Powering the Future
Fusion & Plasmas

A Report of the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee

A long-range plan to deliver
fusion energy and to advance
plasma science2020

Contents

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmasi
Prefaceii
Executive Summary
1	Chapter 1: Introduction
and Overview
19	Chapter 2: Recommendations
and Budget Scenarios
45
Appendix
47
Appendix A: Public Private Partnerships
53	Appendix B: DEI, Workforce, and Outreach59
Appendix C: Charge Letter
61
Appendix D: Membership
62	Appendix E: Process and Meetings
66
Appendix F: Acronyms

The production of this report was sponsored by
the US Department of Energy, Office of Science,
Fusion Energy Sciences in the year 2020.

Preface

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

This report provides a decade-long vision for the field of fusion energy andplasma science, presenting a path to a promising future of new scientificdiscoveries, industrial applications, and ultimately the timely delivery of fusionenergy. We identify critical areas for research and development and prioritize
investments to maximize impact. The research community worked hard over a
year-long-process to convey a wealth of creative ideas and its passion to accelerate fusion energy development and advance plasma science. Their effort
culminated in the consensus Community Planning Process report. Our work isbased heavily on this report, and we extend our sincere gratitude to our colleagues for their efforts. Following the research community’s lead, we worked
by consensus in generating this report. Different ideas were listened to andwere thoughtfully deliberated until a shared view on each issue emerged. This
process allowed us to discuss and appreciate our different points of view andcome to consensus language. Ultimately, we speak with one voice in conveying
a vision for a vibrant program that will bring significant benefit to society.

Troy Carter, chair
University of California,
Los Angeles

Ariana Gleason
SLAC National Accelerator
Laboratory

Rajesh Maingi
Princeton Plasma Physics
Laboratory

Erik Trask
TAE Technologies

Scott Baalrud
University of Iowa

Christopher Holland
University of California, San Diego

David Schaffner
Bryn Mawr College

Francois Waelbroeck
University of Texas, Austin

Riccardo Betti
University of Rochester

Paul Humrickhouse
Idaho National Laboratory

Oliver Schmitz
University of Wisconsin,
MadisonAnne White
Massachusetts Instituteof Technology

Tyler Ellis
Commonwealth Fusion Systems

Charles Kessel
Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Uri Shumlak
University of Washington

Don Rej, ex officio
Los Alamos National Laboratory,
retiredJohn Foster
University of Michigan

Ane Lasa
University of Tennessee, Knoxvillle

Lance Snead
Stony Brook University

Cameron Geddes
Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory

Tammy Ma
Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory

Wayne Solomon
General Atomics

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma scienceiExecutive Summary

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Fusion — the merging of nuclei to release theenergy that powers stars — and plasmas — ionizedgas, the fourth state of matter that makes up
stars — are inextricably linked. Their shared history
exemplifies how basic scientific research translates from a deeper understanding of the universeto technologies that benefit society.
Now is the time to move aggressively toward the deployment of fusion energy,
which could substantially power modern society while mitigating climate change.
Scientific and technological innovations point the way toward a unique US vision
for economically attractive fusion energy, setting the stage to build a fusion pilot
plant by the 2040s. The foundation of a US fusion energy industry is central tothis vision and this industry has already taken root, with approximately $2 billion
of private capital invested to date.
The technological and scientific achievements arising from plasma research aresignificant and far-reaching. The US vision for fusion energy is enabled bybreakthroughs in the physics of magnetically confined plasmas, where record
confined pressures have recently been achieved. Plasma physics helps us
understand not only the confined plasmas that could power an energy-generating
fusion reactor, but distant objects that capture our imagination, such as supernovae and black hole accretion disks. Understanding the exotic states of mattercreated using the most intense lasers in the world requires deep plasma physics knowledge. Plasmas transform society, enabling the development of industrychanging technologies, including plasma-enabled manufacturing at the heartof the trillion-dollar information technology industry.
Partnerships will accelerate progress. Partnership in the international ITER
fusion project is essential for US fusion energy development, as is supportingthe continued growth of the private sector fusion energy industry. Publicprivate partnerships have the potential to reduce the time required to achievecommercially-viable fusion energy. The diversity of topics addressed by plasma
science is reflected in the wide range of federal agencies that are committed
to supporting its development. Increased coordination among those agencies iswarranted to maximize progress in research and development.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma scienceii

Executive Summary

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Fusion and plasma research in the US are world-leading, and continued scientificleadership requires nurturing and agility. The US is poised to take the lead
globally in the development of a private sector fusion energy industry, but thisopportunity will be lost without strong support. Similarly, our leadership position insome key research areas is threatened by the absence of investment in major
new facilities that address critical gaps in the relevant science and technology.
For the first time, scientists have created a long-range plan to accelerate thedevelopment of fusion energy and advance plasma science. Earlier, the community undertook a year-long study that identified new opportunities and developed guidance for prioritization. The consensus that resulted in the Community
Planning Process report formed the basis for the strategy detailed here. This
plan calls for important redirections in DOE Fusion Energy Sciences research
programs and is embodied by six technology and science drivers in two thematic areas.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma scienceiii

Executive Summary

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Fusion Science and Technology

The Fusion Science and Technology area should
focus on establishing the scientific and technicalbasis for a fusion pilot plant by the 2040s:– Sustain a burning plasma. Build the science and technology required to confine
and sustain a burning plasma.
– Engineer for extreme conditions. Develop the materials required to withstandthe extreme environment of a fusion reactor.
– Harness fusion power. Engineer the technologies required to breed fusion fueland to generate electricity in a fusion pilot plant by the 2040s.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

iv

Executive Summary

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Plasma Science and Technology

The Plasma Science and Technology area should
focus on new opportunities to advance fundamental
understanding, and in turn translate theseadvances into applications that benefit society:– Understand the plasma universe. Plasmas permeate the universe and are theheart of the most energetic events we observe.
– Strengthen the foundations. Explore and discover new regimes and exotic
states of matter, enabled by new experimental capabilities.
– Create transformative technologies. Unlock the potential of plasmas to transformsociety.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma sciencev

Executive Summary

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

This plan makes the difficult choices necessary
to embark on these critically important directions.
A number of recommendations, which express
an optimized path to achieve our goals, emerged
from this process. Overarching recommendations
are made that identify important programmaticchanges:– Addressing the technology and science drivers will require continuing investmentin the design, construction and operation of facilities that provide importantnew capabilities. To allow this, resources need to be established in the programfor ongoing investment. Opportunities for developing small and mid-scale
facilities aligned with the plan are also needed. Pre-conceptual design toward
new experimental facilities should be a part of regular program activities tobetter prepare for future strategic planning.
– To achieve efficiencies and maximize technical progress across all the elementsof this strategic plan, build on the existing successful partnerships with NSF,
ARPA-E and NNSA, and explore opportunities to form new partnerships withother agencies and with industry. The successful Innovation Network for Fusion
Energy (INFUSE) program should be expanded and new public-private partnership program, including milestone-based cost-share programs, should be
developed.
– This long-range planning process should be repeated regularly to enable periodic
review and update of the strategic plan with strong community engagement.
– Policy changes should be developed and implemented that improve diversity,
equity, and inclusion within the research community and allow discipline-specificworkforce development.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma sciencevi

Executive Summary

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

The strategic plan is developed through a seriesof recommendations, not in priority order, on
needed programs and experimental facilities:– A fusion pilot plant design effort should begin immediately to develop cost
attractive fusion solutions on the fastest time scale possible.
– The fusion pilot plant goal requires a pivot toward research and development offusion materials and other needed technology. Emphasis is needed on fusionmaterials science, plasma facing components, tritium-breeding blanket technology
and the tritium fuel cycle. A number of key experimental facilities are recommended. The Fusion Prototypic Neutron Source (FPNS) will provide uniquematerial irradiation capabilities and the Material Plasma Exposure Experiment(MPEX) and High Heat Flux testing experiments will enable solutions for theplasma facing materials. The Blanket Component Test Facility (BCTF) will provide
the scientific basis for tritium fuel breeding and processing.
– The successful tokamak plasma confinement concept must be advanced to meetthe stringent requirements of a fusion pilot plant. A sustained burning plasma
at high power density is required simultaneously with a solution to the power
exhaust challenge: mitigating the extreme heat fluxes to materials surrounding
the plasma. US partnership in ITER provides access to a high-gain reactor-scaleburning fusion plasma and an accompanying US ITER research team and program to exploit this facility must be developed. Present tokamak experiments in
the US and abroad can address key issues in the near-term and new opportunities in the private sector should be leveraged and supported. Addressing thecore/exhaust integration challenge requires a new tokamak facility, the EXhaust
and Confinement Integration Tokamak Experiment (EXCITE).
– The plan embraces the development of innovative ideas that could lead to morecommercially attractive fusion systems and address critical gaps with entirely
new concepts. The quasi-symmetric stellarator is the leading US approach todevelop disruption-free, low-recirculating-power fusion configurations and shouldbe tested experimentally with a new US stellarator facility. Liquid metal plasma
facing components have the potential to ameliorate some of the extreme challenges of the plasma-solid interface and may reveal new plasma operating
regimes. Inertial fusion energy research can leverage significant investments in
the US in order to establish new technologies and approaches toward energy
production. Private investment in alternative fusion plasma configurations has
enabled breakthroughs that have potential as fusion energy sources. Strengthening
these elements will provide both scientific opportunity and programmatic security.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma sciencevii

Executive Summary

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas– A sequence of mid-to-large-scale facilities will establish a leadership role infrontier plasma science. To strengthen plasma foundations: the Matter in
Extreme Conditions Upgrade (MEC-U) will provide a world-class user facility inhigh energy density science by co-locating a high intensity (petawatt-class)laser and a long-pulse shock compression laser with the Linac Coherent Light
Source free electron laser; and a multi-petawatt laser will push the frontierof laser intensity and reveal fundamental quantum electrodynamic processes ofcreating matter and plasma directly from light. To understand the plasma universe: a new Solar Wind facility will close key science gaps in plasma turbulence,
connecting laboratory experiments with space and astrophysical observations;and a mid-scale Z-pinch facility will allow access to strongly magnetized highenergy density matter relevant to astrophysics and fusion energy research.
To create transformative technologies: A high repetition rate high-intensity laser
system will dramatically increase the rate at which high energy density plasma
experiments can be conducted, with the potential to significantly advance thedevelopment of plasma-based accelerators.
– A plasma-based technology research program will provide the scientific basis
needed to enable the next generation of technological inventions. Plasmas canenable transformative technologies in manufacturing, microelectronics, biotechnology, medicine, and aerospace. Fulfilling this potential will require a dedicatedand nimble research program able to take advantage of the translational natureof this research by connecting the basic science with the breadth ofapplications.
– Programs that support foundational plasma science research should be emphasized. Foundational science fosters creative exploration that sets new directions
for the field, addresses fundamental questions of nature, and explores novel
states of matter.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma scienceviii

Executive Summary

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Our prioritization of needed programs andfacilities was applied to address three different
funding scenarios: constant level of effort,
modest growth (2% yearly growth), and unconstrained, but prioritized.
In the constant level of effort scenario, programs in fusion materials and technology are grown, the MPEX facility is completed and construction of FPNS
begins. Important scientific and technical progress continues in other areas.
However, US leadership in fusion and plasma science is at risk in this scenario.
New activities to address other key gaps are significantly delayed, and many
opportunities for innovation and enhanced US leadership cannot be acted upon.
To provide needed resources for fusion materials and technology programs
and facilities, operations and research programs on existing domestic tokamak
facilities, DIII-D and NSTX-U, which aim to address fusion pilot plant design
gaps, will have to be modestly reduced in the near term. One domestic tokamak
facility will likely need to cease operations mid-decade to free the resources
required to make progress on FPNS. A nascent ITER research team is developedand some shift of resources to collaboration with international and private sector
facilities is possible. A limited plasma technology program will be established.
Almost all other strategically selected enhancements of experimental capabilities
and new program activities will be delayed. Importantly, completing the ongoing
MEC-U project is not possible. New facility concept studies will be pursued
to build a basis for deliberations on these important facilities to be ready for
improving budgetary conditions.
The return on the investment of the relatively small increment from the constantlevel of effort to the modest growth scenario is substantial. Fusion materials andtechnology research is further strengthened and FPNS is accelerated. Increased
focus is given to addressing the core/exhaust integration challenge, such thatdesign and start of construction of the EXCITE facility may be possible.
Fundamental plasma research and plasma technology program areas are modestly grown, and networks are established and bolstered. However, substantial
risks and missed opportunities remain. A similar reduction of activity on existing
tokamak programs as in the constant level of effort scenario is envisioned. Other
new major facilities are not possible in this scenario, including MEC-U, leaving
important research gaps unaddressed and US leadership opportunities areunfulfilled.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma scienceix

Executive Summary

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

In the unconstrained scenario the complete strategy as summarized above canbe implemented, but prioritization and staging of items beyond the constrained
scenarios is proposed. Additional investment beyond the modest growth scenario
will have significant return. Major scientific advances would be enabled andprogress toward realizing practical fusion energy would be accelerated. FPNS
would be further accelerated to ensure operations as soon as possible. In
addition, a number of additional facilities and program enhancements havebeen identified that capture the opportunities provided by the full breadth andcreativity of the program. Priority order for additional facility investment isexpressed thusly: the MEC-U project and the EXCITE facility at equal priority; anew quasi-symmetric stellarator device; the blanket component test facility;
the Solar Wind facility; a facility for full-size component-level high heat flux testing;a multi-petawatt laser facility; and, in collaboration with other agencies, thehigh-repetition rate laser facility and the mid-scale Z-pinch could be pursued.
Research programs would be bolstered first to accompany new facility investments.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma sciencexPowering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Chapter 1
Introduction and Overview

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

1Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Fusion and plasmas: powering the future
The US is at a critical moment in the effort to develop fusion as a carbon-neutral,sustainable source of energy. The last decade has seen significant progress inthe physics and engineering necessary to confine high temperature plasmas forfusion, with important technological breakthroughs, including high temperature
superconductors, that enable the advances in magnet technology required
to achieve that confinement. We are on the verge of entering an era of burning
plasmas with the international ITER experiment, set to begin operation this decade.
At the same time, there has been rapid growth in privately financed fusion
research and development, leading to an emerging fusion energy industry. Thesedevelopments enable a unique and ambitious path for US fusion research,targeting a low capital cost fusion pilot plant that will form the basis for economically attractive fusion electricity.
Fusion energy and plasmas are inextricably linked. A fusion reactor requires aconfined, controlled, burning plasma at its core. For this reason, fusion research
has historically been an important driver for the development of plasma physics
as a fundamental field. The link between the two fields is strong but does not
fully define either one. Fusion energy requires research and development intomaterials resistant to neutron irradiation, into technologies for breeding fusion
fuel and into enabling technologies like magnets. The field of plasma scienceand engineering is intellectually diverse, highly interdisciplinary, and has myriad
applications beyond fusion energy.
Plasma science and engineering has advanced significantly over the last decadeand future opportunities abound. Extreme states of matter have been produced
and studied using the world’s most intense lasers developed using Nobel Prizewinning research in chirped pulse amplification. Understanding of the mostenergetic events in the universe requires deep knowledge of plasma physics.
Such research is essential to interpreting electromagnetic signatures fromevents like black hole mergers in this era of multi-messenger astronomy. Plasmas
enable technologies essential to our everyday lives, including plasma-processingof semiconductor devices, which is key to the trillion-dollar information technology
industry. There is potential to expand these applications with significant societal
benefit; for example plasma-enhanced chemistry could help address energy
security and climate change by providing ways to make products from carbon-freeelectricity, as well as purifying water and providing new medical treatments.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science2Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

