ARPA-E Fusion-Energy Programs and Plans
Presentation to FESAC
Rockville, MD, Oct. 2, 2019
Scott C. Hsu, Program Director, ARPA-E
scott.hsu at hq.doe.gov
Malcolm Handley, T2M Consultant, ARPA-E
Colleen Nehl, Technical Support, Booz Allen Hamilton

High-level ARPA-E perspective‣ Fusion strategic plan should be responsive to dynamic constraints imposed by evolving energy
markets through an adequately diverse portfolio– Very different energy landscape shaped today’s fusion program– The competition today: LCOE <6 ¢/kWh, unit size <<1 GWe, capital cost <$1B, <$2/W– Fusion should absorb fission’s lessons (i.e., reduced capex and opex)‣ Increased alignment between federal and private efforts could enhance fusion’s near-term
relevance and raise the tide for all boats––––

Private fusion investments represent significant market pull
Little federal support today in specific areas of interest to private companies
Federal leadership-class capabilities will help accelerate private efforts
Difficult for federal or private efforts alone to achieve timely, commercially viable DEMO

‣ ARPA-E stands ready to coordinate further with FES; we can contribute strongly to– Developing impactful fusion public-private partnerships– Providing a detailed understanding of energy markets and commercialization requirements– Making connections to other energy researchers solving synergistic problems

1Outline‣ Introduction‣ Brief review of the ALPHA* program (2015–2019)‣ Fusion program plans (2019–?)‣ Q&A (lots of backup materials)*Accelerating Low-Cost Plasma Heating and Assembly2

ARPA-E is an agency within the U.S. Dept. of Energy modeled
after DARPA
Mission: To overcome long-term, high-risk technological barriers in energytechnology development by providing applied R&D funding for high-risk, highreward transformational ideas

Ensure U.S.
Technological Lead &U.S. Economic andEnergy Security

REDUCEIMPORTS

IMPROVEEFFICIENCY

FY19 Enacted: $366M
FY20 House: $425M
FY20 Senate: $428M

REDUCEEMISSIONSNational Academies report An Assessment of ARPA-E (2017)3

ARPA-E supports transformative applied energy R&D, bridging
the gap between basic research and energy commercialization(none for fusion)

Capital investment
Adapted from former ARPA-E director A. Majumdar’s House Science testimony, 2010

4

ARPA-E supports transformative applied energy R&D, bridging
the gap between basic research and energy commercialization
Privately funded fusion companies(VCs, small business, private equity)
Office of
Science/ITER(none for fusion)

Capital investment
Adapted from former ARPA-E director A. Majumdar’s House Science testimony, 20105

ARPA-E program development and execution process• Collaborative
milestonenegotiation• Active project
management andfeedback• Attention to T2M• Situationalawareness• Identification of“white space”• Stakeholder
engagement

6What problem is fusion trying to solve? Risk mitigation forachieving a cost-effective zero-carbon grid by mid/late century• Significant gap exists to achieve zero or negative carbon emissions by mid/late century• Firm, low-carbon sources needed to keep costs reasonable

INDC = Intended Nationally
Determined Contributions

Energy Futures Initiative, 2018 (modified
from UNEP Emissions Gap Report, 2017).

N. A. Sepulveda et al., Joule 2, 2403 (2018)

See “Heilmeier questions,” which must be answered in ARPA-E program formulation.

7

How much does fusion need to cost? We don’t know for surebut have an idea based on competition and financing
Aspirational fusion-energy cost metrics that will
guide fusion R&D choices at ARPA-E
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
DEMO OCC ($B)$/W

LCOE (¢/kWh)net-gain experiment($100M)8

Outline‣ Introduction‣ Brief review of the ALPHA* program (2015–2019)‣ Fusion program plans (2019–?)‣ Q&A (lots of backup materials)*Accelerating Low-Cost Plasma Heating and Assembly

9

ALPHA program objectives ($30M over 3–4 years)‣ Explore lower-cost path to fusion-energy

