# Presentation: 532478

## Fast Track Concept in the European Fusion Programme

**Fast Track Concept in the European Fusion Programme**
** **
- Harald Bolt
- Max-Planck Institute for Plasma Physics, Garching
- EURATOM Association
- _Contents_
- Introduction
- Mandate
- „Fast Track“: Conclusions
- Role of materials R&D for fusion power development

**International Symposium for ITER**

## „fast track initiative“: Background

**1. British government to EU Commission and Research Ministers** (24 Oct. 2001)
-     concerns: stability of supply of fossil energy; global warming, decreasing share                     of electricity from fission
-              _convincing reasons for __significant role of fusion_:
- 	- demonstrate feasibility of fusion within 20-30 years
- 	- accelerate materials R&D for fusion (in parallel with ITER)
- 	- bring US „on board“ - including financial participation
- 	- involve industry in steering function
**2. EU Research Council** (31 Oct. 2001)
- takes up matter
**3. Fast Track Working Group** (27 Nov. 2001)
- report to Research Council
**4. EU Research Council** (10 Dec. 2001)
- positive response

## Mandate

## Slide 4

## Starting point and reference scenario

*From: Five year assessment report on the specific programme:*
*Nuclear energy covering the period 1995-1999; June 2000*

## Conclusions 1/7

**„****The ITER project is the essential step towards energy production on a fast track.“**
-  engineering design finalized;   modest upgrading over life of ITER
-  fully exploiting the flexibility of the present  design:        - tests of breeding and energy extraction       - blanket modules prototyping the blanket           for DEMO
*  **demonstrate technical feasibility of fusion**   power on 20-30 year time scale*

## Conclusions 2/7

**„****...in a fast track approach, the DEMO and PROTO generations could be combined in a single step...“**
- This power plant
-  has to be designed as credible prototype for power-producing   fusion reactor
-  must not be fully technically and economically optimised
-  depends strongly on the development of adequate   materials

## aims and milestones (K. Lackner, EFDA)

** ****power into grid:**** **
- DEMO & 1st generation power plants (economically competitive)
- DEMO & 1GPP will be based on similar/identical physics & technology

** ****further improve economic & environmental properties **
** „**advanced“ power plants
-  R&D now, due to long lead times (materials)
- ongoing physics research

## Starting point and reference scenario

*From: Five year assessment report on the specific programme:*
*Nuclear energy covering the period 1995-1999; June 2000*

## Conclusions 3/7

**Fusion landscape in Europe (medium term)**
- Emphasis of research on ITER:
- demonstration of sustained fusion power production and extraction
- Fusion associations should concentrate on accompanying ITER R&D and plasma physics
- Stellarators and Spherical Tokamaks should address *possible improvements of concepts* and of designs for future fusion reactors

## Conclusions 4/7

**Materials**
-  solutions for a sustainable, environmentally benign and economically attractive  energy technology
-  ITER provides essential information on *plasma facing materials*
-  *high intensity neutron source* such as IFMIF (Int. Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility):   test and verify material performance in reactor relevant neutron environment
-  before starting IFMIF engineering design:   identify possibilities of relevant studies on *Neutron Spallation Sources*
-  IFMIF engineering design should be completed during FP6 (until end 2006)
-  *modelling* of radiation damage and structural evolution is instrumental to   understand and control underlying processes.

## Conclusions 5/7

**Elements of key importance**
-  construction of ITER as soon as reasonably achievable   next step: extend mandate of negotiations to address cost   sharing and site dependent issues
-  ITER and IFMIF should proceed in a co-ordinated way:  realisation of ITER starting *in parallel* with detailed engineering  design of IFMIF
-  existing facilities, esp. JET: not to be interrupted abruptly, but to  be *phased out progressively* according to the schedule of ITER  realization and the availability of financial resources (JET)

## Conclusions 6/7

**Financial resources**
-  additional resources needed in the early stages (<2011) due to parallel   progress of ITER and materials R&D
-  expand *international collaboration*
-  clear position of Europe should generate positive response also from  potential ITER partners
- long term: *much less public funding required, if one generation of fusion**                 devices can be saved*

## Conclusions 7/7

**Role of industry**
-  *role of industry* in the engineering of fusion devices should    *grow significantly* during the realization of ITER and later of   DEMO/PROTO
-  involvement of utilities should increase progressively
-  to drive the programme most efficiently towards power production:   *industrial sector has to assist in managing all phases of the**   programme;* this also ensures that fusion developments meet   industrial requirements for energy production