This report details opportunities to accelerate the development of practicalfusion energy and to advance the frontiers of plasma science and engineering.
Importantly, it outlines a strategy to act on these opportunities for DOE Fusion
Energy Sciences (FES).
Embracing opportunities to form partnerships that accelerate progress inresearch and development is an important theme of this report. Partnership
opportunities exist within the federal government, internationally, and with industry.
DOE FES is the primary federal sponsor for fusion research, but other agencies
have made important investments including DOE ARPA-E, DOE Advanced
Scientific Computing Research (ASCR), and the Department of Energy National
Nuclear Security Administration (DOE NNSA). Owing to the interdisciplinary
nature of the field and to the multitude of applications there are many federal
agencies that invest in broader plasma science and engineering, including the
National Science Foundation ( NSF ), National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), Department of Energy High Energy Physics Program(DOE HEP), Office of Naval Research (ONR), and the Air Force Office of Science
Research (AFOSR). Better coordination is warranted and could result in more
efficient use of federal resources and enable more rapid progress in advancing
plasma science and engineering and developing fusion energy.
Fusion energy and plasma science research are both global endeavors. Manynations recognize the promise of fusion energy and have made significant
investments in research and development. International collaboration has been
critically important to progress. This has been particularly true in the quest
to address a top priority for the global fusion research community: experimental
access to a burning plasma, where energy released by fusion reactions is thedominant heating mechanism within the plasma. The international community,with the US as a key partner, is collaborating to construct the ITER experiment inFrance to achieve this goal. At the time of this writing, the ITER construction
project is more than 70% complete toward first plasma. The NASEM Burning
Plasma Report highlighted the importance of the ITER project to the US fusion
program, stating that it provides the most compelling path to accessing a burning
plasma at reactor scale. However, significant research and development isrequired in addition to ITER to produce electricity from fusion. Additional investment supporting that R&D is needed in parallel with ITER to advance the scienceand technology of a fusion pilot plant in a timely manner. While other international parties are considering a reactor scaled directly from ITER, the NASEM
Burning Plasma Report recognized that this approach is too large and expensive
to be economically competitive in the US market when compared to other carbonneutral energy technologies. Consequently, the NASEM Burning Plasma Reportinstead set forth a unique US vision for fusion energy using scientific and
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

3Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

technology innovations to target the development of a low capital cost fusion
pilot plant. This emphasis on developing innovative, world-leading solutions makes
the near-term investments in R&D even more critical as other nations continue
to invest in new fusion facilities that advance their own approaches to fusionenergy development.
Likewise, research in fundamental plasma science is vibrant and growing internationally, with activity spanning scales ranging from the sub-atomic to thecosmic, from low temperature atmospheric plasmas to the most extreme conditions in the universe. Shrewd investments by DOE over the past few decades
in world-class facilities have enabled the US to be at the forefront of pioneering
plasma research. However, such scientific leadership requires agility and continuous nurturing. In some instances, the US is losing its leadership position.
For example, the recent NASEM report Opportunities in Intense Ultrafast Lasers:
Reaching for the Brightest Light, highlights how the US has already lost leadership in the high-intensity lasers that are essential for high energy density science.
Although the chirped-pulse laser amplification technology that led to petawatt
lasers was developed in the US, the vast majority of high-intensity laser systems
are now being built in Europe and Asia. This long-range plan describes a path
to regain a leadership position in fundamental plasma science and its applications in the US.
Fusion energy and plasma science research advances fundamental science,but also translates to direct commercial application. The ultimate goal of fusionenergy research is the development of commercial fusion power. The fusionenergy industry is already taking root but realizing the ultimate goal of producing
power will require additional support to help it become firmly established. The
last decade has seen about $2B invested worldwide in fusion energy developmentin the private sector. Internationally, the United Kingdom and China have alreadyestablished multi-hundred million dollar partnership programs to attract private
fusion energy companies. Therefore, it is imperative that the US strengthens
partnerships in the private sector to accelerate the development of fusion powerin the US and maintain a leadership position in the emerging fusion energy
industry. For decades, plasma technologies have played a ubiquitous role inmanufacturing, crucial for the fabrication of microelectronic circuits, lighting,
optics, advanced materials, materials processing, and much more. The future
looks even more promising. Recent research suggests that plasmas will influencemuch of the future economy, playing a decisive role in technologies that convert
electricity from carbon-free sources to the products that drive society, as wellas in future medical treatments, aerospace, particle accelerators, advanced X-ray
sources, and agriculture. Countries that establish a means to solve the science
questions that make these technologies possible and facilitate technology
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

4Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

transfer from academic research to commercial applications will position themselves to lead tomorrow’s economy. This long-range plan outlines ways in which
the US can position itself to lead in both commercial fusion energy and otherplasma-based technologies.
This report marks the first time a strategic planning process for DOE Fusion
Energy Sciences has been undertaken that addresses both fusion energy andplasma science and that has had a significant, community-led portion of theprocess. The strategic planning process involved two stages: a community-driven
stage followed by a stage led by the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory
Committee, using input from the community process. The community-driven
phase, the year-long Community Planning Process (CPP), was organized by the
APS Division of Plasma Physics. The process was invaluable and resulted ina consensus document, the CPP report, that not only enumerates scientific andtechnological opportunities, but also provides guidance for prioritization. The
CPP report formed the basis for this strategic plan and remains an essential
companion to this report for those looking for more technical detail on specificinitiatives.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

5Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Technology and Science Drivers
As acknowledged by the NASEM Burning Plasma Report, the NASEM Plasma
Decadal, and Community Planning Process reports, Fusion Science andTechnology has reached a level of maturity that calls for Fusion Energy Sciences
to broaden its focus from the plasma core of a fusion reactor towards a holisticenergy mission. At the same time, these reports also show that Plasma Scienceand Technology outside the fusion mission deepens our understanding of theuniverse and lays the foundation for creating transformative technologies ranging
from microelectronics to medicine to new materials and particle accelerators.
The energy mission is driven by the urgent desire to address climate change andenergy security on a relevant time scale, which requires focus on activities that
resolve the critical challenges of fusion energy in the next two decades. Thismission-driven program is founded on the steady progress in plasma science,
ITER construction, computational and predictive modeling capabilities, and aburgeoning investment in private fusion enterprises. However, the least developed
domain in the mission portfolio is within Fusion Materials and Technology (FM&T).
Fulfilling the energy mission demands a shift in the balance of research towards
FM&T, which connects the technology and science drivers of Sustain a Burning
Plasma, Engineer for Extreme Conditions, and Harness Fusion Energy. The
program’s renewed attention to economic viability distinguishes it from those ofother ITER partners. It leverages US innovation, leadership, and technology
advances to address the key gaps in fusion plasma science, nuclear science,materials science, and enabling technology that will be required to constructa fusion pilot plant (FPP), anticipated to be the key remaining step to enable
commercial fusion energy. Critical gaps in FM&T will have to be closed for any
choice of plasma core in an FPP, and they have the potential to become pacelimiting without immediate investment. Such a program will create US leadershipin a broad range of disciplines through innovation and rigorous scientific inquiry.
A critical need in the quest for fusion energy production is the ability to sustain
a burning plasma by controlling and predicting burning plasma dynamics.
Burning plasmas, in which the heating is primarily due to the energy released
from fusion reactions, pose challenges to stability and control that are not fully
accessible by present experiments and for which significant uncertainty exists.
Addressing this requires establishing scenarios for maintaining high performance in a burning regime and preventing damage associated with transient
events, through the development of tools to predict, avoid, and mitigate such
events. The tokamak approach for the plasma core is the most technicallyadvanced and mature confinement concept. A tokamak FPP will require finishing
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

6Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

critical research on existing domestic facilities, and significant participation in
the ITER research program that will enable the acquisition of knowledge inburning plasma physics as well as in materials science and technology. New
collaborations with industry potentially offer pathways to accelerate accessto burning plasma conditions. Complementing these two top priority areas is
research into non-tokamak confinement approaches, including stellarators,
inertial fusion energy, and other alternate confinement approaches. Investmentin this area is important as both a risk-mitigation strategy for the tokamak
approach, and to support innovations that have the potential to accelerate
progress towards an FPP and deployment of commercial fusion energy.
A fusion pilot plant will produce heat, particle, and neutron fluxes that significantly
exceed those in present confinement facilities, and new innovative approaches
and materials will need to be developed and engineered for the extreme reactor
conditions anticipated. These intense conditions affect all regions of the device
in distinct ways, including the plasma-facing components (PFCs), structural
materials, functional materials, magnet materials, diagnostic materials, andex-vessel components. In a fusion pilot plant, high fluxes of 14 MeV neutrons
produce damaging effects in materials, which are presently poorly understood.
A scientific understanding of how the properties of materials evolve anddegrade due to fusion neutron exposure is needed to be able to safely predict
the behavior of materials in fusion reactors. Even those components not directly
exposed to high fluxes from the plasma still experience a complex multi-factor
environment including high temperatures, tritium migration and trapping, materialinterfaces, and high stresses. Innovative approaches and new developments
will access integrated solutions to these harsh conditions.
Interlinked with a burning plasma and materials are the key systems required toharness fusion power, breed fuel, and ensure the safe operation of the reactor.
Before a fusion pilot plant is constructed, materials and components must be
qualified, and a system design must ensure the compatibility of all components.
Just as the plasma and materials in a fusion reactor will need to advancebeyond today’s capabilities, the balance of plant equipment, remote handling,
tritium breeding, and safety systems will also require significant advances.
Pursuit of the research encompassed by these three technology and sciencedrivers is essential to retiring the risks to an acceptable level for a fusion pilot
plant, and will enable the US to pursue a swift, innovative and economicallyattractive path to realizing fusion energy production. The societal benefit ofestablishing a new carbon-neutral power source, and growing the industry
that supports it cannot be understated and is one of the most transformational
technologies in the field of plasma science. On the road to achieving thisA long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

7

Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

scientific grand challenge are myriad additional spinoff technologies and fundamental investigations that can reveal new knowledge about the universe.
The field of plasma science and technology is a rich and diverse landscape, fromthe search for accurate theoretical descriptions of the complex emergent behaviorof the plasma state, to the production of matter at extreme conditions exceeding
even those at the core of giant planets or stars, to low temperature plasma
science that can translate into new technologies. Expanding the fundamental
understanding of plasmas and its interactions with its surroundings across wide
ranges of temperature and density underpins not only fusion physics but thepractical application of plasmas for manufacturing, medicine, and agriculture.
The Plasma Science and Technology component of the FES mission is impelledby three main scientific and technological drivers: strengthen the foundations,
understand the plasma universe, and create transformative technologies. Together,
these drivers tackle the plasma questions of highest scientific impact andurgency, and foster innovation by spurring exploration as dynamic as the processes in plasmas themselves. The programs, initiatives, and facilities identified
here represent an opportunity to grow and fortify US leadership by strengthening investment in research areas of high potential, while leaning forward withnew capabilities and facilities, and tapping the collective wisdom of the scientificcommunity through a series of networks, collaborations, and partnership
opportunities.
Strengthening the foundations of plasma science deepens our fundamental
understanding of nature. It is an exciting time in this fast-paced area as newexperimental capabilities unlock unprecedented plasma regimes, while newtheories and computational methods provide outstanding insight to decipher
them. Extremely intense lasers are making compact particle accelerators possible, and may soon reach nonlinear quantum electrodynamic (QED) regimes
where pair plasmas will be created directly from light. Pulsed power facilities
compress matter to such high density that the behavior of the warm dense
plasma it produces is fundamentally differently from known states of condensed
matter or plasmas. Due to the high electrical conductivity, magnetic fields canbe compressed with the plasma, approaching strengths only found in astrophysical objects such as white dwarfs. Coupling these drivers with X-ray free electron
lasers allows exquisite measurements of these novel states of plasma. At thesame time, tabletop-scale experiments create and trap exotic states of antimatterand strongly correlated plasmas, which can be so sensitively diagnosed that they
can be used to test fundamental symmetries of nature. Strengthening the foundations. of plasma science will continue to require research and facilities at a rangeof scales.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science8Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Understanding the plasma universe is essential to learning about our origins andthe evolution of our universe. Nearly every aspect of the cosmos is influenced
by plasma, from lightning and aurora in the Earth’s atmosphere, to stellar windsthat fill the space between planets and stars, to accretion disks surrounding supermassive black holes at the centers of the galaxies, to the particle jets launchedfrom the most distant and ancient quasars. Viewing astrophysics through the lensof plasma physics is crucial given recent advances in multi-messenger astronomy
and spacecraft missions. As spacecraft such as the Parker Solar Probe and Solar
Orbiter “touch the sun,” knowledge of plasma mechanisms will play a key role ininterpreting this frontier of space exploration. In addition to theoretical and computational study, exploration of the plasma universe can be conducted throughexperiments on Earth. The breadth of conditions observed in the plasma universe
requires a wide-ranging laboratory approach from high energy density laser
experiments to magnetized plasma facilities at multiple scales.
Plasma science and technology lays the foundation for creating transformativetechnologies unique in implementation and application. The realization of afusion power plant opens the door to ubiquitous carbon-free electricity. Plasmabased technologies promise unique pathways to convert that electricity to the
products that power society, potentially revolutionizing the way chemicals are
manufactured. Already, they promise the realization of novel materials that are
not possible to manufacture by conventional means, such as functionalized
nanoparticles for drug delivery and new materials relevant to quantum information systems. The next generation of rockets, powered by fusion, may enablehuman exploration of the solar system and beyond with fast transit times. The
next generation of ultra-fast, compact electronic devices such as cell phones
and computers will rely on plasma science to fuel advancements in semiconductor
manufacturing. Novel, precision treatment therapies for cancer and for antibiotic
resistant bacterial infections are now within reach, buoyed by advancementsin the areas of atmospheric pressure plasmas and advanced plasma-based ultra
compact accelerators.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

9Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Programs and Facilities to executethe strategic plan
Aligning the program with the six technology and science drivers will require
redirection of programs and development of new facilities. Collaborations withinternational and privately funded research programs are important componentsof this strategy, and participation in ITER is considered essential for obtaining
access to a high-gain burning fusion plasma. Rigorous and impactful scientificinquiry is cultivated by leveraging areas of current US leadership, partnerships,
and priority research areas organized to highlight both the discovery natureof general plasma science and high energy density physics, while emphasizing
the potential of plasma-based technology for translational research. Success inall of these areas will require robust support for foundational cross-cutting
research in theory, modeling, and computation, diagnostic development, andtransformative enabling technologies, as well as building a more diverse andinclusive workforce.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

10Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Research Program Areas
A number of new or expanded research program areas are urgently needed tofulfill the mission of developing our fundamental understanding of plasmas andto progress towards a fusion energy source with FPP readiness by the 2040s.
These research program elements are described here at a high level, targetingthe specific technology and science drivers identified above, and are not inpriority order (prioritization is provided within the budget scenarios in Chapter 2).
FPP System Design and Integration: A central overarching priority is to form
a domestic multi-institutional, collaborative FPP design and study program. Thiseffort will provide the resources and coordination to integrate critical researchadvances made across the FES portfolio into attractive FPP concepts. It willneed to merge advances in our understanding of burning plasma physics, withthe capabilities of new fusion materials and technologies, as well as attention
to safety-related issues (e.g. tritium and activation product transport, and stored
energy sources including the plasma, magnets, and cryogens) and licensing.
Balance of plant considerations demand the development of supporting technologies for remote handling and supporting measurements for Reliability,
Availability, Maintainability, and Inspectability (RAMI) of the plant. Participationby private as well as public stakeholders is essential to ensure economic attractiveness and innovations made outside the public program are appropriately
considered in developing these concepts. An essential component underpinning
this effort is a strong theory and computation program, including the advancement of multi-scale, multi-physics theory and modeling capabilities necessary
to predict the complex interactions between numerous plasma, material, andengineering processes that will occur within a fusion pilot plant (FPP). Moreover,accelerated progress and increase in readiness of multiple systems are needed
to safely design and operate a fusion reactor, including advances in diagnostics,
instrumentation, data handling and automated real-time decision making. This
design effort should also give significant attention to activities agnostic to theplasma core and specific areas in which solutions based on the tokamak asbaseline approach are contrasted with concept studies of possible advantages
from different plasma core concepts like stellarators, alternates or IFE. As partof the national design effort, targeted studies for new concept explorationor performance extension devices should be pursued to provide an informationbasis for the design, decision and pursuance of such new facilities.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science11

Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Fusion Materials & Technology: Critical developments are needed in fusionmaterials, magnets, and heating and current drive actuators that comprise thisarea. Technology advances are needed to handle the extreme conditions
expected in future fusion reactors, and to harness fusion energy and breed fuel.
In addition to advancing key research on existing facilities (such as linear
plasma devices and in-pile fission irradiation), resource enhancement is needed
to a level that allows timely resolution of critical FPP design questions. Becauseof the significant time scales involved in facility development and subsequent
research, immediate action is needed. Increased investment in theory and simulation supporting the research on these facilities is also needed. Focus is given
to the development of Plasma Facing Materials and Components, Structural andFunctional Materials, and Fusion Blanket and Fuel Cycle elements needed for
an FPP. Diagnostic advancements for fusion materials studies are needed tounderstand the interaction of materials with the fusion environment. Magnets are
an integral feature of magnetic fusion configurations, and it is highly desirable
to develop magnets with higher fields, higher operating temperatures, higher
reliability, streamlined manufacturing processes and reduced production costs,
all of which improve the performance and/or lower the costs of an FPP. Industry
has made significant progress in developing the relevant magnet technology,
including high-temperature superconducting magnets, and the federal program
should complement and, when possible, collaborate with these activities.
Launching structures for radio frequency plasma heating and current drive
actuators must be made of new materials to withstand the neutron and plasma
environment, have integrated steady state cooling, and more acceptable longpulse reliability. Efficiency improvements including the source, the transmission,and the plasma coupling must be developed to enhance fusion power plant
attractiveness. The lack of appropriate materials, technology and knowledge
necessary to complete FPP designs with respect to material performance undernuclear conditions and complex integrated fusion core components is an international gap. The US is poised for leadership in this area by targeted investments
into unique facilities.
Fusion Plasma Core: The tokamak is the most technically advanced approachfor use as a fusion reactor power core. ITER is the largest single investment
by DOE-FES, and a US ITER research team needs to be formed to leverage thisinvestment. The US ITER research team will make essential contributions toachieving the high gain mission for ITER , exploit unique access to a burning
plasma at the reactor scale, and enable gap closure of nuclear science andengineering toward an FPP. The existing DIII-D and NSTX-U national tokamak
facilities are key to preparation for the study of burning plasmas in ITER, as wellas in other planned and future private devices. Additional research on theseA long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

12Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

facilities, in combination with private and international collaboration, continuing
support for existing university tokamak programs, and utilization of US expertisein theory and simulation, is needed to advance solutions to remaining technicalgaps. These gaps include disruption prediction, avoidance, and mitigation;
plasma facing component integration, and FPP-relevant scenario development.
Advances in our understanding of plasma physics and enabling technologies
have opened paths to lower capital cost tokamak FPPs, but also bring additional
scientific and technical challenges to overcome. These challenges motivate theconstruction of a new world-leading domestic tokamak, which would be uniquely
situated to develop integrated solutions in a timely fashion. In order to mitigate
risks associated with the tokamak approach, alternative pathways to fusion are
also pursued, with the potential to lead to more economic fusion power in thelonger term by capitalizing on US expertise. Quasi-symmetric stellarators are
considered as well as alternate plasma core solutions beyond the tokamak andstellarator. These alternate pathways are supported at three different levels, frombasic validation of the physics, through development of self-consistent solutions, to demonstration of integrated solutions. An IFE program is re-established,taking advantage of US leadership in high energy density physics and progressthat the NNSA has made in inertial confinement fusion toward high yield.
General Plasma Science (GPS) Program: GPS research explores the fundamental
behaviors of plasmas. This includes foundational theoretical descriptions ofplasma dynamics, numerical methods to model multi-scale behavior, and experiments that test if our understanding is true. Such foundational research serves
as the basis for all areas of plasma science and technology, ranging from thelaboratory to astrophysics. Although motivated primarily by the desire to understand nature, many of the physics processes studied have direct relevance tofusion and other technological applications. The GPS program funds research ata range of scales, including operations and construction of the Basic Plasma
Science Facility at UCLA , the Wisconsin Plasma Physics Laboratory, theMagnetized Dusty Plasma Experiment at Auburn and the Facility for Laboratory
Reconnection Experiments at Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory. A major
component of the GPS research program is the long-standing, successful NSFDOE Partnership in Plasma Science and Engineering.
High Energy Density Laboratory Plasma ( HEDLP ) Program: HEDLP research
explores and applies novel regimes resulting from the extraordinary ability toconcentrate power — in many cases more power than the world’s total electric
generating capacity in an area smaller than the end of a human hair for a brief
fraction of a second. This creates new states of matter ranging from condensed
matter to warm and hot dense matter and plasmas relevant to astrophysicalphenomena, stellar properties/processes and fusion reactors. Self-organized,
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

13

Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

far-from-equilibrium plasmas are probed and controlled, enabling unique applications such as new accelerators and materials. This program has a very successful history of partnering with DOE-NNSA, NSF, and DOE-HEP to fund research ona number of mid-scale laser, pulsed-power, and XFEL facilities.
Plasma-Based Technology Program: Plasma technologies currently researchedwithin the PST portfolio include low temperature plasmas and plasma-based
accelerators. These technologies offer benefits directly to the public by enablingmodern conveniences such as cell phones, computers, advanced drinking water
purification, and security and medical methods. They furthermore underlie key
industries such as semiconductor manufacturing and materials processing thus
directly fueling the economy through innovation as well as maintaining corecompetence and leadership in these critical areas. To highlight the growing
importance and promise of this area, a plasma-based technology program that
consolidates critical efforts will focus these efforts and facilitate efforts fortechnology transfer.
Networks: Collaborative networks of researchers and facilities can provide
enormous value as a coordinating organization and mechanism for leveraging
resources and capabilities. LaserNetUS is a successful model that brings
together 10 unique mid-scale laser facilities and opens up opportunities to alarge number of new users. In a similar vein, the establishment of a MagNet,
centered around basic magnetized plasma and laboratory space/astrophysics;
a ZNet for pulsed-power science and technology; and an LTP-Net for low temperature plasmas could similarly support growth and enable collaborative
research in their respective areas. These networks can furthermore encouragecross-fertilization as researchers work on multiple facilities, and will facilitate thetraining of students. Coordination and access to computational/theoreticalmodels, diagnostics, and other resources in support of experiments can also beestablished. These network structures also position the US to be more competitive, as investments, technology development, and future planning can be implemented more strategically by engaging the full community.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

14

Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Facilities
A number of new mid- to large scale facilities are urgently needed to meet thegoal of FPP readiness by the early 2040s, and to realize the goals of plasma
science and technology. The elements of the following list are roughly groupedby topical area and are not in priority order.
Fusion Prototypical Neutron Source (FPNS): The science of material exposure
to fusion neutron fluxes is a central gap of the international fusion program. No
facility exists in the world that can generate the necessary fluence, energy
spectrum, and helium production level in the lattice of candidate materials.
FPNS concepts that utilize either existing facilities like accelerators or commercial
units combined into a cost effective system can be a fast track forward. FPNS
provides leadership opportunities based on existing expertise in nuclear materials in the US program, by enabling the fundamental explorations of fusion
nuclear material science that needs to be combined with a reinvigorated neutron
theory and computation program. Moreover, accelerated access to fusion neutron exposure is an area of extreme interest to the fusion industry with significant
opportunities for near-term public-private partnership.
Material Plasma Exposure eXperiment (MPEX): MPEX is under construction andwill provide a unique capability to study plasma-material interactions underconditions that are prototypical for a reactor divertor regime as far as the nearwall plasma material interface is concerned. The capability to expose irradiatedmaterials to these plasma conditions and conduct rapid turn-around in-situ
and ex-situ material characterization are the most important project elementsthat need to be met as key program deliverables towards an FPP.
High-Heat-Flux (HHF) testing facilities: Testing capabilities to explore propertiesof materials and plasma-facing components, both solid and liquid, under highheat fluxes address a key gap towards FPP material definitions. Experimental
capabilities to conduct fundamental testing on coupon levels (cm scale) are anecessary testbed for model validation of material properties. The coupon-leveltesting is a prerequisite for component-level testing (tens of cm to m scale) to
qualify components for a fusion pilot plant. Accordingly, testing-facilities for bothlevels of high heat flux materials research are required.
EXhaust and Confinement Integration Tokamak Experiment ( EXCITE ): Highmagnetic field approaches to a tokamak-based FPP bring forward specificscientific and engineering challenges. High divertor power exhaust solutions
need to be integrated with sustainment of high power density plasma cores,
which are needed for generation of significant fusion power. Both the NASEM
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

15

Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

burning plasma report and the CPP report identify the need to solve these challenges in an integrated fashion, rather than at separate facilities. This requirement motivates construction of a new domestic tokamak, previously referred toas NTUF (“New Tokamak User Facility”) within the CPP report.
Blanket Component Test Facility (BCTF): The research and development program on blanket materials and transport phenomena will culminate in the design
and fabrication of blanket section prototypes, which are to be tested in a
Blanket Component Test Facility (BCTF). Such large component-scale testing inan environment that is as prototypic as possible but without neutrons or radioactive materials, is an essential accelerating element in the FM&T domain.
Mid-scale Stellarator: A proof of concept experiment is needed to demonstrate
improved steady-state plasma confinement in combination with a novel nonresonant divertor. Development of this research line provides risk mitigation forthe mainline tokamak approach and bears the potential of a commercially more
attractive fusion system. This stellarator facility would therefore be a discovery
oriented facility that has a large innovation potential.
Volumetric Neutron Source (VNS): The VNS is proposed as an evolution of thefusion neutron science focus established with FPNS to test integrated material andstructure elements on a component level. A concept assessment study for VNS
should examine the plasma physics development required for the concept, thedevice requirements for the desired neutron fluxes (major scale-up of theplasma performance and engineering systems), and the relevance of the configuration to a tokamak or other FPP components to determine if such a facility
should be pursued. Facility concepts should be pursued with all due speed if
assessment results warrant it.
MEC-Upgrade: An upgrade to the Matter in Extreme Conditions (MEC) endstation
at the Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS) would enable the co-location of a
PW-laser operating at 1–10 Hz repetition rate and a multi-kJ long pulse laser with
our only domestic X-ray free electron laser to tackle physical and chemicalchanges at fundamental timescales, and explore new regimes of dense material
physics, astrophysics, planetary physics, and short-pulse laser-plasma interactions. The MEC - U proposal has achieved CD - 0 and is currently in preparation
for CD -1.

Solar Wind Facility: How the solar wind is accelerated, heated, and driven turbulent is among the most persistent and important open questions in plasma
science. It is an opportune moment to develop, in concert with advanced space
missions, a next-generation experimental facility to isolate, control, and diagnose
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science16

Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

plasma phenomena responsible for the complex solar wind behavior, at relevant
scales. This facility would leverage and coordinate existing laboratory space/astrophysics research groups as experimental conditions needed to pursue solar
wind related questions can also benefit research in broader astrophysical contexts.
Such a venture would be a prime opportunity to coordinate amongst interested
funding agencies including primarily NSF and NASA, as well as ONR and AFOSR.
Multi Petawatt Laser Facility: Multi-10s of petawatt laser systems can produce
light pressures in the exa-Pascal regime, copious amounts of radiation, andextremely bright beams of energetic particles, including electrons, ions, neutrons,
or antimatter. The novel capabilities enabled by multi-PW lasers open new frontiersin research and development such as particle acceleration and advanced lightsources, high-field physics and nonlinear quantum electrodynamics (QED), andlaser-driven nuclear physics. As identified in the BLI Report, there is a need for the
US to develop ultrahigh-intensity technology and build an open-access laser user
facility with multiple beamlines at 10–100 PW peak powers.
High Repetition Rate Laser Facility: New high-repetition-rate (10 Hz to kHz) laser
systems coming online represent a fundamentally new system architecture for
HED. The >1000x increase in shot rate over today’s systems, coupled to emerging
technologies such as machine learning and additive manufacturing will result inan enormous acceleration in the rate of knowledge acquisition. Such high-rep-ratehigh energy lasers further open the door to unprecedented temporal and spatial
resolution of HEDP phenomena including GeV-class electron beams and precision
HED pumps and probes. Recent community reports (NASEM, BLI) have clearly
outlined the urgent science case and FES mission-relevant needs demandinga short-pulse, high-peak power, high-average power laser system. This may be
an area for partnering with DOE HEP which may take the lead on this facility.
Mid-scale Z pinch: Extremely strong magnetic fields over macroscopic volumes
are only accessible via pulsed-power facilities, opening up the physics of plasmas in a way that other plasma drivers cannot. Current US facilities are either verylarge and complex (the 26-MA Sandia Z-Machine with <1 shot/day) or too small(~1 MA or less) to address the breadth of science expressed by the community.
There is clear community interest in establishing a pulsed-power facility at an‘intermediate’ size (up to 10 MA) accessible to the academic community, with ahigher shot rate than Z, yet still capable of fielding fusion-relevant and HED experiments. Further, such a facility could explore driver technologies and pulsedpower science for next-generation larger-scale pulsed-power devices such as a
60 MA “Z-Next”. This facility would be a good opportunity for FES to partner withanother agency such as NNSA or NSF which might take the lead.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