Sandia MagLIF provided convincing MIF proof
of concept à helped justify the program

development and eventual deployment‣ Focus on pulsed approaches with final
density of 1018–1023 cm-3

– Magneto-inertial fusion (MIF) and Z-pinch
variants‣ Enable rapid learning– High shot rate: hundreds of shots during ALPHA,
scalable to ≥1 Hz in a future power plant– Low cost per shot: “drivers” < $0.05/MJ and“targets” < 0.05 ¢/MJ over life of plant
See archived ALPHA program description and review paper, C. L. Nehl
et al., “Retrospective of the ARPA-E ALPHA fusion program,” J. Fusion
Energy, accepted (2019).

M. R. Gomez et al., PRL 113, 155003 (2014)
P. Schmit et al., PRL 113, 155004 (2014)10

ALPHA portfolio (awards ~$400k–$5.9M)
Integrated concepts

Driver development

Applied MIF science

Magnetic
compressionof an FRC

Plasma guns toform high-speed
plasma liners

Underlying
science of MIF at
fusion conditions

Shear-flow-stabilized
Z-pinch(direct pulsed power)

Scalable MEMSbased ion
accelerator

Helical Taylor
state as stable
plasma target

Staged Z-pinch(direct pulsed power)

Piston-driven
liquid liner

NumerEx

Physics ofplasmacompression

11

ALPHA portfolio (awards ~$400k–$5.9M)
Integrated concepts
Magnetic
compression
FuZE: SFS Z-Pinch – UW / LLNLof an FRC

Award No. DE-AR0000571

Shear-flow-stabilized
Z-pinch(direct pulsed power)

Figure 6: Top: Characteristic signal observed on the scintillator detector showing neutron
production during the quiescent period. For a 20% deuterium/80% hydrogen gas mixture,
the neutron signal is sustained for approximately 5 µs, which is 5000 times the m=1 mode
growth time. Bottom: the normalized magnetic field fluctuation amplitude for the m=1
mode, at locations z = 5, 15, 25, and 35 cm, decreases below an empirical threshold of 0.2
which indicates a quiescent plasma from 21 µs to 38 µs along the assembly region. The
evolution of the plasma pinch current at z = 15 cm is included for reference and shows apeak current plateau of approximate 200 kA during the sustained neutron production.

Staged Z-pinch(direct pulsed power)

5

Driver development

Applied MIF science

Plasma guns toform high-speed
plasma liners

Underlying
science of MIF at
fusion conditions

Scalable MEMSbased ion
accelerator

Helical Taylor
state as stable
plasma target

Piston-driven
liquid liner

NumerEx

Physics ofplasmacompression

Summary

Employing the SFS Z-pinch concept, plasma parameters of 1017 cm−3 electron particle density, 4 × 104 m/s peak plasma velocity, 106 /s radial shear, and pinch radius of approximately

12Summary of ALPHA outcomes‣ Technical outcomes– Evidence of >1-keV temperatures and DD neutron production for 3 integrated concepts– Demonstrated two new, potential compression-driver technologies– Developed three new, low-cost, high-shot-rate platforms to study MIF target physics‣ Tech-2-market (T2M) outcomes– 3 new spinoff companies and $35M private capital raised by ALPHA projects*– Dozens of peer-reviewed publications, 6 patent applications filed, APS-DPP mini-conference (2018)– ALPHA teams among the founding members of the Fusion Industry Association‣ Positive (but cautious) findings from 2018 JASON report:– MIF within 10% of scientific breakeven for ~1% of total US fusion R&D funding– Near-term priority should be scientific breakeven in a system that scales to commercial power plant– Support all promising approaches; do not concentrate resources on early frontrunners*Since 2015, publicly disclosed private funding into worldwide fusion R&D doubled to over $1.5B.