## Roadmap

**EFDA reference case**

- 3 years

**demonstration of the feasibility of fusion**
**power generation**

**ITER**

**IFMIF**

**DEMO/PROTO**

## Summary „fast track“

- ITER: reactor-like fusion performance (moderate extrapolation to power reactor operation)
- successful extraction of reactor grade heat  and tritium from blanket modules
- materials: ensure industrial availability of materials
-                  which are ready to be licensed for use (80 dpa)
- technology: industrial readiness in detail
-       fusion power generation feasible
-       in 20 (25) years
-              all elements to build first fusion power plant (DEMO/PROTO)
- on basis of DEMO/PROTO operation:
*enter phase of large scale electricity production*

## Materials for fusion reactors beyond ITER

**Materials for fusion reactors beyond ITER**

- 10 m

**Reactor (DEMO/PROTO)**

- 10 m

## structural material

- _Baseline: ferritic-martensitic steel __(EUROFER, F82H)_

- Composition (%)
- C 0.12, Mn 0.4, Cr 9, V 0.2, W 1.1, Ta 0.1
**no Mo, Nb           reduced activation**

- neutron irradiation:
- - dimensionally stable
-    (data of similar steels up to 150 dpa)
- - no high temp. embrittlement
- but: low temp. embrittlement

- irrad. to 12.5 MWa/m2

**FZ Karlsruhe**

## structural material: needs

- structural material: needs

_**Baseline: ferritic-martensitic steel **__**(EUROFER, F82H)**_
- _here water-cooled Li-Pb blanket as baseline_

## Neutrons - irradiation damage - neutron source

- Fusion neutrons cause displacement damage and He-production
- important for relevant studies:
- - relation of dpa to He (H) production
- - high neutron flux (target 25 dpa/year)
-  fission sources    low energy (<2 MeV): mainly displacement damage
-  spallation sources
-  D-Li stripping source

- under planning: **IFMIF**

**Fission**
**sources**

**FZ Karlsruhe**

## Neutrons - irradiation damage - neutron source

**Can material irradiations in spallation sources support fusion studies?**
-  How close can irradiation conditions be  be brought to fusion situation?
-  Bracketing of fusion conditions by fission   reactor irradiations and spallation source  irradiations?
-  Capability of advanced modelling of  radiation effects and structural evolution to  fill bracket?
-  Would this approach be sufficient for  licensing of materials?                     Working group is being established           within EFDA-frame

**Neutron flux distribution in long pulse****target region of ESS (FZ Jülich)**

**N/cm2/s**

## Plasma facing materials: key issues

- Plasma facing materials: key issues

_**Key issues**_
-  erosion lifetime and   plasma compatibility
-  neutron damage
-  control of power deposition:   *to be established in ITER*
-  heat removal
-  fabrication technology

**first wall: **
- modest flux of high energy neutral particles (100s eV),
- low energy ions

**divertor target: **
- high heat flux 10 (20) MW/m2
- _transient heat loads_:
- e.g. ELMs, disruptions

**bulk plasma: **
- impurity tolerance
**W** < 2 10-5, reactor < 10-4
**Be, C**: 10-2

## Plasma facing components, lifetime (erosion of materials)

- Plasma facing components, lifetime (erosion of materials)

**First wall:**
- Erosion of
- _low Z materials_
- order of 3 mm/burn year: 15 mm in 5 years
- _tungsten_
- order of 0.1 mm/burn year: 0.5 mm in 5 years

**Divertor:**
- mostly redeposition of eroded wall material

**D ions**

***Presently:**** order of magnitude-knowledge; *
_*data from ITER needed to assess PFM thickness*_

## Plasma facing components, plasma compatibility of tungsten

- Plasma facing components, plasma compatibility of tungsten

- high operational flexibility, W-concentration in plasma <10-5

- The tungsten programme in ASDEX Upgrade

**tungsten coated divertor**
**(500 ********m plasma spray coating)**

**W coated inner wall**
**(1.5 ********m plasma PVD coating)**

## Plasma facing and heat sink materials: research needs

- Plasma facing and heat sink materials: research needs

- ITER:
- establish quiescent plasma operation; learn to reduce divertor heat load by impurity seeding;
- erosion data (apply relevant materials); resolve T-issue

**Satellite experiment(s):** explore alternatives not possible in ITER

- Materials development; mainstream:
- _plasma facing material_: thin functionally applied high-Z material
- _divertor heat sink::_ Cu-based derivates from ITER R+D: high neutron dose
- _first wall heat sink_: ODS-RAFM, RAFM

- Long term development; innovation:
- composites (MMCs, CMCs), ductile refractories, ideas (heat pipes,...)

- Neutron damage:
- relevant n-irradiation facility for PFM, heat sink material and PFC development

## Status: Fusion Materials

**Status: Fusion Materials**

-  baseline materials for fusion reactors are within reach (e.g. EUROFER, W)
-  baseline technologies (esp. bonding, joining) have been developed for ITER
-  neutron irradiation facility needed for materials assessment under fusion  relevant conditions; accompanying modelling effort
-  long term materials development should further increase attractivity in
-   terms of environmental benignity, thermal efficiency, cost of electricity