3 Building a better magnetic bottle: examples of recent progress. In stellarators (three-dimensional
magnetic configurations), large particle drifts across the magnetic field can cause significant heat and particle
loss. Over the last 20 years, theoreticians have discovered three-dimensional configurations with effective sym-
metries in the magnetic field strength. These have low drift losses. The deviation from symmetry is measured by
the parameter εeff. Recent results from the Helically Symmetric Experiment (HSX) demonstrating the expected
reduction in the electron diffusion in the low εeff quasi-helically symmetric (QHS) configuration are shown in
diagram (a). SOURCE: Adapted from J.M. Canik and D.T. Anderson, Physical Review Letters 98: 085002 (2007).
© 2007 by the American Physical Society. Diagram (b) displays results from many stellarator experiments show-
ing increased confinement with smaller εeff. Also shown is the design value for the National Compact Stellarator
Experiment (NCSX), which is under construction. SOURCE: Adapted from H. Yamada, J.H. Harris, A. Dinklage,
E. Ascasibar, F. Sano, S. Okamura, J. Talmadge, U. Stroth, A. Kus, S. Murakami, M. Yokoyama, C.D. Beidler, V.
Tribaldos, K.Y. Watanabe, and Y. Suzuki, “Characterization of energy confinement in net-current free plasmas
using the extended International Stellarator Database,” Nuclear Fusion 45: 1684-1693 (2005). Diagram (c) pres-
ents data from the National Spherical Torus Experiment (NSTX) showing ion transport at the collisional levels
(marked “neoclassical”) in discharges where turbulence is suppressed by sheared flows. SOURCE: Adapted
from S.M. Kaye, R.E. Bell, D. Gates, B.P. LeBlanc, F.M. Levinton, J.E. Menard, D. Mueller, G. Rewoldt, S.A. Sab-
bagh, W. Wang, and H. Yuh, “Scaling of electron and ion transport in the high-power spherical torus NSTX,”
Physical Review Letters 98: 175002 (2007). © 2007 by the American Physical Society. Diagram (d) shows that,
as predicted by theory, NSTX achieves large values of current and pressure for given magnetic field strengths
at the center of the plasma—over 10 times the ratios expected in ITER. SOURCE: Adapted from S.M. Kaye et
al., “Progress towards high performance plasmas in the National Spherical Torus Experiment (NSTX),” Nuclear
Fusion 45: S168-S180 (2005).
OCR for page 124
Plasma science
124
shoulder a major fraction of the ITER cost, the country will be well positioned to
lead the exploration of new plasma confinement and fusion science ideas that come
to the fore over the next two decades.
Examining Table 4.1 again, however, one observes that many other countries
are developing a new generation of facilities, often employing scientific develop-
ments that stem from older U.S. research. The United States played a more domi-
nant role in magnetic fusion research when there were fewer players. It is clear,
however, that with its present set of aging domestic facilities the United States
is not well-positioned to lead in the many aspects of the science and technology
that require either large powerful devices or the long pulses that superconducting
magnets enable.
IMPORTANCE OF THIS RESEARCH
Magnetic fusion research has one primary goal: to develop a virtually unlim-
ited, noncarbon, environment-friendly source of energy for the production of
electricity. The potential of fusion is enormous—see the first section in Chapter
1. Reactor system studies indicate that magnetic fusion could produce electricity
at a cost (about 6 to 8 cents per kilowatt hour) commensurate with the likely cost
of other baseload electricity-producing systems in the middle of the 21st century.3
Thus magnetic fusion could become a critically important contributor to the en-
ergy security of the United States by the end of the 21st century.
The primary goal of magnetic fusion research is important enough that it
would be pursued even if it produced no other scientific benefit. However, magnetic
fusion research does contribute to the national scientific enterprise in three ways
that are not directly part of the primary goal:
• Plasma physics: Magnetic fusion relies upon and drives plasma science. The
most critical science for fusion is plasma physics. Thus the fusion research
program has been the primary driver for development and support of
plasma physics, a new discipline of physics, over the past 50 years. For
example, in just the past decade fusion research has produced studies of
laboratory magnetic reconnection; plasma and fluid dynamos; and mi-
croturbulence. These processes have great importance in space and as-
trophysical plasmas (see Chapter 5), and insight gained in the magnetic
fusion program continues to be fruitful. The relatively large investment
in developing computational methods for fusion is benefiting many areas
of plasma research. This includes the direct use of fusion computer codes
in other areas of plasma science. Similarly, new diagnostics developed in
3 See http://aries.ucsd.edu/ARIES/DOCS for more information.
OCR for page 125
the Plasma science magnetic fusion 12
of
magnetic fusion have found application in areas such as low-temperature
plasma science.