13

Outline‣ Introduction‣ Brief review of the ALPHA* program (2015–present)‣ Fusion program plans (2019–?)‣ Q&A (lots of backup materials)*Accelerating Low-Cost Plasma Heating and Assembly

14ARPA-E interested in transformative fusion R&D to help enablegrid-ready fusion demo in ~20 years for OCC* < “few $B”
Cost constraint

Timeliness constraint

Develop credible lower-costconcepts with identifiable upside
potential (MIF and others)

Catalyze technology/engineering development
for commercially motivated fusion concepts

Develop technologies withpotential to drastically reduce costfor tokamaks, stellarators, IFE

Priorities: plasma-facing/blanket, tritiumprocessing, and high-duty-cycle enablers
see Request for Information(50 responses, will provide to FES/CPP PC for
responses with authors’ permission)*OCC = overnight capital cost

Potential program A: Develop credible fusion concepts that may
cost ~!($100M) for net gain and ~!($1B) for grid-ready demo
Where wewant to go

X
X
X
X
X
X

LawsonObjective: Deliver more concepts at or on a path tobetter reward/risk ratios for private development

Many low-costconcepts today

16

Potential program B: Catalyze enabling-technology solutions tocommon challenges of commercially motivated fusion concepts
Free-surface liquid
PbLi first walls

Replaceable
solid first wall
• Engage outside communities• Enable use of thick liquid blankets• Tritium process intensification tominimize tritium inventory• Accelerated subscale material testing• Beyond solid divertors• Exploit advances in modern powerelectronics• Advanced fuels and power cycles

Different but synergistic challenges/requirements
compared to ITER-based DEMO

FLIBE
immersion
blanket17

ARPA-E is exploring idea of “capability teams” to support fusion
concept teams
Diagnostics (8 projects
funded already)

Theory,modeling,
HPC

Machinelearning

Engineering design/fab(mechanical+electrical)???
Multipleconcept teams

Leverage thebest expertise

Avoid reinventing the wheelby each concept teamStretchlimited $$Build publicprivate partnership
18

Fusion T2M plans at ARPA-E: Smoothing the pathway to fusioncommercialization‣ Support studies to identify first markets for fusion at a range of unit size and cost
‣ Weave in programmatic structure and incentives for public-private partnering‣ Build finance scaling through investor engagement‣ Help establish fusion regulatory certainty and public acceptance19SC/FES legislation of interest/relevance to ARPA-E‣ H.R. 589 “Department of Energy Research and Innovation Act” (became public law no.
115-246 on 9/28/2018):– SC/ARPA-E coordination on fusion energy– Support IFE and a portfolio of alternative and enabling fusion energy concepts‣ S. 97 “Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act of 2017” (became public law no. 115248 on 9/28/18)– Extensive language on memorandum of understanding between DOE and NRC tobenefit advanced-reactor testing, development, and demonstration including fusion‣ Pending FY20 Senate appropriations language on private-public partnership:– Up to $20M for INFUSE– Up to $20M to initiate a (NASA/COTS-like) cost-share program for integrated
prototype demonstrations over the next 5 years

20Outline‣ Introduction‣ Brief review of the ALPHA* program (2015–present)‣ Fusion program plans (2019–?)‣ Q&A (lots of backup materials)*Accelerating Low-Cost Plasma Heating and Assembly21History of ARPA-E
In 2007, The National Academies recommended Congress establish an Advanced Research
Projects Agency within the U.S. Department of Energy to fund advanced energy R&D.

American Recovery & Reinvestment
Act Signed – Providing ARPA-E its
first appropriations of $400 million,
which funded ARPA-E's first projects

2007
Rising Above the Gathering Storm
Published - warning policymakers
that U.S. advantages in science andtechnology had begun to erode
America COMPETES Act Signed –authorizing the creation of ARPA-E

2009

2019
800+ Awards
47+ Programs
Current Funding:
US$366M(FY19)
22

ARPA-E funds transformative, off-roadmap energy R&D with thegoal of disrupting “current learning curves”

Time or Amount Invested
23

Limited-term program directors formulate, pitch, and execute“focused programs” that are each nominally 3 years, $30M total
ELECTRICITY
GENERATION & DELIVERY