17

Chapter 1

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Process and Prioritization Criteria
The following criteria express the principles used to prioritize projects andprograms discussed in this report. Consensus criteria and guidance for prioritization within program areas were developed by the research community during
the CPP process. This guidance is incorporated in the criteria below, which wereused for whole portfolio prioritization. In applying the criteria and following thecharge language, we assume that the ITER construction project will be successful and we thus focus on the non-ITER-project portion of the budget.
Alignment: Align projects and programs with the technology and science drivers, to achieve the fusion mission, specifically the path to an FPP , and toadvance fundamental plasma science and enable societally beneficial plasma
applications. Balance technological development with scientific discovery,
recognizing the importance of both as the sources of innovations that will benefit the entire program.
Urgency: Prioritize the most expeditious path to fusion energy and other plasma
technologies that provide compelling solutions to urgent issues, including sustainable, carbon-free power production, advanced medical therapies, and more
efficient industrial processes.
Innovation: Embrace innovative research, new developments in technology,
and interdisciplinary connections to address key challenges. Reduce the timeand cost to develop usable fusion energy and other plasma applications.
Impact: Implement a logical sequence of programs that increases scientific andtechnological progress relative to investment, reduces the risks associatedwith the FPP mission and the technology and science objectives, and takes into
account time constraints and impacts on the overall program.
Leadership: Establish and maintain US leadership, including world-leading
facilities, science, and industries that attract international participation.
Recognize federal, industry, and international efforts in fusion and plasma
development and form partnerships whenever possible.
Stewardship: As experimental capabilities are developed and program transitions occur, ensure the continued productivity of the essential workforce tomaintain scientific and technological progress. Engage all stakeholders in executing the program, including national laboratories, industry, and universities.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science18

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Chapter 2
Recommendations and Budget Scenarios

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

19

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

The fields of fusion energy research and plasma science and engineering
were described in Chapter 1 , along with the scientific and technologicalopportunities they present. In this Chapter, we present recommendations on
how the DOE Fusion Energy Sciences research program should capitalizeon those opportunities to move aggressively toward practical fusion energy,
deepen our understanding of plasma science, and create transformativeplasma technologies. The recommendations are worked through three different
budget exercises, detailing how the recommendations might be implemented
under specific funding scenarios. The recommendations are grouped into
two categories and three sub-categories. Overarching recommendations are
independent of specific programs or facilities but viewed as essential to successful execution of the FES research program. Project and Program Specific
Recommendations are grouped into three subcategories: Fusion Science andTechnology Program recommendations, Plasma Science and Technology
Program recommendations, and Cross-cutting recommendations that apply toall programs. The order of presentation of these recommendations does not
imply priority; all recommendations should be acted on in order to fully realize
the strategic plan. Prioritization of activities is expressed through the budget
scenario descriptions below.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

20Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Overarching Recommendations
The Community Planning Process (CPP), completed early in 2020, resulted in thefusion and plasma science research community coming to consensus on new
directions for FES-funded research. This first recommendation aligns the strategic plan with the consensus view, as summarized in Chapter 1:– Recommendation: Align the program with the six technology and science drivers
in order to establish the scientific and technical basis for a fusion pilot plantby the 2040s and advance fundamental understanding of plasmas that translates
into applications that benefit society.
Experimental research and technology development in fusion energy and plasma
science requires state-of-the-art facilities, often at large scale. US participationin the international ITER experiment is critical to accessing burning plasmas atreactor scale. The US has invested significantly over the last decade in thedesign and construction of ITER and will continue to do so over the coming
decade to ensure this access. However, there are additional high-priority
research gaps that require the development of large-scale facilities to be successfully addressed. Outside of the important investment in ITER, there has
been little investment over the last decade in the development of major new
experimental capabilities. Addressing the technology and science drivers will
require continuing investment in the design, construction and operation offacilities that provide important new capabilities. Such investment is necessary
to maintain a vigorous scientific program and to achieve necessary breakthroughs in a number of areas. This strategic plan provides a framework forsequencing the development of these new capabilities.
– Recommendation: Resources for ongoing design and construction of major new
experimental facilities should be established in the DOE Fusion Energy Sciencesbudget.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science21

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Although large scale facilities are essential to make progress in many areas,
important aspects of the technology and science drivers can be successfully
addressed through the development of small and medium scale experimental
facilities. Such facilities are amenable to siting at universities, where investments
can have high impact, provide leadership opportunities to faculty and juniorscientists, and help develop the workforce needed to execute this strategic plan.
– Recommendation: Opportunities should be provided for developing new experimental capabilities at a range of scales, as appropriate to address the goals of
this strategic plan.
The strategic plan should be regularly updated to adapt to new scientific discoveries, technological breakthroughs and other changes in the research anddevelopment landscape.
– Recommendation: This long-range planning process, including a strong communityled component, should be repeated every five years in order to update thestrategic plan.
Strategic planning is most effective if ideas for major new experimental capabilities are developed to the pre-conceptual stage, preferably with mission needand scope well defined and a preliminary cost range established. The Critical
Decision process within DOE provides a framework for accomplishing this goal
and utilizing this process to routinely refine the design of needed new experimental facilities is highly desirable.
– Recommendation: Maturation of pre-conceptual designs, scope, and costing for
proposed new experimental facilities should be part of regular program activities.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

22

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Fusion and plasma science research has strong and growing commercial connections to US industry. These connections exist across the whole portfolio ofindustry applications and an opportunity exists for DOE to take a more active rolein translating advances stemming from federally funded research into commercial applications. Public-private partnerships (PPP) should be formed with private
industry and used as a paradigm for accelerating fusion and plasma science
research that would present opportunities for beneficial partnerships between
the government-funded program and private companies. Research conducted in
the private sector can benefit from federally supported programs by offering
more cost-effective pathways to retire risk in key gap areas while establishing theindustrial infrastructure critical for the next steps in fusion energy and plasma
technology. Access to public facilities and programs can be leveraged to solve
technical problems by private companies that do not have the public sector’scapabilities. Public-private partnership should be used as a tool to engage andstimulate industry involvement. DOE Fusion Energy Sciences has already established successful PPP programs, notably the Innovation Network for Fusion
Energy ( INFUSE ). These activities should be expanded and new public-private
partnership programs, including milestone-based cost-share programs, should
be developed. Investment in PPP activities should align with priorities in thestrategic plan and be balanced by robust investment in federally-funded programs
to maximize effectiveness of the partnership. Further discussion of specificopportunities in PPP is offered in Appendix A.
– Recommendation: Expand existing and establish new public-private partnershipprograms to leverage capabilities, reduce cost, and accelerate the commercialization of fusion power and plasma technologies.
Research and development in fusion energy and plasma science and technology
is inherently interdisciplinary. Given the broad range of applications where thesefields have relevance, there is also a range of federal agencies that currently
provide research support including the National Science Foundation (NSF), DOE
Advanced Scientific Computing Research, DOE High Energy Physics, DOE
National Nuclear Security Administration, DOE ARPA-E, NASA, Air Force Officeof Sponsored Research, and the Office of Naval Research. Coordination among
these federal programs has led to extremely successful research programs; the
NSF-DOE Partnership in Basic Plasma Science and Engineering is a prominent
example. Expanding on these successes and increasing program coordination
could make better use of federal resources and enable more rapid progress
toward development of fusion energy and toward advancing plasma science andengineering.
– Recommendation: Explore and implement mechanisms for formal coordination
between funding agencies that support fusion and plasma science research.
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science23

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Successfully addressing the challenges of bringing fusion power to the grid andadvancing the frontier of plasma science requires innovation, creativity and atalented, multidisciplinary and diverse workforce. There are barriers to achieving
this workforce that should be addressed in order to achieve the goals in thisstrategic plan. First, the fusion and plasma community is not accessing theavailable talent pool in our current workforce. Data show that our researchcommunity has significant deficiencies in workforce diversity, with participationfrom women and underrepresented minorities below national averages forother subfields of physics and engineering. This is not just an issue of recruiting
talent, but also of retaining talent, something that is affected by the culture
within the community and that could be addressed through embracing equity
and inclusion.
Second, DOE lacks the tools necessary to direct development of the needed
workforce to execute this strategic plan. The Office of Management and Budget
recently implemented a policy change that significantly limits workforce andoutreach programs at DOE . This policy was intended to reduce duplication of
education and outreach activities at federal agencies, but had the unintended
consequence of eliminating discipline-specific outreach and workforce programs
that were not being duplicated at other agencies.
Below we offer overarching recommendations on diversity, equity and inclusion
and workforce development. We dedicate Appendix B to more specificrecommendations.
– Recommendation: DOE and FES should seek to implement policy changes that
improve diversity, equity and inclusion within the FES research community.
– Recommendation: Restore DOE’s ability to execute discipline-specific workforce
development programs that can help recruit diverse new talent to FESsupported fields of research.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science24

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Program and Project Specific
Recommendations
The following recommendations address specific elements of the Fusion Scienceand Technology (FST) and Plasma Science and Technology (PST) program
components. As with the earlier recommendations, resource priorities across andwithin program components are delineated in the budget scenarios in the following section, and not by recommendation ordering.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

25

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Fusion Science and Technology
Recommendations
The recommendations described below are targeted toward realizing the overall
mission of establishing the technical basis for an FPP in the 2040s. As such, it
is implicit that all recommendations are implemented in time to be consistent withachieving this goal.
The underlying theme guiding the overall strategic plan is the need to move urgently
and aggressively toward the deployment of fusion energy. The design, construction
and operation of a fusion pilot plant (FPP) is recognized as a critical milestone
toward that goal. Here a coordinated program is delineated that develops FPP
concepts that can advance to engineering designs, and that can rapidly adapt toadvances in understanding and new innovations. Effort is also needed to bringphysics modeling efforts together with engineering tools in order to consider issues
beyond the fusion core, including balance of plant equipment, licensing, remotehandling, maintenance, and reliability. Cutting edge physics, materials and engineering, and integrated models need to be applied to viable confinement concepts
and operating scenarios, so as to continuously inform research needs and priorities.
A diverse range of stakeholders exists for an FPP in both the public and private
sectors, and they will all need to participate in such a coordinated effort.
– Recommendation: Initiate a design effort that engages all stakeholders andestablishes the technical basis for closing critical gaps for a fusion pilot plant.
Construction of a viable fusion pilot plant will require significant technology
development beyond the burning plasma itself. Critical enabling technologies
such as plasma facing components, structural and functional materials, andbreeding blanket and tritium handling systems are currently not advanced
enough for an FPP. The time required to develop these technologies at present
levels of support is incompatible with the goal of a fusion pilot plant by the2040s. Increased support for these program areas is therefore critical. Essential
to this effort is an increased emphasis on foundational fusion materials andtechnology research. This includes the expansion of theory and modeling
efforts that support advancing technology readiness levels (TRLs), accelerating
development of diagnostics and measurement systems that will function
in fusion nuclear (irradiation-hardened) environments, and rapid maturation of
enabling technologies.
– Recommendation: Pivot the research and development focus toward fusionmaterials and technology.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science26

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Fusion nuclear facilities including an FPP will require new materials to be conceived, developed and qualified for nuclear use. This process is well understoodfor nuclear components having a clear path that includes laboratory development, standardized testing, and regulatory oversight and approval. While mixed
spectrum fission reactors are and will remain the primary workhorse forresearch and development and obtaining qualification-level data of irradiatedmaterials, they do not produce the appropriate spectrum for materials irradiatedin a fusion reactor core. In this region, the fusion-born neutrons will produce
significant, yet largely unknown, effects on structural and non-structural components of the first wall, divertor, and blanket. In order to develop materials thatwithstand high levels of fusion neutron irradiation and can be qualified for FPP
service, an irradiation facility that can produce the required damage and transmutation rates is necessary. The Fusion Prototypical Neutron Source ( FPNS )recommended here should be of high reliability and have the flexibility toincrease the damage rate. The primary utility of this facility will be to translate
the measured effects of the fusion spectrum and transmutation products into
codes with predictive capability. Towards this end a comprehensive program ofmodeling, advanced characterization, and high-temperature nuclear-structuraldesign criteria is necessary. These tools, along with the construction of an FPNS,
will build upon the US leadership in fusion materials technology.
– Recommendation: Immediately establish the mission need for an FPNS facility
to support development of new materials suitable for use in the fusion nuclear
environment, and pursue design and construction as soon as possible.
Physics-based understanding of plasma-material interactions (PMI), including
the development of predictive capabilities for the material response and exhaust
solution, is necessary to construct and qualify plasma-facing components(PFCs) for an FPP. Reaching these capabilities will require support for the completion of the scientific infrastructure, of which the Material Plasma Exposure
eXperiment (MPEX) is a central piece. MPEX is a linear plasma exposure device
that will be uniquely equipped to access prototypical plasma conditions in afusion reactor divertor. The MPEX is currently in the design to build process.
Additionally, high heat flux testing via a coupon-level (cm-scale samples) facility
early and a component-level (tens of cm to 1 m scale) facility later, will allow for
development of materials and qualification of components for an FPP. Together
with the existing PMI facilities, these world-leading capabilities will allow forvalidation of PMI models that will form the base of PFC design tools for an FPP.
– Recommendation: Develop the scientific infrastructure necessary for the studyof plasma-materials interactions needed to create plasma facing components
for a fusion pilot plant by completing the MPEX and high-heat flux testing facilities.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science27

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Closure of the fusion fuel cycle via successful breeding and extraction of tritium
will be critical for the sustained operation of an FPP. But breeding blanket technologies are presently at a low technology readiness level and are unlikely toadvance to this demonstration stage without significantly increased researchand development support. In the near term, this should entail a variety of separateeffect test stands and fission reactor irradiations to understand fundamental
tritium transport properties and phenomena in solid and liquid breeder materials,
and associated modeling and model validation efforts. Tritium technologies
related to fueling and exhaust from the plasma, and subsequent processing, will
be demonstrated at significant scale in ITER. The program should involve tritium
experts in the US ITER team so as to maximally benefit from this technology
demonstration. It should also support additional research and development oftechnologies that would minimize the size, cost, and tritium inventory of theplant required to perform these functions. Since there is no current path for the
US to deploy a test blanket module in ITER or any other facility, this program
should also develop a strategy for component-scale blanket testing and support
pre-conceptual design and costing studies for facilities such as a blanket component test facility (BCTF).
– Recommendation: Significantly expand blanket and tritium research and development programs.
Several gaps in the tokamak physics basis need to be closed to confidently design
a low capital cost tokamak FPP. These include advancing understanding oftransport and stability physics for sustaining disruption-free, high-average-power
output operation; energetic particle and burning plasma physics relevant to ahigh-fusion-gain FPP; and plasma-material interactions and material choices forexhaust solutions. Critical issues must also be addressed to integrate improved
understanding into operational scenarios for an FPP. Significant parts of thetokamak physics basis can be addressed immediately through a comprehensive,
multidisciplinary science program utilizing the world-leading DIII-D and NSTX-U
facilities alongside important smaller-scale facilities at universities. DIII-D will focus
on resolving the disruption and transients challenge, and informing long pulse
steady state operation, while NSTX-U will focus on spherical tokamak plasma
physics, along with PMI control and liquid metal PFC evaluations. Collaborations onplanned public and private domestic and international facilities, particularly thosethat focus on long pulse conditions inaccessible in the US will provide uniquecontributions to complete the tokamak physics basis in these areas.
– Recommendation: Close fusion pilot plant design gaps by utilizing research operation of DIII-D and NSTX-U, and collaborating with other world-leading facilities.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science28

