ITER CTA NEWSLETTER
No. 11, AUGUST 2002

INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, VIENNA, AUSTRIAISSN 1683–0555

A FAST TRACK APPROACH TO FUSION ENERGY
Editor's Note:
We see increasingly frequent references to a "Fast Track" approach to fusion energy and to thepossible role of ITER in such a strategy. The term "Fast Track" has its origin in an initiative taken by theBelgian Presidency of the European Research Council last autumn to investigate whether it might be possible
to accelerate the development of fusion, setting a goal of energy production with 20-30 years.
A top level Working Group chaired by Professor David King, Chief Scientific Adviser to the UK
government, was charged to examine the question. With the permission of Professor King, the experts'
conclusions, which were presented to the European Research Council in December 2001, are reproduced
below.

Conclusions of the Fusion Fast Track Experts Meeting
held on 27 November 2001
on the initiative of Mr. De Donnea, President of the Research Council
Experts participating in the meeting:
Prof. David KING (Chairman)
Prof. Angelo AIRAGHI
Prof. Harald BOLT
Dr. Joaquin CALVO
Mr. Bernard FROIS

Mr. Marcel GAUBE
Dr. Lars HÖGBERG
Mr. Gabriel MARBACH
Mr. Steven WALSGROVE

We examined a possible fast track towards fusion energy production with reference to the tentative roadmap
elaborated in 2000 by the panel in charge of the assessment of the Euratom programme (see figure). Thisroadmap foresees three successive generations of devices, the Next Step (ITER in the international context),
DEMO achieving net electricity production about 35 years after the decision to construct ITER, and PROTO.
This would lead to the beginning of large-scale electricity production on a timescale of about 50 years. Theroadmap also shows that the parallel development of appropriate fusion materials and the demonstration of
the environmental and safety case supporting wide use of fusion power should be completed in time forDEMO.
We have reached the following conclusions on the topics listed in the mandate established by the ResearchCouncil Presidency. We would be happy to hold a second meeting on these issues if requested to do so by
the Council Presidency.
1. The ITER project is the essential step towards energy production on a fast track. The engineering design
has been finalized, and a modest upgrading could readily be achieved over the life of ITER, by fully
exploiting the inherent flexibility of the present ITER design in demonstrating the technical feasibility offusion power on a 20-30 year timescale. The tests of breeding and energy extraction blanket modules
prototyping the full size blanket for DEMO should receive particular attention.
2. Future commercial systems are likely to be energy injected, and not self-sustained. Since the DEMO
generation is energy-injected, current thinking is that in a fast track approach, the DEMO and PROTOgenerations could be combined into a single step that should be designed as a credible prototype for a1