• Science: Fusion contributes to other sciences. Fusion research continues to
make important contributions to broader scientific pursuits. These include
very significant contributions to the theoretical understanding of complex
nonlinear systems. For example, fusion research has made fundamental
contributions to the understanding of the onset of stochasticity, chaos,
and nonlinear dynamics. These insights have important application in,
for instance, meteorology and planetary science. Fusion research has also
advanced atomic physics in two ways: by investigating and measuring the
atomic processes in the low-temperature, partially ionized plasmas at the
edge of fusion experiments and by providing a hot plasma environment to
measure the properties of highly stripped atoms of relevance to astrophysi-
cal plasmas.
• Workforce: The fusion program has trained many plasma scientists. The chal-
lenge and importance of fusion research has always been very attractive to
students. It can be expected to have an even stronger draw over the next
decade for both the United States and the rest of the world, as carbon-free
energy becomes an increasingly important societal goal and ITER is being
built. The fusion research program continues to train many young scientists
who then move into other areas of plasma science such as space plasma
physics, stockpile stewardship, inertial confinement fusion, and plasma
processing of microprocessors.
The NRC report An Assessment of the Department of Energy’s Office of Fusion
Energy Sciences Program (2001) examines in more detail the linkage between fusion
science and other areas of science. It identified a need to enhance those connec-
tions and reduce the perceived isolation of the fusion community. In response to
a recommendation in the report, two university-based fusion science centers have
been established to form new links with the general physics community. NSF’s
Physics Frontier Center at the University of Wisconsin, the Center for Magnetic
Self-Organization, is also making explicit connections between fusion science, basic
plasma science, and space and astrophysical plasma science. In the era of ITER, it
will be increasingly important to enhance these connections so as to exploit the
expertise of the wider scientific community for the benefit of fusion and to dis-
seminate the insights and understandings gained in fusion.
RECENT PROgRESS AND FuTuRE OPPORTuNITIES
Since the achievement of significant deuterium-tritium fusion power in the
mid-1990s (see Chapter 1), the magnetic fusion program has become focused on
OCR for page 141
the Plasma science magnetic fusion 141
of
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Wave–Particle Interactions in Fusion Plasmas
Hot magnetized plasma supportsB.4.6 variety of waves that can exchange
fig a huge a,b,c,d
energy and momentum with the plasma particles. The resonant particles, those
moving almost at the speed of the wave, interact strongly with the wave. Stable
waves launched from the edge of the plasma are used to heat the plasma and to
drive current in the plasma. This is a well-developed technique and can be modeled
with high accuracy—an example of the state of the art is given in Box 4.7. Resonant
particles can cause waves to become unstable—Box 4.8 shows an example of such
instability that can be driven by energetic particles.
OCR for page 142
Plasma science
142
BOX 4.7
Fast-Wave Heating
High-power electromagnetic waves of tens of megahertz are commonly launched into fusion plasmas
to heat the plasma and drive plasma current. (a) Diagram of a multichord phase contrast imaging technique
developed in the last decade that measures the wave number of the wave-induced density fluctuations. (b)
Numerical simulation of a high phase velocity wave, the fast wave (FW), that is launched from the right into a
tokamak plasma. Simulations have become powerful enough to resolve the transformation of waves from one
mode into another, a process known as mode conversion. Here the FW is predicted to mode-convert into two
other waves with much shorter wavelength perpendicular to the confining magnetic field (IBW, ion Bernstein
wave; ICW, ion cyclotron wave); shown is the real part of the parallel electric field (Re(E||)). (c) Data from the
imaging technique that measures the expected launched (kR 0) low-k fast wave and
the higher-k mode-converted (MC) waves. (d) Comparison of the experimental and theoretical profiles of the
line-integrated density fluctuations showing agreement. High-k MC waves are predicted to be capable of gen-
erating sheared plasma flows and could ultimately provide a powerful tool for efficiently controlling plasma
microturbulence and therefore the fusion gain in burning plasmas. SOURCE: S.J. Wukitch, Y. Lin, A. Parisot, J.C.