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

In addition, the US should fully exploit its participation in ITER to gain experience
with a burning plasma and fusion technology while benefiting from the sharedcost through an international partnership. ITER is the baseline path to a reactor
scale burning plasma and provides unique technology advances that will
accelerate the FPP development path. To ensure timely involvement by the
pre-fusion-power operation phase starting in 2028 , the US urgently needs toestablish a framework for developing an appropriate workforce. This should becentrally organized and activities would ramp up as the project moves toward
first plasma, starting in the near term with opportunities to participate in systemdesign and commissioning efforts.
– Recommendation: Ensure full engagement of the US fusion community in ITER
by forming an ITER research team that capitalizes on our investment to accessa high gain burning plasma.
Even with existing and planned facilities, it will not be possible to fully complete
the tokamak physics basis needed for the US vision of a tokamak based FPP,
followed by an economically attractive power plant. In particular, this vision
requires demonstrating integrated strategies for handling exhaust heat fluxes
well beyond what is expected to be accessible in existing or planned devices,while simultaneously supporting sustained high core plasma performance.
A range of options for closing this Integrated Tokamak Exhaust and Performance(ITEP) gap were considered, including upgrades to existing facilities and collaborations on both private and international tokamaks. While these options provide
excellent opportunities to partially bridge this gap, none were judged sufficient
to close the fundamental core-edge integration challenge encapsulated by
the ITEP gap. Closing that gap is necessary to ensure FPP readiness. Building
upon the recommendations of the NASEM Burning Plasma report, we recommend
the construction of a new domestic tokamak, named EXCITE (EXhaust andConfinement Integration Tokamak Experiment) in this report, as the optimal
solution to closing the ITEP gap. The envisioned EXCITE design would offer
a unique and world-leading combination of flexible power exhaust capabilities,
plasma-facing component options, control actuators, and access to plasma
conditions that would enable continued US leadership in tokamak physics into
the 2030s. At the same time, it is envisioned to be a modestly sized high-fielddevice utilizing short-pulse, non-nuclear operation to enable design and construction on an acceptable timescale at manageable cost. This approach requires
an immediate, significant design and costing effort to advance solutions to the
ITEP gap and confirm the EXCITE mission and scope. This activity should
develop EXCITE pre-conceptual designs that allow for a more detailed assessment of EXCITE cost and technical feasibility, and benchmark them against

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science29

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

alternate gap closure approaches such as collaborations and upgrades. This
activity should include par ticipation from private industry and internationalgroups in order to accelerate the EXCITE schedule and reduce costs.
– Recommendation: Immediately establish the mission need for an EXCITE facility
to close the integrated tokamak and exhaust gap and pursue design and construction as soon as possible.
A tokamak with solid plasma facing components is currently the mainstream
path to commercial fusion. Four innovative areas aim to address key vulnerabilitiesof this approach, potentially leading to more attractive commercial fusion powersystems while leveraging areas of US leadership.
– Stellarators offer intrinsically disruption-free operation with low recirculating
power. The quasi-symmetric stellarator concept is a unique US design approachthat is complemented by international collaboration at the W7-X and LHD stellarators. A new domestic mid-scale US stellarator experiment should be realized.
– Liquid metal plasma-facing components ( PFC ) potentially expand the reactor
wall power limits and alleviate lifetime constraints due to material erosion. Low
recycling, liquid lithium walls may open up pathways to high plasma confinement
and compact FPP designs. Development of liquid metal PFC concepts in nonplasma test stands and existing magnetic confinement facilities should betargeted, building on PFC concepts developed in the existing domestic program.
– Inertial fusion energy (IFE) utilizes advances in lasers, pulsed power technology,
and other innovative drivers to achieve fusion at high fuel density. The enormous
progress made with indirect drive at the National Ignition Facility, direct drive,
magnetic drive Inertial Confinement Fusion (ICF), and heavy ion fusion underpin
the promise of IFE. An IFE program that leverages US leadership and current
investments should be targeted.
– Breakthroughs in alternate magnetic confinement concepts, beyond tokamaks
and stellarators, could lead to a lower cost FPP and subsequently more economically attractive fusion power. Examples include those that require no plasma
current, have moderate or zero toroidal magnetic field, and compact, pulsed
plasma targets that may eliminate auxiliary heating. A program that supports
innovative MFE concepts should be considered.
– Recommendation: Strengthen the innovative and transformative research program
elements that offer promising future opportunities for fusion energy commercialization: stellarators, liquid metal plasma facing components, inertial fusion energy
and alternate concepts.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science30

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Plasma Science and Technology
Recommendations
Fundamental plasma science explores new regimes and deepens our understanding of nature. It includes theories that propose foundational descriptions ofplasmas, computational methods required to predict outcomes of these theories, and experiments that test the predictions. The knowledge these discoveries
provide makes possible the innovative plasma-based technologies of the future.
The future of plasma science will rely on consistent support, even when spendingfor construction projects and larger program elements fluctuate.
– Recommendation: Consistently support fundamental plasma science to ensure
a steady stream of innovative ideas and talent; laying the scientific foundation
upon which the next generation of plasma-based technologies can be built.
Advances in energy compression with intense lasers and pulsed power facilities
have made it possible to squeeze matter to extreme pressures, creating exotic
dense plasma states similar to those thought to exist in the interiors of giant
planets and stars. However, our ability to diagnose or probe the structure anddynamics of these high energy density (HED) plasmas is inherently difficult due
to the very dense and rapidly evolving conditions. Transformational measurement techniques are necessary to develop a physics-based understanding totackle some of the grand challenges in HED physics that span from Warm
Dense Matter (WDM) material properties, to relativistic laser-plasma interactions,
to magnetic field generation, to plasma particle acceleration. X-ray free electron
lasers can provide such sensitive measurements of HED plasma states that they
provide an atom-eye view with attosecond precision, significantly advancing thestate-of-the-art. The MEC-Upgrade is the central piece needed to achieve thesescience goals.
– Recommendation: Complete the design and construction of MEC-Upgrade.
Technologies derived from plasma science investments have had a transformative
effect on modern society. The translation of discoveries in low temperatureplasmas, for example, has created the semiconductor manufacturing industry as
we know it today, providing such advanced electronics as cell phones, laptops
and tablets. Plasma-based technologies will continue to improve the quality oflife with advances in environmental hazard clean up in air, soil and drinking water,
advanced methods for medical treatment and imaging, low-dose X-Ray imaging
sources, and electronics. Plasma-based chemical processing has the potential torevolutionize industry by enabling the production of new materials, providing
a means to recycle plastics and other wastes. It will address climate change by
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science31

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

greatly improving the efficiency of typically energy-intensive chemical processes,
and by providing ways to convert carbon-free electrical energy into the productsthat power society. Translation of basic plasma science research into actualtechnologies can be accelerated by a more organized and formal investment,
including partnerships with industry and other federal agencies, for example,
NSF, NIH, USDA, and EPA.
– Recommendation: Establish a plasma-based technology research program
focused on translating fundamental scientific findings into societally beneficial
applications.
High intensity lasers are opening new fields across plasma physics, from highenergy density science and laboratory astrophysics to new diagnostics andparticle sources for science and industry. Their unprecedented ability to concentrate power — focusing more power than the world’s total electric generating
capacity onto an area smaller than the end of a human hair for a fraction of asecond — creates unique states of matter with broad applications for fundamental science. Such opportunities were recently highlighted in two reports, theNational Academy’s Opportunities in Intense Ultrafast Laser: Reaching for the
Brightest Light and Plasma Science, and in the 2019 Brightest Light Initiative
workshop report on ultrafast lasers. A new type of organization needs to be
developed to maintain the vitality of this research field in the US and to makeavailable the necessary petawatt-scale and high repetition rate laser technologies.
FES has an opportunity to take a leading role in coordinating a high intensity
laser research initiative supporting needs in discovery science and advancing
energy technologies. Support is also needed for a user network of academic
and national laboratory high intensity laser facilities. This would resolve fragmentation where no single national funding agency has responsibility for the field
as a whole. Currently funding comes from an array of sources, including DOE FES,
DOE High Energy Physics (HEP), DOE Accelerator R&D and Production (ARD&P),
DOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), the National Science
Foundation (NSF), and DoD.
– Recommendation: Coordinate a High Intensity Laser Research Initiative in collaboration with relevant DOE offices and other federal agencies.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science32

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Advanced lasers that go beyond the state-of-the-art in high peak power and invery high average power (kilowatts and beyond) would open new frontiers in thelaser-based science of particle acceleration, advanced light sources, high-field
physics and nonlinear quantum electrodynamics, laser-driven nuclear physics,
and extreme materials and astrophysics. Competition in this arena is fierce, withscores of multi-petawatt lasers planned in Europe and Asia, and petawatt-classhigh-repetition-rate laser facilities already in operation internationally. However,the US has an opportunity to stay competitive by leveraging decades-long
investments and know-how in laser technology, while combining competencies
in multiple emerging technologies (machine learning, advanced manufacturing,
diagnostics, and edge computing) to develop a formidable capability that willrapidly accelerate the HED field.
– Recommendation: Pursue the development of a multi-petawatt laser facility anda high-repetition-rate high-intensity laser facility in the US.
Networks provide an organizational structure that supports collaboration byincreasing access to experimental facilities, diagnostics, and computational tools.
LaserNetUS is an existing very successful model that partially supports facility
maintenance and operation, coordinates users, and evaluates proposals. This
program provides researchers who would otherwise not have access to state-ofthe-art facilities the ability to conduct frontier experiments, enabling workforce
development, and facilitating coordination and collaboration. This or a similar
model are likely to have a comparable impact in other areas of plasma scienceand technology, including in low temperature plasmas, laboratory magnetizedplasmas, and pulsed power. In addition to access to experimental facilities anduser support, networks should include access to resources for computationalmodeling and diagnostics. Networks provide a mechanism to organize the community input that defines next-generation user facilities.
– Recommendation: Support networks to coordinate research and broaden accessto state-of-the-art facilities, diagnostics, and computational tools.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science33

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Space and astrophysical plasma physics are enjoying an exciting time of discovery, as advances in spacecraft missions and remote observations provide
insights into previously inaccessible regions in the solar system and beyond.
The Parker Solar Probe spacecraft is orbiting close enough to the sun to directly
measure the solar wind at its origin. The mechanisms by which the solar windis accelerated and heated are among the most persistent and important open
research topics in plasma science. Recent advances in deep space imaging
have culminated in the first visualization of an accretion disk, the turbulent,rotating plasma that is generated as material is gravitationally pulled toward a
black hole. Understanding this phenomena presents a timely opportunity for FES
to establish new laboratory-based plasma space and astrophysics. Controlledlaboratory experiments, for example, can isolate, control, and diagnose plasma
phenomena responsible for the complex behaviors seen in plasma systems
throughout the cosmos. A partnership could be established with NASA in a
focused laboratory space/astro plasma physics program, taking advantage ofa recent NASA-DOE memorandum of understanding affirming mutual interestin collaborative activities pertaining to energy-related civil space activities. The
existing partnership between DOE and NSF could also be leveraged for suchan activity, including collaboration on needed facilities in this area. There is aneed within the community to advance the capabilities of experiments, including
the development of a solar-wind-relevant midscale experiment, to better compliment the advances in spacecraft technology and observation. Laboratory experiments can provide a crucial intermediate between observation and computer
simulation as well. In particular, laboratory experiments can provide specificconditions and environments that can be modeled in great detail in simulation
frameworks.
– Recommendation: Strengthen support of laboratory-based research relevant
to astrophysical and space plasmas through increased programmatic and facility
funding as well as expansion of partnership opportunities.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

34

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Cross-cutting Recommendations
To successfully carry out this plan, there are foundational research activities thatreach across the breadth of the FES portfolio which must be robustly supported.
Fundamental theoretical research, separate from computation, remains essential
for developing new models, insights, and innovations in topics across plasma
and fusion science and technology. This foundational theory work also enables
the FES community to continue taking advantage of growth in advanced scientific computing tools that can further improve our fundamental understanding
and predictive modeling capabilities, including new methods in Machine Learning(ML), Artificial Intelligence (AI), and Quantum Information Science (QIS). This
work is also essential for fusion and plasma research to take full advantage of US
investments in exascale computing. A healthy program for developing diagnostics, measurement, and control techniques for a reactor environment and thebroader environment of plasmas is equally needed to support progress toward
an FPP , as well as toward deeper understanding of plasma science. Thereis community consensus in favor of increased support for programs to develop
critical enabling technologies that advance plasma and fusion science andtechnology and reduce the cost of resulting applications, including an FPP . In
each of these cross-cutting areas, the CPP report identified a wealth of needs
and opportunities that should be addressed and pursued.
– Recommendation: Ensure robust support for foundational research activities that
underpin all aspects of plasma and fusion science and technology.
Models and diagnostics in many areas of plasma science rely heavily on fundamental data for physical processes such as cross sections and rate coefficients,
as well as materials properties such as strength and opacity. These are essential
elements of plasma physics and nuclear science which should be more strongly
supported. In many instances, models are limited by the absence of accurate
input data, rather than knowledge of plasma physics. Research that both supplies
and verifies such fundamental data is essential to advance in many areas ofplasma science, including development of models. This type of research does not
currently have a clear source of funding.
– Recommendation: Support research that supplies the fundamental data required
to advance fusion energy and plasma science and engineering.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

35

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Budget Scenarios
Plans have been developed for the constant level of effort, modest growth andunconstrained (but prioritized) budget scenarios as described in the charge.
While the constrained scenarios require difficult choices, they are constructed torepresent a balanced program with prioritization and emphasis on critical elements that advance the fusion energy mission and sustain scientific impact andtechnological progress. Importantly, the implementation of activities describedin the constrained scenarios allows for continued growth should more favorable
budgets develop in the future. Nonetheless, the constrained scenarios do notprovide sufficient resources to confidently prepare for FPP construction by the2040 s, and large projects in the plasma science and technology area areunfunded. This has consequences as it will cost the US its position as a global
leader in fusion energy and plasma science, and compromise future developments with important societal implications.
In all three scenarios, there is a conscious decision to direct resources to theactivities identified by the community as the most essential and urgent to enable
construction of an FPP. This includes a strategic pivoting toward R&D in fusionmaterials and technology (FM&T). This pivot is essential because FM&T R&D ison the critical path to an FPP, independent of the eventual choice of FPP plasmacore(s). The strategic plan in all scenarios emphasizes innovation in both physics and technology as a means of establishing a unique leadership opportunity
for the US fusion and plasma community, and recommends corresponding
programs be supported in parallel with facility developments. Following thecharge, the scenarios are considered starting from the FY19 budget, specificallyfocusing on the non-ITER construction project portion. The FY19 budget did notinclude significant resources dedicated to design and construction of facilities.
For this reason, in the two constrained scenarios below, any recommended new
construction is funded by redirecting resources from current facility operations
and research programs. This redirection is confined within each of the twothematic areas ( FST and PST ). Table 1 provides a summary of recommended
program and facility actions for each scenario.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science36

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Portfolio Elements

Scenarios

Research, Operations,and Small
Scale Construction

Table 1

Sustain a
Burning PlasmaEngineer for
Extreme Conditions

Yes, enhance

Yes, enhance••

Yes, but reduce

Yes, but reduceYes•• 		• 		Stellarator and Alternates
Operations and Research

Yes, but flat

Yes

Yes, enhance

IFE program

Yes, but limited

Yes, but limitedYes

FPP Design Effort

Yes, but limited

Yes

Yes

•
• 		• 		• 					••
• 			GPS Program

Yes, but reduce Yes
Yes, enhancemodestly						 		HEDP Program

Yes, but reduce Yes
Yes, enhancemodestly				 		• 		 •

•

•

•

•

•
•

•
•

•

Yes, but limited

Yes

Yes, enhance			

Theory and Computation

Yes

Yes

Yes, enhance

Yes		
			

•

•

•

Plasma-Based Technology
Program•Understand thePlasma Universe

Unconstrained

Yes, enhanceStrengthen theFoundations

Modest Growth

FM&T Programs
US Tokamak Operations
and Research

Harness Fusion
PowerConstant Level

Create Transformative
Technologies

Technology and Science Drivers••

New Constructionof Midscale+ Facilities••• 			 •

MPEX

Yes

Yes

FPNS

Yes, but highly
delayedYes, but delayed Yes		MEC UpgradeNo, but develop
further

No, but develop Yes
further					•EXCITENo
		

Yes, but highly
Yes
delayed		

Mid-Scale Stellarator

No

No

BCTF

No

No

Solar Wind Facility

No

No

HHF-Component

No

No

Multi-PW Laser

No

No

•

•

•

• 				
• 				
Yes		•• 			•
Yes				
• 		•Yes		• 				
Yes				
• 		•
Yes

•
•

High Rep. Rate Laser
No
No
			

Yes, withpartnerships				

Midscale Z-Pinch
No
No
			

Yes, withpartnerships				 		

VNS

•

•

•

•
•
• 			

No

No

Concept Study			

ITER research team

Yes

Yes

Private fusion collaborations

Yes, enhance

Yes, enhanceInternational fusion collab.