Alumni

ActiveINTEGRATE GRID DATAIONICSMOSAICTRANSPORTATIONEFFICIENCYSENSOR

CIRCUITSPNDIODES

MARINER

NEXTCARGENSETS

NODES

ALPHA

ENLITENEDSHIELDROOTSCHARGES

FOCUS

METINERMONITOR

ARID

DELTA

REBELS

GRIDS

GENI

HEATS

SOLAR ADEPTIMPACCTSWITCHESBEETITTERRAMETALS

REACT

ADEPT

REFUEL

TRANSNET

RANGE

PETRO

MOVE

ELECTROFUELSREMOTE

AMPED

BEEST

OPEN 2009, 2012, 2015 & 2018 Solicitations
Complement Focused Programs
24

ARPA-E aims to create a “mountain of opportunity” intransformative energy technologies
Other Investors
Investment

$100M

$10M
ARPA-E

Demonstration
Prototype$1M

Research

ConceptTime

25

Public-private partnering is at the core of ARPA-E’s mission andprogram formulation/execution
Metrics:‣ Private-sector follow-on
funding‣ New company formation‣ Partnership with othergovernment agencies‣ Publications, inventions,patents

26

What makes a good ARPA-E proposal/project?

Idea

Transformative

Potential to disrupt development
trajectory based on present
state-of-the-art projections

Not duplicative

Compatible
budgetProposal/project

Impactful project result for ≤$10M(federal funds), ≤3 years that will
catalyze further support/effort

27

Fusion must learn from fission: (1) lower the cost/complexity, (2) understandmarkets, (3) achieve regulatory certainty, and (4) earn public acceptance28

Markets/cost: One study suggests that, in 2030, ~465-GWe exist
for fusion at >$75/MWh, and ~2.7-TWe exist at <$60/MWh

Examples:• Alaskan village: $400/MWh• DoD base: $200/MWh• Singapore: $130/MWh• Germany: $60/MWh• Texas: $3/MWh

Source: Electrification and decarbonization: the role of fusion in achieving a zero-carbon power grid(from SYSTEMIQ, July 12, 2019)29

Firm power sources (i.e., meets demand over seasons and long
duration) needed for cost-effective, low-carbon grid
New England, 2050

Tianjin, Beijing, Tangshan, 2050

From “The Future of Nuclear Energy in a Carbon-Constrained World,
An Interdisciplinary MIT Study,” MIT Energy Initiative (2018), p. 13.
30

Fusion programs at ARPA-E are informed but not overly
constrained by market awarenessTo impact 21st-century markets, fusion must be solved and adopted quickly.

What capital cost is needed for a hypothetical zerocarbon, 100%-capacity-factor electricity source to be
adopted quickly (i.e., to displace fossil fuels)?

$3.6/W may
displace
legacy fossilfuel
generation$2.2/W may
displace
cheap
natural gas($/kW)
L. Spangher, J. S. Vitter and R. Umstattd, “Characterizing fusion market entry
via an agent-based power plant fleet model,” Energy Strategy Reviews 26,
100404 (2019).

Platt, John and Pritchard, J. Orion and Bryant, Drew, Analyzing
Energy Technologies and Policies Using DOSCOE (August 8,2017). Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3015424.

31

Carbon tax of >$50/ton could greatly expand the market forfusion (based on modeling of fission in competitive market)

https://twitter.com/noahqk/status/1157343492332539910

Analyzing Energy Technologies andPolicies Using DOSCOE
32

ALPHA focused on pulsed, magnetized, intermediate-density
fusion (MIF and z-pinch variants) à lowers ignition requirements
Magnetic field dramatically reduces areal density (andtherefore predicted facility cost) required for pulsed ignition

M. M. Basko et al., Nucl. Fus. 40, 59 (2000)
I. R. Lindemuth & R. E. Siemon, Amer. J. Phys. 77, 407 (2009)33

Fusion concepts studied within the ALPHA portfolio spanned ~6orders of magnitude in fuel density
ITER

Magnetized target
Slower implosion
Lower min. power

NIF

1

ARC

MagLIF0.
1

Fusion Core ($BB)