Wright, P.T. Bonoli, M. Porkolab, N. Basse, E. Edlund, A. Hubbard, L. Lin, A. Lynn, E. Marmar, D. Mossessian,
P. Phillips, and G. Schilling, “Ion cyclotron range of frequency mode conversion physics in Alcator C-Mod:
Experimental measurements and modeling,” Physics Plasmas 12: 056104 (2005). NOTE: PCI, phase contrast
imaging; R, radius.
(b)
(a)
OCR for page 143
the Plasma science magnetic fusion 14
of
1.0 MC Waves
FW
ñ eL (AU)
(c)
0.5
0
-10 -5 0 5 10
k R(cm -1)
B.4.7.1 c
(AU)
(d)
OCR for page 144
Plasma science
144
BOX 4.8
Alpha-Particle-Driven Instabilities
The 3.5-MeV alpha particles from deuterium-tritium fusion reactions are born with velocities just above
the fastest characteristic macroscopic (Alfvén) wave speed of the plasma and are therefore capable of giving
energy to the Alfvén waves, creating instabilities. These instabilities can threaten the reactor and the fusion
burn by transporting alpha particles to reactor walls before they can heat the background plasma. (a) Triton
(tritium nuclei) and alpha particle energy distribution functions were found to be consistent with theoretical
expectation (from collisions, without instabilities). Courtesy of IOP Publishing Limited; S.S. Medley, R.V. Budny,
D.K. Mansfield, M.H. Redi, A.L. Roquemore, R.K. Fisher, H.H. Duong, J.M. McChesney, P.B. Parks, M.P. Petrov,
and N.N. Gorelenkov, Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion 38: 1779 (1996); and R.K. Fisher, J.M. McChesney,
P.B. Parks, H.H. Duong, S.S. Medley, A.L. Roquemore, D.K. Mansfield, R.V. Budny, M.P. Petrov, and R.E. Olson,
“Measurements of fast confined alphas on TFTR,” Physical Review Letters 75: 846 (1995). (b) The measured and
predicted plasma electron heating through collisions with alphas. Reprinted with permission from G. Taylor,
J.D. Strachan, R.V. Budny, and D.R. Ernst, “Fusion heating in a deuterium-tritium tokamak plasma,” Physical
Review Letters 76: 2722 (1996). Copyright 1996 by the American Physical Society. (c) Frequency versus time
data from new density fluctuation diagnostics revealing a multitude of destabilized Alfvén wave eigenmodes
that are not detectable by magnetic sensors outside the plasma. (d) Theoretical Alfvén eigenmode spectrum
showing excellent agreement with data. Such waves could redistribute the alpha particles in advanced operat-
ing modes proposed for ITER. (c) and (d) Reprinted with permission from R. Nazikian, H.L. Berk, R.V. Budny,
K.H. Burrell, E.J. Doyle, R.J. Fonck, N.N. Gorelenkov, C. Holcomb, G.J. Kramer, R.J. Jayakumar, R.J. LaHaye,
G.R. McKee, M.A. Makowski, W.A. Peebles, T.L. Rhodes, W.M. Solomon, E.J. Strait, M.A. VanZeeland, and L.
Zeng, “Multitude of core-localized shear Alfvén waves in a high-temperature fusion plasma,” Physical Review
Letters 96: 105006 (2006). © 2006 by the American Physical Society.
(a)
OCR for page 145
the Plasma science magnetic fusion 14
of
(b)
(c)
(d)
OCR for page 146
Plasma science
14
Opportunities in Wave–Particle Interactions
The goals of wave–particle research in the next decade are twofold: first, to
extend the modeling of launched wave excitation and propagation to three di-
mensions and, second, to explore possible energetic-particle-driven instabilities in
ITER. Calculations of the linear properties of the instabilities are rapidly becoming
routine. The challenge now is to understand the nonlinear evolution and interac-
tion of multiple unstable modes and their effect on fast-particle confinement. In
particular, it is not clear whether the instabilities will benignly (perhaps benefi-
cially) redistribute alpha particles or eject them to the reactor walls, potentially
damaging the plasma facing components. Improved understanding of wave heating
and fast-ion transport is needed to confidently predict the characteristics of the
dominant heating sources in ITER burning plasmas.
CONCLuSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THIS TOPIC
The U.S. decision to rejoin ITER is recent, and the magnetic fusion program
is beginning to evolve into the burning plasma era. The present U.S. program was
shaped in 1996 when a science-focused mission with three goals was adopted:
(1) advance plasma science in pursuit of national science and technology goals;
(2) develop fusion science, technology, and plasma confinement innovations as
the central theme of the domestic program; and (3) pursue burning fusion energy
science and technology as a partner in the international effort. These goals remain
entirely pertinent since the central strategic questions that frame the future pro-
gram are the following:
• What plasma science must be developed to maximize the scientific output
of ITER?
• What science and enabling technology must be developed to move beyond
ITER to fusion-generated electricity?
The specific plasma science issues were discussed in the preceding section.
Conclusion: The scientific opportunities in magnetic fusion science are
compelling, intellectually challenging, and a direct product of the scientific
focus of the u.S. magnetic fusion program over the past decade. Realizing
the promise of these opportunities and addressing new challenges will hinge
on maintaining the focus on achieving three goals: (1) advancing plasma
science, (2) ensuring concept improvement through innovation, and (3)
pursuing burning plasma science.
The science focus resulted in the growth of predictive capability, which now
provides much of the direction for the program. This increasing capability to
OCR for page 147
the Plasma science magnetic fusion 14
of
predict and control the behavior of magnetically confined plasmas has begun to
replace sometimes costly and time-consuming empirical approaches. For example,
it has yielded a cheaper and more promising design for ITER. Organizing and
structuring the program around key science issues requires a prioritization that
is beyond this committee’s mandate (this issue is addressed later in this section).
However, the science dictates some opportunities and directions that should be
part of the program.
The key to recent and future progress on all three goals lies in better measure-
ments and better models that will allow addressing and resolving new scientific
challenges and opportunities as they arise.
Recommendation: DOE should undertake two broad initiatives that are
essential for advancing all areas of magnetic fusion research:
(1) A diagnostic initiative to develop and implement new diagnostics in
magnetic fusion experiments.
(2) A theory initiative to reinvigorate theory and develop the next generation
of models.
Both initiatives require additional resources in their respective areas.
Recent advances inside and outside the magnetic fusion program have made
possible diagnostics that can measure multiple physical quantities at many points
inside the plasma simultaneously. A diagnostic initiative would lead to a new
generation of diagnostics that would test the veracity of present predictive models
(e.g., tractable reduced models such as hybrid fluid-kinetic models of macroscopic
instabilities and the five-dimensional gyrokinetic models of microturbulence)
and stimulate the growth of better models through a complementary theory ini-
tiative. Specifically, a major new diagnostics initiative like that proposed by the
community’s Transport Task Force in its white paper4 is needed. The cost and
scale of these diagnostics may exceed present levels, but so will the value of the
information derived from the measurements. Taking advantage of this opportu-
nity to significantly advance plasma measurements should be a key priority of the
magnetic fusion program.
Most of the advances in modeling plasmas originated from the development
of tractable reduced models, helped by the astonishing increase in computational
power. Addressing the fusion plasma science challenges will require new theory and
models to extract further scientific gains from the next generation of computational
modeling. The theory program needs to be reinvigorated, paying special attention
to the support of theorists who are willing and able to engage with the experimental
4 The white paper of the fusion community’s Transport Task Force on the type of diagnostic initia-
tive that is needed for microturbulence and anomalous transport is available at http://psfcwww2.psfc.
mit.edu/ttf/transp_init_wht_paper_2003.pdf.
OCR for page 148
Plasma science
14
and simulation communities. The fusion program’s ability to evaluate new ideas
for magnetic confinement depends critically on advancing predictive capability. It
is the broad analytic aspects of theory that are the weakest in fusion plasma sci-
ence today. Filling this critical void in the theory program should be a very high
priority for the next decade. Theory has not only a direct impact but also plays
a role in enabling the next generation of advances in computational simulation
and modeling. The recent growth of large-scale computation in fusion research
through the Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing (SciDAC) initia-
tives in concert with the DOE Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research
(OASCR) has been laudable. In FY06, for instance, the DOE Office of Fusion Energy
Sciences (OFES) theory program was supported at about $25 million; the OFES
contribution of $4 million to SciDAC was highly leveraged by OASCR to amount
to a total investment of more than $10 million. Without these essential theory and
diagnostic initiatives, large-scale computation would have only a limited impact
on the magnetic fusion program. Moreover, the impact of computation would be
greatly enhanced by stronger coupling to the theoretical and experimental com-
ponents of the magnetic fusion program. It is the committee’s opinion that new
and continued investments in large-scale computation for fusion will achieve far
better leverage if they are accompanied by investments to improve the underlying
basis of analytic theory.