Yes

Yes

LaserNetUS

Yes

Yes, enhance

ZNet, MagNetUS, LTPNet

No

Yes, but limited

•
• 			
			
•
•
Yes, enhance• 			 •
Yes, upgrade				•••Yes				•••

Collaborations andNetworks
Yes, fullYes, enhance•••

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science37

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

In the constant level of effort budget scenario, formation of a nascent ITER
research team and FPNS design are initiated immediately. FPNS construction
should commence as soon as possible and would likely need to start in thesecond half of the decade with operations not beginning until the 2030 s.
Establishment of EXCITE mission need and initial design should also proceed
immediately. Although EXCITE construction costs likely cannot be accommodated
within this scenario, it is vital to develop a conceptual design, and if possible,
a full construction-ready design in the event budget outlooks improve. Additional
options to help close the integrated tokamak exhaust and performance (ITEP)
gap, including enhanced collaboration with private companies and international
partners, must be developed as well. Increased investments in FM&T enablesignificant growth in programs (including blanket and tritium breeding research),
completion of MPEX on schedule, the buildup of a domestic collaborative FPP
conceptual design effort in the early 2020s. FM&T investment also allows theconstruction of a high heat flux coupon-scale testing facility for PFC developmentin the second half of the 2020s.
The increased emphasis on these FM&T activities requires a reduction in tokamak
research and operations, which are being used to resolve FPP design gaps in
the areas of disruptions, burning plasma physics, plasma-facing materials, andoperating scenarios. In particular, a modest but immediate reduction in operations funding to the existing major tokamak facilities ( DIII-D and NSTX-U ) would
be required, with a more significant reduction (~50%) in the mid-2020s, likely
resulting in the cessation of operations of one of the major tokamak facilities.
The continued growth of the ITER research team and expanded private andinternational collaborations provides increased access to the burning plasma
regime and helps offset the reduced research effort on the existing facilities.
This pivoting of tokamak research and facility utilization should proceed at apace which enables total tokamak research funding to continue at a stable level,with changes in facility emphasis and timing clearly communicated in advanceto avoid significant workforce continuity challenges. A more aggressive ramp
down of existing facilities (DIII-D and NSTX-U) and programs was considered,but it was concluded that this approach would only marginally advance timelines
at the expense of losing workforce expertise deemed essential to closing the
ITEP gap, and would delay closure of the remaining tokamak physics gaps.
Foundational research activities in theory, modeling, and measurement innovations, together with all other existing program priorities (including INFUSE, stellarators, liquid metal PFCs, RF technologies etc.) continue to be supported atcurrent levels in this scenario, and these should similarly pivot toward FPP relevant
needs. A modest IFE program, focused on developing enabling technologies, issupported in this scenario through redirection of existing HEDP funds.
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science38

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Preconceptual development of facilities that are not started within the 10-year
horizon of this charge (e.g. mid-scale stellarator, blanket component test facility
or volumetric neutron source) are also supported. It is important to note thatthe technology readiness levels of the required elements for an FPP would likely
remain low, creating significant risk in proceeding with an FPP in the 2040s.
In the PST portfolio of activities, FES should maintain its level of commitment tofunding single-PI researchers, to operations of collaborative research facilities, andto LaserNetUS. FES should specifically form a program focused on Plasma-Based
Technology by transitioning support for similar research currently funded throughthe centers and the NSF-DOE partnership. It is important for FES to continue todevelop pre-conceptual plans for new facilities and articulate the mission needs
while at the same time planning for future upgrades to existing facilities. Funding
for these activities would be modest, consistent with identifying R&D needs tobring facility planning to the next critical decision level, and be redirected out ofcurrent plasma science facility or experimental user support. In the case of the
MEC-Upgrade, a small level of support similar to current funding levels should be
extended for pre-project R&D and project planning to reduce the risk associatedwith entirely new technologies.
Additionally, FES should encourage community organization toward new networks
in the areas of magnetized plasma laboratory research (MagNet), pulsed-powerplasma research (ZNet), and low-temperature plasma science (LTPNet). Undera constant level of effort budget scenario, this activity will be limited to improving
communications and sharing of resources within the research community.
Particularly in a constrained scenario, it is imperative that FES reaffirm its
commitment to funding agency partnerships including NSF, NNSA, and ARPA-E,
as well as explore the potential for new partnerships with other NSF divisions
and directorates, NASA, NIH, ONR, DOE BES, and AFOSR.
It is important to emphasize that within the constant level of effort scenario, the
new initiatives and pivoting of program elements are only achieved at great cost
to existing areas of US strength, and many time-critical opportunities for future
innovation, impact, and leadership are missed. The pivot to increased FM&T
research is vital for the fusion energy mission, but it cannot proceed in this
scenario at a pace sufficient to be confident in FPP readiness by the 2040s.
Likewise, establishing a new plasma technology program requires reductions ofother vital plasma science and technology research thrusts. In this scenario,
the opportunity to build MEC-upgrade is lost, initiation of EXCITE construction ishighly unlikely, and the US tokamak program is significantly reduced. Many
additional opportunities for innovation throughout the portfolio, including a number

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science

39

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmasof possible PPP opportunities, cannot be acted upon. And although some domestic tokamak research can be redirected to ITER and collaborative efforts on international and private facilities, the resources to take full advantage of theseopportunities are not available, and possibilities for US leadership are inherently
limited on international facilities not predominantly funded by the federal program.
Therefore, while these recommendations help align the FES program with thetechnology and science drivers, the ability to act with urgency, enable innovation,and drive US leadership in this scenario is highly constrained.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science40

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

In the modest growth (2% above inflation) scenario, the FPNS schedule is accelerated by 2 – 3 years, with operations targeted to begin by the end of the 10-year
period of this plan. The related structural and functional materials programs
are also expanded. Significant funding becomes available to accelerate the effort
on the ITEP gap in the latter half of the 2020s, which may enable constructionof the EXCITE facility to begin, as well as possible alternate approaches including
major upgrades to an existing facility and/or more aggressive pursuit of collaborations. An expanded ITER research team also becomes possible in the later
2020s. With modest growth, the technology and science drivers are significantly
advanced by more robustly funding research programs in GPS and HED .
Additional investments in enabling technologies are made that support plans for
new facilities needed to move the field forward. Cross-cutting research thatconnects topical areas such as multi-scale simulation codes, advanced computing, and diagnostic development, should be better supported to provide
increased impacts across the FES portfolio. Small enhancement projects to theexisting PST facilities and networks are pursued to extend their lifetime andincrease their availability. Even small investments in new Network coordination(e.g. LTPNet and MagNet) will enable leadership in these areas. Other strategic
advancement of existing and modest scale new programs can be evaluatedand executed consistent with the recommendations in this report, the priorities
listed below, and the guidance from the CPP report. Given that much of thisadvancement could happen in the later 2020s, future long range planning activities will also be able to provide more detailed guidance for prioritization.
The return on the investment of the relatively small increment from the constantlevel of effort to the modest growth scenario is substantial. It accelerates thefusion energy mission and provides excellent science per incremental dollar bycontinuing to support the high-impact work being done across the program.
Furthermore, it aids the development of emerging technologies and innovative
R&D to ensure continued progress, while also looking toward new facilities thatwill be forward leaning when they are built. However, there are still significant
costs incurred and opportunities missed in this scenario. Most notably, meeting
the goal of FPP readiness by the 2040s remains highly unlikely, significant
reductions to the US tokamak program are still required, and some important timesensitive opportunities for US leadership such as construction of MEC-Upgrade
cannot be acted upon.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science41

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

	In the unconstrained, but prioritized, scenario, the FPNS facility is accelerated
further, with operations anticipated in the latter half of the 2020 s. A number of
additional facilities and program enhancements have been identified that takeadvantage of the opportunities provided by the full breadth and creativity of the
program. The following facilities and their supporting research programs arerecommended, in prioritized order, factoring in the timeliness and urgency of theactivities in supporting the strategic plan:
1 At equal priority:
– Design, construct, and operate EXCITE by 2030 to close the integrated tokamak
exhaust and performance gap.
 Construct and operate the MEC-Upgrade to enable cutting edge science in–laser-plasma interactions, warm dense matter, and dense material physics
via the co-location of a high energy and high repetition rate lasers with an X-ray
free electron laser (XFEL).
2	Design, construct and operate a new Stellarator facility to demonstrate theoretically predicted advantages of an optimized stellarator configuration.
3	Design, construct and operate a Blanket Component Test Facility to perform
non-nuclear testing of integral scale blanket components.
4	Design, construct and operate a new Solar Wind Facility to investigate thefundamental processes in magnetized, high-beta plasmas relevant to, e.g.,accretion disks and stellar winds.
5	Design and begin construction of a Component-level High-heat Flux Testing
Facility for plasma-facing component (PFC) development.
6	Construct and operate a large-scale multi-petawatt laser facility for novel studies
in high field physics and the exa-Pascal pressure regimes.
7	Design, construct and operate a high repetition rate laser facility for precision
studies of complex high energy density phenomena, potentially in collaboration
with other agencies.
8	Design, construct and operate a mid-scale Z-Pinch facility for magnetized highenergy density plasma studies, potentially in collaboration with other agencies.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science42

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

	As emphasized above, programs should be grown as needed to support all
facility research and operations activities. Beyond providing the appropriate
support for facilities, the following new or expanded programs are recommended
in priority order:
1 At equal priority:
– Strengthen FST programs (structural and functional materials, blanket andtritium fuel cycle, magnet development, and solid and liquid PFCs), increase
support for research and operations on existing tokamaks in the early 2020 s,
and ensure optimal support of the national FPP design effort.
– Strengthen programs in GPS and HED to optimize progress and discoveries(consistent with priorities expressed here and within the CPP) in frontier plasma
science and the plasma universe.
2	Strengthen support for the plasma-based technology program, with significant
expansion in the number of grants, establishment of multiple technology-related
centers, and a robust technology transition program.
3	Strengthen additional fusion science programs to optimize progress (stellarator
physics, heating and current drive (H&CD) technologies, balance of planttechnology), and ensure optimal support of the ITER research teams in the mid
to late 2020s.
4	Increase operations support and aggressive upgrades to the LaserNetUS network to expand the base of users while allowing for a diverse set of capabilities
that maintain US competitiveness.
5	Establish a program to develop innovative fusion core concepts using rigorous
evaluation and metrics.
6	Expand the IFE program to more aggressively pursue IFE requirements andtechnologies.
7	Explore options for component-scale irradiation testing in a volumetric neutron
source (VNS).
8	Strengthen and expand networks to coordinate and leverage researchersand facilities in pulsed power, basic magnetized plasma experiments, and low
temperature plasmas.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science43

Chapter 2Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

These new and expanded programs should be pursued as feasible within agiven budget scenario, balanced against the new facility recommendations
using the prioritization criteria expressed throughout this report. With this scenario, all necessary elements could be advanced to the appropriate technology
readiness level to enable a fusion pilot plant by the 2040s. Clearly, this scenario
grows the FES program significantly beyond the constant level of effort or modest growth scenarios. However, with careful staging of new facility construction,
program pivoting, and aggressive utilization of public-private partnerships, we
believe that much of what is recommended in this scenario can be accomplished in a timely manner and under realistic budgets.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science44Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Appendix
47
Appendix A: Public Private Partnerships
53	Appendix B: DEI, Workforce, and Outreach59
Appendix C: Charge Letter
61
Appendix D: Membership
62	Appendix E: Process and Meetings
66
Appendix F: Acronyms

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science45

Appendix

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Appendix A: Public Private Partnerships
Introduction
Public-private partnerships (PPP) are highly recommended as a means of rapidly
and efficiently enhancing scientific and technological capabilities. Both general andfusion-specific plasma science and technology programs will benefit from robust
PPP collaborations. Scientific insights gained from basic and applied plasma
science research lead to innovations that ultimately are developed into technologies
in partnership with industry. Strategic partnership between public programs andprivate activities can provide an effective approach to resolving common technicalproblems facing fusion and plasma science in creating a competitive energy sourcein the US market, as well as new technologies utilizing plasma processes. Because
the nature and missions of the private companies in basic plasma science andfusion energy development differ, and the breadth and maturity of existing PPP
programs also differ, the PPP mechanisms for each area are described separately.