10Higher B
Smaller size
Lower min. energy

pulsed magnet liquid liner

plasma liner

AXIAL (B Z)
FIELD
LOW-Z
TARGET

DIFFUSED
FIELDS

0.
01

AZIMUTHAL(BΘ) FIELD

AXIAL
CURRENTHIGH-Z
PLASMA
LINER

7
+2
1E

6
+2
1E

5
+2
1E

4
+2
1E

3
+2
1E

2
+2
1E

1
+2
1E

0
+2
1E

9
+1
1E

8
+1
1E

7
+1
1E

6
+1
1E

5
+1
1E

4
+1
1E

3
+1
1E

0.
00
1

stabilized Z-pinch

ni = ion density (#/cm3)34

ALPHA concept: Sustained
neutronin a sheared-flow
FuZE: SFS Z-Pinch– UW /production
LLNL
Award No. DE-AR000057
stabilized Z pinch, consistent with thermonuclear DD fusion

ni
(m-3)

Te=Te
(keV)

!E
(µs)

nT!E
(keV s/m3)Pre3e22
ALPHA

0.075

5

1e16

ALPHA 1e23

~1.0

~5

~5e17

Follow-on: scale up to 600 kA and multi-keV temperatures by

Figure 6: Top: Characteristic signal observed on the scintillator detector showing neutro
spin-out
Zap
2018 program)production
duringthe Energy
quiescent (ARPA-E
period. ForOPEN
a 20% deuterium/80%
hydrogen gas mixtur
the neutron
signal(2017)is sustained for approximately 5 µs, which is 5000 times the m=1 mod
U. Shumlak et al., Phys. Plasmas
24, 055702
35
Y. Zhang et al., PRL 122, 135001
growth(2019)
time. Bottom: the normalized magnetic field fluctuation amplitude for the m=

ALPHA applied science: Development of the OMEGA “miniMagLIF” platform to explore MIF science at fusion conditions

With axial field and laser pre-heat, Ti > 2.5 keV, YDD > 1010 neutrons
D. H. Barnak et al., Phys. Plasmas 24, 056310 (2017)
J. R. Davies et al., Phys. Plasmas 24, 062701 (2017)

E. C. Hansen et al., Phys. Plasmas 25, 122701 (2018)
J. R. Davies et al., Phys. Plasmas 26, 022706 (2019)36

ALPHA drivers: demonstration of two new potential MIF drivers,
MEMS ion accelerator and plasma guns with preionization
Compact, low-cost, high-power ion beams

Plasma guns for plasma-liner formation
via merging plasma jets
1 mg mass
50 km/s>1016 cm-3

Demonstrated 2.6 kV/gap,
10.2 kV, 3⨉3 beam array~80 cmFollow-on: scale up to 1 MV/m and >100 mA(ARPA-E OPEN 2018 program)

LBNL: P. Seidl et al., Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89, 053302 (2018)
LANL/HyperJet: S. C. Hsu et al., IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 46, 1951 (2018); Y. C. F. Thio et al., Fus. Sci. Tech. (2019).

37

ALPHA concept: Stable staged-Z-pinch implosions at BZ0>1.5 kG
and DD neutron production on the 1-MA Nevada Terawatt Facility
Kr gas-puff liner gave the best results

simulation

H. U. Rahman et al., Phys. Plasmas 26, 052706 (2019).
J. Narkis et al., Phys,. Plasmas 26, 032708 (2019).

38

ALPHA applied science: Acceleration and compression studies
of a helically relaxed Taylor state as a potential MIF target
Equation of state during compression
suggests better agreement withparallel CGL compared to MHD or
perpendicular CGL

Theta-coil (notshown) pulse
generatedsuper-thermaland superAlfvenic waves
rather thaneffective
acceleration of
the plasma

Ongoing work: merging of two Taylorstate plasmas to increase density
M. Kaur et al., Phys. Rev. E 97, 011202(R) (2018)
M. Kaur et al., J. Plasma Phys. 84, 905840614 (2018)39