Conclusion: Participation in ITER remains the most effective path for ac-
complishing the u.S. objective of studying a fusion burning plasma. Maxi-
mizing the return on the u.S. investment in ITER will require the united
States to maintain leadership in advancing key areas of plasma science and
in ensuring concept improvement through increased scientific understand-
ing. Without continuing leadership in these areas, the success of the ITER
burning plasma experiments will be at some risk.
The next large step in magnetic fusion research is to measure and explore the
properties of burning plasmas. This step has been greatly facilitated by the U.S.
decision to participate in ITER, which was recommended by the NRC Burning
Plasma Assessment Committee.5 Significant research must continue in order to
maximize ITER’s engineering and scientific success and to optimize its ultimate
performance. Over the past decade, U.S. leadership in a number of scientific
areas has contributed significantly to making ITER smaller, more efficient, and
less expensive. This was achieved by redefining ITER’s scientific goals, advocating
major changes in the engineering design, and by developing and pushing several
advanced modes of tokamak operation. Many of these contributions to ITER came
not from burning plasma research but from research formally classified as part of
5 National Research Council, Burning Plasma: Bringing a Star to Earth, Washington, D.C.: The
National Academies Press, 2004.
OCR for page 149
the Plasma science magnetic fusion 14
of
the pursuit of the program’s plasma science or concept improvement goals. The
United States is projected to contribute $1.122 billion for its participation in the
ITER construction project. To obtain an appropriate scientific benefit from this
very substantial investment and to ensure ITER’s success, the United States would
be wise to retain, and preferably grow, a strong domestic fusion science research
program. Such a program is necessary to develop the understanding and predictive
capability that is needed to extract critical information from ITER and to project
beyond ITER to fusion power.
Conclusion: To ensure that the magnetic fusion program can progress be-
yond ITER to electricity-producing fusion power, it is essential that research
in concept improvement and innovation continue.
To hasten fusion energy development, a demonstration reactor must follow the
completion of the burning plasma research mission on ITER. This will require the
definition and development of high-performance reactor configurations operat-
ing at high plasma pressure (β) with controlled macroscopic instabilities, minimal
microturbulence, and tolerable edge conditions. Research in concept improvement
has shown that several configurations promise to yield improved predictive under-
standing, new plasma regimes, and potentially superior reactor designs. Without
continuing U.S. leadership in this area it is unlikely that improved configurations
will be ready in time, and the era of fusion power will be delayed.
Conclusion: The u.S. fusion program lacks a clear vision for the next decade
and has been slow to react to and evolve toward the developing burning-
plasma, ITER era.
While the scientific opportunities, the promising methodologies, and the pro-
gram elements are clear, the detailed program structure is not. Although the ITER
site was decided on only in mid-2005, the recent establishment of the U.S. Burning
Plasma Organization is a positive step. However, the U.S. fusion program does not
have a strategy for its evolution over time periods longer than the yearly budget
cycles. In particular, it has not responded adequately to a program recommenda-
tion of the Burning Plasma Assessment Committee: “A strategically balanced U.S.
fusion program should be developed that includes U.S. participation in ITER, a
strong domestic fusion science and technology portfolio, an integrated theory and
simulation program, and support for plasma science. As the ITER project develops,
a substantial augmentation in fusion science program funding will be required in
addition to the direct financial commitment to ITER construction.”6 This recom-
mendation has not yet been adequately addressed beyond participation in ITER.
Also, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 calls for a plan for evolution into the burning
plasma, ITER era and calls for its review by the National Research Council. The
6 From the report Burning Plasma, p. 6.
OCR for page 150
Plasma science
10
U.S. community has taken positive steps to organize itself for the burning-plasma
era, most notably with the formation of the U.S. Burning Plasma Organization,
a grassroots technical organization that is coordinating U.S. research activities in
preparation for ITER.