Fusion Science and Technology
There is broad agreement across stakeholders that it is in the best interest of the
DOE and the nation to have commercial fusion energy generation developed andbased in the US. The fusion energy endeavor is receiving new and significant contributions from private entities that aim to address the clean energy market. There are
currently 22 private entities that have raised nearly $2B in private capital to develop
fusion energy concepts, with some targeting commercialization by the 2030s.
Partnership between the public program and private activities can provide an effective approach to resolving common technical problems facing fusion as a competitive energy source. Although public and private strategies differ in technical focus
and deliverables, significant overlaps exist that are beneficial to both parties and canaccelerate progress toward the common goal of bringing fusion power to the grid.
Many private fusion companies are preparing to build facilities to demonstratethat their technologies scale, can be integrated, and can produce fusion-power
relevant plasmas. Examples include DT burning plasmas, next generation spherical tokamaks, high temperature field reversed configurations, high current
pinches, compact stellarators, spheromaks, converging plasmas, impactors,
and laser-driven IFE ignition, all aiming toward design of full-scale power plants.
International competitiveness is an important consideration in the identificationof candidate public-private partnership (PPP) programs, given that the UK,
Europe, China and other countries are supporting development of their burgeoning domestic fusion industries. An Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)
report describing the responsibility of government and industry in the development of fission nuclear power showed two salient points are: 1) the significant
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science46

Appendix A

Program on Technology Innovation: Government and Industry
Roles in the Research, Development, Demonstration, andDeployment of Commercial
Nuclear Reactors, EPRI 2017
Technical Report, EPRI ProjectManager, A. Sowder; https://www.
epri.com/research/products/3002010478

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

scope of shared partnership and responsibility between government and industry in establishing a new type of energy generation technology, and 2) the
gradual transition from government-led to industry-led activities approaching
and realizing commercialization. This provides a positive indication for the
public-private partnership on facilities from a similarly complex technical systemdevelopment.
Candidate public-private partnership programs can take different forms basedon the maturity and mission of the technology, in addition to the capital required.
The DOE currently has PPP programs to aid in the maturation of low TRL technologies and is considering other programs, including a milestone-based costshare program to demonstrate fully integrated mid-TRL technologies. With 22
members of the Fusion Industry Association (FIA) engaged in at least one of thestrategic objective or program recommendation topics from the CPP report,
there exists significant potential for partnership with the public program to close
gaps on these technical topics of mutual benefit.
Low TRL Maturation Programs: Existing technology maturation programs havebeen successful and should be expanded to enhance the scope and scale
for closure of key technology gaps. Examples are the ARPA-E ALPHA, ARPA-E
BETHE, ARPA-E GAMOW, INFUSE, and the SBIR/STTR programs. These were
established to both help mature specific private industry fusion energy concepts,
and to develop widely applicable platform technologies that would be usefulacross many fusion energy concepts. The high degree of interest from the private sector in programs like INFUSE has been evident since many more applications from private companies were received than could be funded. Given
industry demand, additional resources in these programs would enable private
fusion activities to grow and even accelerate.
– ARPA-E ALPHA create tools to develop lower cost pathways to fusion energy– ARPA-E BETHE deliver higher maturity, lower cost fusion technologies throughconcept development of less mature concepts, component development of mature
concepts, and capability teams to accelerate development of all concepts– ARPA-E GAMOW prioritizes R&D in technologies between fusion plasma/balanceof plant, high-duty cycle drivers, and cross-cutting areas such as materials andadditive manufacturing– INFUSE accelerates fusion energy development in the private sector by reducing

impediments to collaboration involving the expertise and unique resources
available at DOE laboratories– SBIR/STTR develops innovative techniques, instrumentation, and concepts thathave applications to industries in the private sector
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science47

Appendix A

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

As the possibility for commercialization grows, partnerships where industry may
bear a greater burden of the cost become advantageous. Completion of prototype products can be made more quickly as private companies driven by market
needs focus on fast and efficient product delivery. A milestone-based 50/50 costshare program should be created for partnerships to develop enabling technologies that are of larger scale than projects funded through INFUSE, ARPA-E, andthe SBIR/STTR paths. Such a program could target the development of specificcomponents or enabling technology for the fusion program. Examples could
include magnets, high-power microwave and radiofrequency sources, neutron
sources for materials irradiation, systems for tritium breeding blankets andtritium processing and plasma facing components. Some of these technologies
could have applicability beyond fusion, for example superconducting magnets
and cables have broad commercial applicability in fields such as energy transmission and medical imaging. A cooling technology that can demonstrate power
handling of greater than 10 MW/m2 as needed for tokamak divertors may also
be applicable to other applications where energy is concentrated such as highenergy particle accelerators or heat removal from advanced semiconductors.
Integrated Facility Cost Share Program: We support the concept of a milestonebased cost share program aimed at the demonstration of integrated facilities
with the potential to more rapidly and cost-effectively close technological gaps
to achieving fusion energy. Such an activity should be executed as a parallelinvestment to augment the public long-range plan. This approach would maintain a robust strategy in the federal program while supporting high-risk, highreward private industry efforts to allow “multiple shots on goal” in the effort todevelop fusion energy.
An example of a new fusion-centered milestone-based cost-share program withprivate industry was recently proposed by the FIA, seeking near-term investment
in order to be relevant for current commercial timelines. The program is based on
the NASA Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) cost share program.
This program, targeting partnership with private industry to take over more routine
operations in low-Earth orbit, proved to be successful in delivering a space launchvehicle at a ~ 90% lower cost than the public program. In this case NASA knew
how to accomplish launches to low Earth orbit; nonetheless, industry innovatedwith new technologies and approaches which demonstrated more cost-effective
solutions. Due to the success of this program, this approach is being applied byNASA and other agencies to lower TRL technologies. In the FIA-proposed fusion
milestone-based cost share program, DOE would leverage private sector creativity
to field new US-based capabilities, enabling fusion commercialization andresearch access to new user facilities. This program would be driven by themarket needs, leveraging the focus private companies provide for fast andA long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science48

Appendix A

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

efficient product delivery. Each private sector participant would meet the milestones agreed upon with DOE to receive the public funds in a proposed 50/50
cost share fraction. This would follow a portfolio approach which has multiple
awardees in a competitive process. Details should be worked out between DOE
and industry stakeholders so that programs could begin as soon as possible.
Facility development and shared programs: The FST program needs new experimental facilities that can close the program gaps in a timely fashion; private entities
can help where mutually beneficial activities are identified. Including private sector
input in the design of these facilities has the potential to reduce both costs anddevelopment time by leveraging private sector efficiencies and practices. DOE canalso look to other PPP models, such as the approach utilized for the DOE Advanced
Reactor Demonstration Program. In addition, private access to operating public
sector facilities and vice-versa can provide an efficient method to close technicalgaps of mutual interest. Generally speaking, the public program should seek toprocure available capabilities and equipment from the private sector.
Information Access: In order to best equip the public and private sectors for
success, FES-funded programs should strive to make information available
between parties. A pathway for information transfer from public to private should
exist for public programs. For example, access to ITER design information
should be provided to US domiciled companies by FES. This access will help
leverage the investments made and technological developments that are occurring and maximize the US investment in ITER. Similar responsibilities lay withprivate entities that participate in public private partnerships. Clear delineationof intellectual property protection should occur as programs are formed, underthe expectation that progress, milestones, and discoveries will be shared whenever possible. Coordination of efforts between all parties might best be madeby consolidation within the FPP pre-conceptual design effort to minimize duplication of effort and advance the pace of discovery.
Mature Stage Programs: New PPP programs to further aid in the commercialization of fusion energy should be considered. The most aggressive private industry plans seek to put fusion power on the grid in the early 2030s. If thesecompanies succeed, mature stage PPP programs will be needed in advance ofthe groundbreaking for the power-producing facilities, which could occur assoon as the mid-to-late 2020s, i.e. within the timeframe of this strategic plan. For
example, loan guarantee programs have been used to help deploy several
successful large-scale energy projects through the DOE Loan Programs Office.
DOE could also consider the development of a long-term power purchaseagreement program, which would simplify financing for the future private sector
fusion power facilities.
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science49Appendix A

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Plasma Science and Technology
Basic plasma science research discoveries can lead to innovations that allow US
industries to maintain global leadership. Historically, insight gained from basic
plasma science has led to many societally important contributions. Plasma
accelerators offer practical applications for cancer treatment and diagnostic
imaging. Atmospheric pressure plasmas are transformative, transferringgreen-energy-derived electricity to electrons and ions in gas or liquid phase forthe purpose of chemical processing, the treatment of disease, water and air
purification, material processing, and light production. Advances in low pressure
multi-frequency RF discharge technology can position the US industry to maintain leadership in semiconductor manufacturing.
The semiconductor industry is an instructive example of how partnerships
between universities, government and industry can come together and successfully revitalize a field. Here plasma science plays a key role in the processing ofsemiconductor devices. In the 1980s, the US had fallen behind in semiconductor
manufacturing. The establishment of the Sematech consortium, a partnership
between 14 US semiconductor companies and the federal government, focused on
improving manufacturing capability. The consortium enabled the US to reclaim its
leadership role and now leads globally with nearly 50% of the market share.
An ecosystem that provides a pathway for partnering with industry and transferring plasma science innovations does not exist beyond the DOE STTR/SBIR
program. Vehicles that facilitate such partnerships are necessary for continued
innovation by bridging the gap between science discovery and forming of newtechnologies. Such partnerships also allow for the resolution of ongoing andarising engineering problems in industry through applied research. The need for
public private partnerships in the semiconductor arena in particular was highlighted in the 2020 Decadal study where it was suggested that a private public
incubator be established that prioritized research particularly focused on breakthroughs in the 5 –10-year timeframe to strengthen US leadership in this trilliondollar market. It would involve collaborative activity between academia, startups
and established companies with the end goal of maturing research and disruptive breakthroughs for the purpose of commercialization.
Shared research programs: Research consortia that bring together public andprivate sectors to solve common technical problems should be encouraged.
Currently, we stand at the precipice of an exciting era in plasma science andtechnology where fusion and plasma research offer potentially transformative
applications. As industrial applications grow, the potential for research consortia
has grown, included partnerships between private companies and universities
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science50Appendix A

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

to solve common problems. With Sematech as the exemplar, new areas for collaboration abound, such as:– Control of atmospheric pressure plasmas for the purposes of chemical processing, the treatment of disease, water and air purification, and light production– Advances in low pressure plasma discharges to improve semiconductor
manufacturing– Plasma accelerators that offer practical applications for cancer treatment anddiagnostic imaging
Questions raised in private industry that are fundamental and not aligned withcommercial goals are often left unanswered. Researchers in universities are well
suited to address foundational issues that may not have immediate applicability
to any one particular company. By pooling resources, public-private consortia may
share the burden and reward.
Shared research programs can also serve to shepherd scientific discoveries
derived from FES -funded research to technological implementation either
through start-ups or licensing. The model suggested here is akin to that utilized
in the NSF. The NSF Partnership in Innovation (PFI) program provides a funding
vehicle for single investigators to carry out customer discovery and develop
technology based on prior research. Such programs provide a framework partnering researchers with industrial entities interested in the development of thetechnology.
Additionally, the current FES SBIR/STTR program should be leveraged for betteralignment with mission goals. FES should convene a community workshop thatbrings together university, national laboratories, and the private sector to outline
research needs in order to focus the program on market driven technologies.
In this way, the program is responsive to new developments and opportunities.
This approach is in contrast to the current approach where SBIR/STTR grants
and contracts are awarded separate from FES priorities.
Altogether, to maintain competitiveness, a framework is required that facilitates
the transfer of technology derived from DOE-funded PST research into innovations
that will impact society. We propose that the recommended newly establishedPlasma Science and Technology program contain vehicles that support PPP
options including single investigator innovation development and partnering withindustry to address technical challenges that impact overall US global leadership.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science51

Appendix A

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Summary
Development of public-private partnerships is recommended as a new paradigm
for appropriately chosen program elements. To maintain and enhance competitiveness, a clear framework is required to facilitate developing FES -funded
research into societally impactful innovations. The programs described above
have all been demonstrably successful where applied and should be implemented within FES . Initiatives are proposed to leverage shared public-privateinterests for maximal mutual benefit. Appropriate resources should be provided
for these programs so that strong partnerships may be established. Regularsharing (e.g. annual or biennial) of information is important so that public programs remain adaptable and private programs might benefit from public accomplishments. Growth of PPP programs will encourage the public and private
sectors to work closely together to more rapidly develop fusion energy andplasma technologies for the betterment of the US and the world.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science52

Appendix

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Appendix B: DEI, Workforce,and Outreach
The success of this strategic plan requires innovation, creativity and a talented,
multidisciplinary and diverse workforce. This appendix seeks to enable thisrequired workforce by detailing actions that can be taken to achieve a morediverse, equitable and inclusive (DEI) environment and growth of the needed
workforce. The Community Planning Process (CPP) report presented consensus
views on needs in these areas. Quoting from that report:“Diversity is expressed in myriad forms, including all ages, socio-economic
backgrounds, ethnicities, genders, gender identities, gender expressions,
national origins, religious affiliations, sexual orientations, family education level,
disability status, political perspective — and other visible and nonvisible differences. Equity ensures equal opportunity and the impact of those opportunities
in equitable outcomes for all persons; requiring zero tolerance for bias, harassment, and discrimination. Inclusion is the deliberate effort to ensure that ourcommunity is a place where differences are welcomed and encouraged, different
perspectives are respectfully heard and where every individual feels a senseof belonging.”
Data show that the fusion and plasma science research communities havesignificant deficiencies in workforce diversity, with participation from women andunderrepresented minorities below national averages for other subfields ofphysics and engineering. This means we are not accessing the available talentpool in our current workforce, a clear barrier to our success. The problems do
not stop with recruiting talent into the field as retaining diverse talent in the field
is affected by the culture within the community. A community that is not welcoming and supportive to diverse populations will have a hard time retaining those
populations. Embracing equity and inclusion is the key to addressing this issue.
A recent policy change by the Office of Management and Budget placed significant limits on workforce and outreach programs at DOE. This policy was wellintended, targeted at reducing duplication of education and outreach activities
at federal agencies, but had the unintended consequence of eliminating discipline-specific outreach and workforce programs that were not being duplicatedat other agencies. Specifically, this eliminated an important graduate fellowship
program and placed limits on undergraduate research programs executed by
DOE . DOE has been able to continue to offer opportunities for undergraduates
through the Science Undergraduate Laboratory Internships ( SULI ) program,which is an excellent program that brings undergraduates to national laboratories for research experience. What was lost was a broader undergraduate
research program that placed undergraduates at a wide range of institutions,
including universities and industry, where they could participate in a wider
spectrum of FES research activities. DOE has created a new program, the Office
A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science53Appendix B

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmasof Science Graduate Student Research (SCGSR) Program, that provides resources
to enable graduate students to spend a portion of their graduate program working
with a mentor at a national lab. This program is very useful, but does not replace
the former graduate fellowship program. The SCGSR can not be utilized as a tool torecruit graduate students into the field; it helps students already committed toworking in the area in obtaining access to cutting edge facilities and national lab
researchers to complete their thesis work. A graduate fellowship program cantarget a diverse population of undergraduate students and be used as a tool torecruit them into areas supported by DOE with workforce needs.
The following sections detail actions that FES can take to address DEI, workforce and outreach needs. Though listed separately, all three areas tie together
strongly: effective expansion of the fusion and plasma science workforce
requires tapping into the full available talent pool, which better reflects thediversity of gender, background, and identity, as well as enacting policies
aimed at improving the social climate within the community and institutions toincrease retention overall. The dual efforts of improving DEI and developing
workforce, in turn, stem from an effective outreach effort that spans all stages
from energizing the imagination of K–12 students and the general public, todirectly attracting undergraduates and graduate students into the field, toexpanding and retaining plasma and fusion faculty presence at colleges anduniversities throughout the nation. In addition, there are significant opportunities for recruitment of established scientists and engineers working in areas
other than fusion and plasma into the community, in both the federal programand private fusion and plasma-focused companies. Progress on any one ofthese fronts will be effective in improving all three desired outcomes.
Since the CPP report was community-based, many of the recommendations are
aimed at the fusion and plasma science research community as a whole rather
than to any one funding agency. The CPP report made a number of recommendations on DEI and workforce, all of which should be acted on. Here we haveidentified specific recommendations that are actionable by DOE or otherwise
within the federal government. We call out a second set of recommendations that
DOE could advocate for in partnership with other federal agencies and research
institutions.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science54Appendix B

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Recommendations that are
actionable by FESDiversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI)
For a diverse, equitable and inclusive environment in the field of fusion and plasma
science and technology, we recommend the following actions:– Unwarranted conscious or unconscious bias (based on gender, race/ethnicity, orother personal and scientifically-irrelevant characteristics) can interfere with afair and equitable funding process, and should be discouraged by FES-funded
programs. This impact can be minimized, for instance by implementing double
blind peer-reviewing of proposals. Similar review processes have been successfully implemented in other agencies, such as NASA and NSF.
– Policies that promote work-life balance are essential towards achieving better
gender and financial-background equality and will improve the diversity of theworkforce. While we understand that FES has limited power in implementing
parental leave policies and the topic is part of a broader national conversation,
FES can take further action to accommodate parenthood among its funding
recipients. For instance, FES should work with PIs to adjust milestones anddeliverables to accommodate research team members who take family leave.
FES has already adapted deadlines due to the exceptional conditions during
COVID-19, proving that the avenues for these deadline adaptation exist.
– Among equally competitive proposals, the committee believes that DEI and workforce improvements should weigh into the awarding process. This can beachieved by implementing an additional requirement in proposals for the consideration and promotion of DEI efforts as an integral aspect of the review process
for institutions seeking federal funding from DOE OFES. Successful examplesof similar actions exist, such as the requirement for addressing “broader impacts”
in proposals submitted to NSF.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science55