ALPHA applied science: Fundamental studies of plasmacompression and heating

B. Seo and P. M. Bellan, Phys. Plasmas 25, 112703 (2018)40

Other ALPHA projects (concept and driver)‣ Helion Energy: magnetic compression of FRCs formed by dynamic merging– Construction of “Fusion Engine Prototype” (FEP) device– Increased the magnitude of compression-magnetic-field strength and FRC flux
– Advancing the plasma parameters of the compressed FRC– Generation and measurement of DD neutrons‣ NumerEx: Design of stabilized, rotating, imploding liquidliner– 1-km/s implosion speed using annular pistons– Developed engineering design of a system using NaK with 10-cmdiameter bore
– Did not construct the system due to challenges with high-pressure
valves and triggering
41

ALPHA’s tech-2-market (T2M) component helped its teams withIP analysis, costing, and understanding fusion market entry

42

JASON summer study (2018) was commissioned by ARPA-E toreview the ALPHA program‣ Statement of work:– Assess progress of ALPHA and non-ALPHA MIF teams toward realizing low-cost fusion– Assess future needs to realize low-cost MIF‣ Abbreviated findings:– MIF is physically plausible and rapid progress has been made despite having received ~1% funding of
MCF and ICF; best performing system (MagLIF) is within a factor of 10 of scientific breakeven– Pursuit of MIF could lead to valuable spinoffs, e.g., fusion propulsion– MIF could absorb significantly more funding than ALPHA‣ Main recommendations:– Investments to study plasma instabilities, transport, liner-fuel mix at MIF conditions– National Labs should contribute unclassified codes and user training– Develop components, e.g., plasma guns, pulsed power, diagnostics, advanced magnets, and materials– Near-term goal/priority should be scientific breakeven in a system that scales plausibly to a commercial
power plant– Support all promising approaches as long as possible; do not concentrate resources on early
frontrunners
Full JASON report available to download.

43

New fusion projects funded by ARPA-E OPEN 2018 program(represents expansion beyond MIF/Z-pinch-based concepts)
Zap Energy/UW ($6.8M, continuationof UW/LLNL ALPHA project)

CTFusion/UW ($3M, spheromak sustainedby imposed dynamo current drive)

Princeton Fusion Systems/PPPL($1.25M, FRC sustained/heated by
odd-parity rotating magnetic field)
44

Diagnostic resource teams to support the validation of ARPA-Esupported fusion concepts ($7.3M, 2 yrs.)
Eight teams selected (July, 2019):‣ ORNL, $1.1M, Thomson scattering (low density) and visible emission
spectroscopy‣ LLNL, $2M, Thomson scattering (high density)‣ LLNL, $1.3M, neutron activation and nTOF detectors‣ Univ. of Rochester/LLE, $1M, neutron activation and nTOF detectors‣ UC, Davis, $444k, ultra-short-pulse reflectometry‣ PPPL, $450k, passive charge-exchange ion energy analyzer‣ LANL, $630k, filtered, time-resolved soft-x-ray imager‣ Caltech, $400k, hard x-ray imaging, non-invasive B-field assessment

45

RFI on enabling technologies for a commercially viable fusion
power plant
Recent ARPA-E Request for Information (RFI) on
Enabling Technologies for a Commercially Viable Fusion Power Plant‣ Fusion market entry may require reduced nameplate capacity and capital cost compared to

traditional fusion reactor cost studies (typically 1 GWe and >US$5B)‣ Fusion power plants at reduced scale and cost likely will have different technology requirements‣ Interest in:– Thick, liquid blankets (e.g., molten salts or liquid metals)– Corrosion-resistant, high-temperature materials– Smaller tritium-processing systems and minimum tritium inventory– Repetitive pulsed-power technology (for MIF, IFE approaches)– Specific challenges presented by use of advanced fuels– Compatibility with advanced power cycles‣ Reduced emphasis on– Developing 150-dpa solid materials– Solid-material divertors
Link to RFI

46

https://arpa-e.energy.gov

47