Although the scientific isolation of the magnetic fusion community—both
from the rest of the physical sciences and from the rest of the plasma science
community7—is decreasing, it is limiting progress and hindering the spread of
knowledge and expertise developed in magnetic fusion to other areas. Including
the community within a broader framework in the DOE Office of Science would
have substantial intellectual benefits for the plasma science of magnetic fusion.
The committee notes that the U.S. magnetic fusion science community has
made several efforts to develop plans for the future, most recently in two reports
of the Fusion Energy Science Advisory Committee: Scientific Challenges, Opportu-
nities, and Priorities for the U.S. Fusion Energy Sciences Program (2005) and A Plan
for the Development of Fusion Energy (2003). More work is needed.
Recommendation: The united States should develop, and periodically up-
date, a strategy for moving aggressively into the fusion burning plasma era
over the next 15 years. The strategy should lay out the main scientific issues
to be addressed and provide guidance for the evolution of the national suite
of facilities and other resources needed to address these issues. Such strategic
planning should include 10 considerations.
• The critical strategic and scientific issues that need to be addressed over the
next 15 years by the magnetic fusion community: (1) the plasma science
needed to maximize the scientific output of ITER and (2) the science and
enabling technology for going beyond ITER—to guide the development of
a strategy.
• The importance of focusing on fewer scientific issues in greater depth—to
compete effectively internationally.
• Development of fusion plasma science and, accordingly, predictive capabil-
ity through initiatives in diagnostics and theory, with greater coupling to the
continuing development and utilization of large-scale computations—to
maintain leadership in key scientific areas.
• Participation of the U.S. scientific community in setting the ITER scientific
agenda and planning for U.S. involvement in ITER experiments—to en-
sure a strong scientific focus for ITER and significant involvement of U.S.
scientists.
7 Please see the following report for a comprehensive discussion of this issue: NRC, An Assessment
of the Department of Energy’s Office of Fusion Energy Sciences Program, Washington, D.C.: National
Academy Press, 2001. This report is also described in Appendix E of the current report.
OCR for page 151
the Plasma science magnetic fusion 11
of
• Transformation of the present portfolio of aging U.S. facilities into a new
portfolio designed to expeditiously address key fusion scientific issues,
including a schedule for retiring some devices to make room for innova-
tive new experimental facilities and resources needed—to rejuvenate the
portfolio of U.S. experimental facilities.
• The desired degree of participation and timing of evolution toward fusion
research program based on international collaboration—to take advantage
of some overseas facilities that are more capable than present U.S.-sited
facilities and to prepare for leading some key scientific experiments on
ITER.
• The balance between the burning plasma program and the development
of innovative regimes and devices that look beyond ITER—to be prepared
for the fusion demonstration era that will follow ITER.
• Possible change in the structure of the fusion program from a focus on par-
ticular experimental facilities, to a focus on science-oriented campaigns—
to better align the program with its scientific objectives.
• Rejuvenation of the U.S. fusion workforce—to address the impending de-
mographic challenge and the need for a new generation of fusion scientists
for the burning plasma era.
• Feasible budgetary scenarios for implementing this strategic plan over the
next 10 to 15 years—to indicate how the fusion program should evolve to
address its scientific goals over that period.
There is a significant opportunity and an urgent need for the U.S. fusion pro-
gram to develop a comprehensive, 15-year strategic plan. The plan would include
10 years of preparations for ITER construction, initial operation and scientific
experiments, and the first 5 years (approximately) of ITER experimentation.
While current fusion budget projections by DOE provide fully for U.S. partici-
pation in the ITER construction project, in the most optimistic budget scenarios
the domestic fusion research program (the program beyond that needed for ITER
construction) is projected to grow only with inflation and the current partial (less
than 50 percent) utilization of the major magnetic fusion research facilities is
expected to continue. These projections make it difficult for the United States to
close the growing gap between newer, more capable intermediate-scale facilities
being built abroad and the aging U.S. facilities (Table 4.1).
Until the strategic planning has been completed, it is not possible to predict
how facilities may evolve or to determine appropriate budget levels. It is, however,
clear from the earlier discussion in this section that the domestic fusion program
must remain strong for ITER to be successful and for the eventual development
of fusion power. This will require a robust level of support for the domestic fusion
program.