Appendix B

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Workforce development
In order to attract the best talent and recruit individuals with the skills that the
program needs, as well as to retain them and grow our workforce:– As recommended in Chapter 2: Restore DOE’s ability to execute discipline-specificworkforce development programs that can help recruit diverse new talent to
FES-supported fields of research. We recognize that this requires action beyond
DOE.
– Reinstate or create fellowships to help recruit and retain the best students into
FES research areas, including a diverse applicant pool. Fellowships for new
graduate students are critical to recruitment. Expanded support should be
provided to directly support students and postdocs during their tenure (such as
internships and SULI for undergraduate and SCGSR for graduate students) andfor early career scientists (such as the DOE Early Career Research Program).
These programs improve recruitment, facilitate collaboration, and mitigate
imbalances of power. Programs should emphasize broadening the recruitment
pool and opportunities for women and underrepresented minorities. They should
support work at National Laboratories, Universities, and private companies.
– Expand or create programs that aim to increase and better retain faculty lines atuniversities and colleges, including faculty start-up grants to incentivize departments to grow their existing fusion or plasma science faculty numbers or to startsuch a program outright. While existing Early Career Awards (ECAs) support
new junior faculty, no program currently exists within FES to encourage collegesor universities to hire fusion or plasma science faculty in the first place. Suchprograms have been successfully implemented at other funding agencies (e.g.
NSF’s Faculty Development in the Space Sciences Program). Such a program
can also address equity and diversity by expanding and aiming such efforts at
Historically Black Colleges and Universities ( HBCUs), Tribal Colleges andUniversities (TCUs) Program, and Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs). Efforts to
support retention of faculty should also include expanding ECAs to non-tenure
faculty at universities and implementing joint university/national lab faculty
development programs.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science56

Appendix B

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Outreach
Recruiting the best workforce requires reaching out to a broad sector of the
public, at every educational level. While we are aware of the limitations imposed
by OMB regulations, we request FES to support outreach to attract a diverse
future workforce and publicly promote the role of plasma and fusion in society.
There is an opportunity to use FES resources to promote plasma science, andin particular fusion science. These actions should come from FES, given that NSF
does not currently support fusion science research or outreach, and thus the
only fusion associated outreach can be conducted by national labs. The goal ofthese outreach activities is to create a broad entrance to the plasma and fusion
science and technology workforce pipeline, which will enable access to thediversity (in skill-set and beyond) required to execute the program.
These FES resources can be used to support the development of a new publicfacing website for plasma science and fusion (potentially in collaboration or
coordination with existing resources). Such resources could also support
pre-college outreach to engage the youngest minds with the FES program andinspire students to consider careers in plasma and fusion science. The latter
could include student design competitions, which have proven successful for thepromotion and attractiveness of other fields (e.g., NASA).

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science57

Appendix B

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Actionable via collaboration or otheragencies and institutions
In addition to the actions directed to FES , the committee encourages FES toengage with other federal agencies and stakeholders on DEI and Workforce
development recommendations laid out in the CPP report that are not directly
actionable by FES alone.
– Institutions should engage Diversity, Equity, Inclusion (DEI) Experts to advise ourcommunity and develop assessment tools. Such programs, such as that led by
APS-DPP, exist and have already been successfully implemented in FES funded
institutions.
– FES-funded institutions and events should adopt or update Policies and Codesof Conduct, including articulating and adopting codes of conduct for meetings;
requiring training on bias, cultural competence and bystander intervention;and investigating how to assess reports of harassment. In its implementation,for
instance, a Code of Conduct could be required for all DOE funded workshops
and events.
– DOE, and FES-funded institutions should create an accessible environment for
all members of our community (in national laboratories and in universities,
respectively). All institutions funded by or working in fields of FES should also
expand recruitment pools (geographically, fields of study, types of institutions,etc.) and identify currently underrepresented areas with linkages to the workforce development topics outlined above.
– Create Parental Leave Policies: in addition to direct FES action as indicatedabove, FES should work with institutions on more uniform family leave policies
across institutions to economically support up to 12 weeks of leave taken
under the protection of the Family and Medical Leave Act, allowing continued
support for personnel during Principal Investigator leave, supporting flexible
hours and telecommuting, and access to lactation space.
– Institutions funded by or working in fields of FES should develop flexible
post-undergraduate education options and facilitate employment of scientists
and engineers with BS/MS degrees at FES facilities and BS/MS development
programs.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science58

Appendix

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Appendix C: Charge Letter

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science59Appendix C

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science60Appendix

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Appendix D: Committee Membership
Troy Carter, chair
University of California,
Los AngelesDavid Schaffner
Bryn Mawr College

Scott Baalrud
University of Iowa

Oliver Schmitz
University of Wisconsin,
MadisonRiccardo Betti
University of Rochester

Uri Shumlak
University of Washington

Tyler Ellis
Commonwealth Fusion
Systems

Lance Snead
Stony Brook University

John Foster
University of Michigan
Cameron Geddes
Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory
Ariana Gleason
SLAC National Accelerator
Laboratory
Christopher Holland
University of California,
San Diego

Wayne Solomon
General Atomics
Erik Trask
TAE Technologies
Francois Waelbroeck
University of Texas, Austin
Anne White
Massachusetts Instituteof Technology
Don Rej, ex officio
Los Alamos National
Laboratory, retired

Paul Humrickhouse
Idaho National Laboratory
Charles Kessel
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Ane Lasa
University of Tennessee,
Knoxvillle
Tammy Ma
Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory
Rajesh Maingi
Princeton Plasma Physics
Laboratory

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science61

Appendix

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Appendix E: Process and Meetings
This report is the culmination of a two-year, two-phase strategic planning process.
The first phase, the Community Planning Process (CPP), was the primary mechanism
for all members of the community to provide input. In the second phase, the FESACLong Range Planning study, we used the CPP report as a starting point. The subcommittee sought a variety of additional inputs from the community and othersources during our 10 month study. This included community focus groups andworkshops and briefings from a number of federal agencies supporting plasma andfusion related activities as part of information gathering to appreciate the funding
landscape and access partnering opportunities. Input gained from these activities
along with discussions carried out at weekly committee meetings facilitated thedevelopment of the LRP report. These activities are described in more detail below.

CPP Process
The CPP, organized under the auspices of the APS Division of Plasma Physics(DPP), was a year-long, community-led process that occurred just prior to our FESAC
LRP activity. The findings of the final CPP report were based on the synthesis ofcommunity generated white papers, webinars, town halls at major fusion and plasma
meetings, and 5 major workshops. The report described opportunities in fusion andplasma science for the purpose of improving our understanding as well as facilitating the translation of science to societally beneficial applications. As such thecommunity report included: 1) Fusion Science and Technology, 2) Discovery Plasma
Science, and 3) Cross Cutting Opportunities. The CPP report achieved significant
community consensus, and its initiatives and priorities formed the basis for our own
prioritization and development of the various budget scenarios.

Committee Focus Groups
In addition to the CPP, the committee gathered additional input through community focus groups. A series of nine focus group sessions were carried out inJune – July 2020 with a total of 90 participants. Participants included representatives from all program areas, across demographics and experience levels. The
focus group sessions had a number of objectives:– Address the question of resource division between fusion science and technology
and discovery plasma science (called plasma science and technology in this report)– Determine program synergies and cross cuts
– Gather feedback on the long range planning report formulation process

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science62

Appendix E

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Virtual Workshop
On August 20 2020, a virtual workshop was held for additional information gathering from the community. The meeting provided an opportunity for the fusion
science and technology and plasma science and technology communities toexchange ideas and understand the priorities of each program area. An additional
objective of the workshop was to merge the mission and vision statements andvalues developed in the two communities into a single strategic plan. The effort
provided input into development of a process to merge the plans and allocate
resources between the two areas in the constrained budget scenarios. The workshop included participation from approximately 200 members of the community.

Stakeholder Federal Agency Briefings
The committee was briefed by representatives from a number of other government agencies and projects with synergistic research interests. The goals of
the briefings were to provide insight into plasma related focus areas and theirfunding footprint in the various agencies, discuss the potential for partnering
opportunities, and to learn about the execution of large projects and publicprivate partnerships by other government agencies. The committee received
presentations from the following individuals and agencies:
On synergistic topical reports:
Mike Mauel, on the 2019 NAS report on Burning Plasma Research
Roger Falcone, Felicie Albert, and Jon Zuegel on the NAS report Opportunities
in Intense Ultrafast Lasers: Reaching for the Brightest Light
Mark Kushner and Gary Zank on the 2020 NAS Decadal Assessment of Plasma
Science (via attending their presentation to FESAC)
Carolyn Kuranz, Lauren Garrison, Nate Ferraro, Nathan Howard, and John Sarffon the Final CPP Report
From other agencies:
Ann Satsangi, NNSA
Scott Hsu, ARPA-E
Thomas Zurbuchen, NASA
Slava Lukin, NSF
On public/private partnerships:
Alan Lindenmoyer (NASA), on the COTS program
Dave Petti (INL), on the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP)
Adrian Collins (INL), on the Versatile Test Reactor (VTR)A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science63Appendix E

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Committee meetings
As with many other activities in 2020, COVID- 19 obviated all plans for the subcommittee to meet in person. The entire subcommittee met weekly via zoom forthe duration of our activity, for discussion aimed at understanding overall program
needs and synthesizing the overall strategic plan. Additional weekly meetings
included separate DPS and FST discussion meetings to develop program-specificpriorities, and multiple additional meetings of smaller subgroups tasked withdrafting specific portions of the report or addressing issues for later discussion
by the larger group. The overarching goal of the meetings was to formulatea plan for three budget scenarios: constant level of effort, modest growth andunconstrained growth (blue sky). Cost estimates for program elements andfacilities informed the discussions to develop the three budget scenarios in the
FESAC Charge, but were not the sole basis. Status updates were provided atregular (virtual) FESAC meetings on March 16, June 23 – 24, and August 24.

Costing and Budget Scenarios
DOE Fusion Energy Sciences briefed the committee several times on budgets,providing details of the FY19 budget that is called out in the charge along withhistoric budget information and information on the FY20 budget enacted. FES
also provided information on costs for ITER operations during the 10 year windowof the charge. Additional meetings of smaller subgroups took place to establish
which program elements and user facilities from the CPP Report would need
to be costed by outside experts. Once the list of facilities to be costed was
finalized, outside experts were enlisted to provide cost estimates. The list of
program elements were costed by the Subcommittee. These cost estimates forthe program elements and facilities were used in exercises to understand thethree budget scenarios in the FESAC Subcommittee Charge. It was determinedby the Subcommittee that the cost estimates of facilities and program elements
could only be used to provide a range of plausible costs, given that the facilities
were at a low level of development (few were even at the pre-conceptual level).
Given the range and the associated uncertainty, the Subcommittee decided not
to include cost estimates in the Report and in the budget scenarios. The resulting budget scenarios described in this report are the result of a combinationof prioritization within the program as derived from the CPP report and costing
exercises targeting the specific budget scenario.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science64Appendix E

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

High Heat Flux Facilities
The Community Planning Process (CPP) recognized high-heat flux testing ofmaterials as a critical step in the development of plasma-facing components for
future fusion reactors. However, the CPP did not specify how to fulfill this need.
Given the safety-driven limitations of international collaborations in the study of
nuclear materials (such as the difficulty of transporting activated samples),and the lack of capability for high-repetition, multi-megawatt heat flux exposure
currently in the US, we concluded that two new facilities are needed for FPP
preparation: a coupon-scale (i.e. sample sizes of cm) high-heat flux exposure
facility for candidate material testing and model validation that form the basis
for an FPP plasma-facing component designs, both solid and liquid; and acomponent-scale facility (i.e. sample sizes of tens of cm up to 1m, as needed)for qualification of components and related systems, such as active cooling.

Implementation
This strategic plan and its recommendations are advisory input to FESAC andthe DOE-SC office of Fusion Energy Sciences (FES). Implementation of these is
the responsibility of FES program management.

Acknowledgements
Finally, the successful completion of this activity and report was enabled bya number of individuals beyond the subcommittee itself. We sincerely thank Jeff
Hoy and Carl Strawbridge for their assistance with cost estimation; Jim Dawson
for professional editing of the final report and Michael Branigan for layout andgraphics; Sam Barish for critical insight from FES throughout the process; andLaurie Moret for facilitating consensus, during both the CPP and LRP activities.

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science65Appendix

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

Appendix F: Acronyms
ASCR

Advanced Scientific Computing Research program

AI/ML

Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning

AFOSR

Air Force Office of Scientific Research

APS DPP

American Physical Society Division of Plasma Physics

ARPA-E

Advanced Research Project Agency-Energy

BCTF

Blanket Component Test Facility

CD

Critical Decision

CPP

Community Planning Process

DEI

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

DOD

Department of Defense

DOE

Department of Energy

DPS

Discovery Plasma Science

EPA

Environmental Protection Agency

EXCITE

EXhaust and Confinement Integration Tokamak Experiment

FES(Office of) Fusion Energy Sciences

FM&T

Fusion Materials and Technology

FPNS

Fusion Prototypical Neutron Source

FPP

Fusion Power Plant

FST

Fusion Science and Technology

GPS

General Plasma Science

HED

High Energy Density

HEP

High Energy Physics

HEDLP

High Energy Density Laboratory Plasma

HEDPHigh Energy Density Plasma

HHF

High Heat Flux

ICF

Inertial Confinement Fusion

IFE

Inertial confinement Fusion Energy

INFUSE

Innovation Network for Fusion Energy

ITEP

Integrated Tokamak Exhaust and PerformanceLM

Liquid Metal

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science66Appendix F

Powering the Future: Fusion and Plasmas

MEC-U

Matter in Extreme Conditions instrument Upgrade

MPEX

Material Plasma Exposure eXperiment

MFE

Magnetic confinement Fusion Energy

NASA

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NASEM

National Academy of Science, Engineering, and Medicine

NIF

National Ignition Facility

NIH

National Institutes of Health

NNSA

National Nuclear Security Administration

NSF

National Science Foundation

NTUF

New Tokamak User Facility

ONR

Office of Naval Research

P5

Particle Physics Project Prioritization Panel

PFC

Plasma-Facing Component

PFPO

Pre-Fusion Power Operation

PMI

Plasma-Material Interaction

PPP

Public-Private Partnership

PST

Plasma Science and Technology

QIS

Quantum Information Systems

RFRadiofrequency

TRL

Technology Readiness LevelUSDA

US Department of Agriculture

VNS

Volumetric Neutron Source

WDM

Warm Dense Matter

XFEL

X-ray Free Electron Laser

A long-range plan to deliver fusion energy and to advance plasma science67

Powering the Future
Fusion & Plasmas

A long-range plan to deliver
fusion energy and to advance
plasma science

For more information on Powering the Future: Fusion & Plasmas or to download a PDF copy of the report, visit usfusionandplasmas.org