power producing fusion reactor, although in itself not fully technically and economically optimized. Thiswould depend strongly on the development of adequate materials, as discussed in item 4 below.
3. The emphasis in the research work on ITER should be on demonstration of sustained fusion power
production and extraction; ITER will serve as an enabling research machine regardless of the design oflater commercial reactors. Within the EU fusion programme the fusion associations should concentrate on
the accompanying R&D for ITER and plasma physics. Other European facilities such as stellerators andspherical tokamaks should address possible improvements of concepts and of designs for future reactors.
4 The mission of fusion materials science is to provide solutions for a sustainable, environmentally benign
and economically attractive energy technology. In addition to the essential information provided by ITER
on plasma facing materials an appropriate high-energy, high intensity neutron source such as theInternational Fusion Material Irradiation Facility (IFMIF) is required to test and verify material performance
when subjected to extensive neutron irradiation of the type encountered in a fusion reactor. In a fast track
approach, the detailed engineering design of IFMIF should be completed during FP6. Before that theirradiation test requirements should be examined to identify the extent to which relevant studies could bedone on the neutron spallation sources available now and in the foreseeable future in Europe orelsewhere. In combination with such irradiation experiments, the theoretical modelling of radiation damage
and of the structural evolution of materials is instrumental to the understanding and the control ofunderlying processes. Such material studies could also contribute to progress and innovation in otherareas such as aeronautics and space, energy systems and advanced processing. Proper co-ordination
with other EU programmes in materials research should be explored.
5. From the above it is concluded that the following elements are of key importance to achieve a faster track
towards fusion energy production:· Construction of ITER should start as soon as is reasonably achievable. As a first step, the present
mandate of negotiations with the EU international partners regarding the ways of establishing an ITER
Legal Entity should be soon extended in order to address ITER cost sharing and site dependent issues.
· The two major international ventures on fusion energy development, i.e. ITER and IFMIF should
proceed in a co-ordinated way, with the realization of ITER starting in parallel with the detailed
engineering design of IFMIF.
· Regarding the use of existing fusion devices, mostly devoted to plasma physics, in particular the useof the JET facilities, it is important not to interrupt abruptly their programmes as long as they canefficiently continue to contribute to improving the knowledge base needed for the next steps and todeveloping the necessary experience in operating fusion machines. JET should be phased out
progressively according to the schedule of ITER realization and to availability of financial resources.
These elements of a faster track towards fusion energy production will require additional resources in thefirst leg of the track, in particular during FP6 and FP7, as more activities need to be carried out in parallel.
Eventually the total amount of public funding to reach the long term objective could be reduced
substantially if it proves possible to omit one generation of fusion devices. These additional resources forthe first leg of the track should be sought also by expanding international collaboration. A clear lead fromEurope could be expected to generate a positive response from both existing and potential ITER partners.
6. At the present stage of fusion energy research, industry is mostly involved through the construction offusion devices and through its participation in the ITER design. From this point of view most of the financialresources required for the construction of ITER should go to industry. The role of industry in theengineering of fusion devices should grow significantly during the realization of ITER, and later ofDEMO/PROTO. The direct involvement of the electricity producers, the utilities, should increaseprogressively along the route to energy production. However, in order to drive the programme mostefficiently towards power production it will be important to harness the energies of individuals within theindustrial communities including engineering companies, component manufacturers and electricity
producers to assist in managing all the phases of the programme. The existing framework where utilities
and industry can bring in their views on fusion energy research should extend further their activities inorder to ensure that fusion developments meet industrial requirements for energy production.
Brussels, 5 December 2001

2

Heat and particles exhaust (plasma facing components)

Test of breeding blanket modules for DEMONet electricity production (full hot breeding blanket)

High reliability of operations

Qualification of lower activation materials for PROTO

Improved economy in electricity production

Improved low activation materialsDemonstration of a reference low activation steel forDEMO
Search for higher performance materials for PROTO

Demonstration of waste management and recycling

Demonstration of safety management

Demonstration of low environmental impact potential••••

••

••

•

••
0Construction

1030

4050

PROTO (1.5 GWe)

Applicationof results

Extracted from:“Five Year Assessment Report related to the specific programme:
Nuclear energy covering the period 1995-1999” June 2000

Years after decision on Next Step20

Material Development
Environ. & SafetyOperation

DEMO (2 GWth)

Next Step (1/2 GWth)DesignAccompanying
Programme in Physics &Technology•

Production and control of long pulse-burning plasma•

Main Achievements Required

Tentative Roadmap of Achievements starting from the decision to construct the Next Step

Large Scale electricity production

3Dr. Peter Robert BARNARD
In memoriam
Dr. Peter Barnard, Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of Toronto-based Iter Canada, passed away
on August 29 at Toronto's General Hospital, at age
64. He had been struggling with prostate cancer forthe past four years, though those who knew him
never noticed any decrease in his boundless energy
and enthusiasm during those years.
His unwavering commitment to family, friends and hiswork never ceased. With strength, marvelled at byall, he continued to pursue his passions and hisresponsibilities. His was a selfless pursuit to put
others first and to counsel numerous individuals andassist many varied groups in realizing their dreams.
Peter received his Ph.D. in Mechanical Sciencesfrom Cambridge University, England, and was a
graduate of the Advanced Management Program atHarvard University. He had a long and distinguishedcareer in management and consulting, including athree year stint as Chairman of Ontario Hydro
Technologies (1994-1997).
He was the driving force behind Iter Canada, a not-for-profit organization founded in 1997 for bringing toCanada the large international research and development project, ITER, with commercial fusion energy as
its goal.
Due to his failing health, he missed the latest ITER Parties' negotiations session in France, but received anote from the Japanese delegation that read, in part, "The Japanese Delegation, which today presented
their bid, is so much aware that the ITER process owes such a great deal to your dynamism, personalengagement and never ending optimism. All the more, we are finding it particularly sad that you aremissing."
The words and implications of this sentiment are exemplary of Peter's influence on all and speak for all ofus.

Printed by the IAEA in Austria
October 2002

02-02224

Items to be considered for inclusion in the ITER CTA Newsletter should be submitted to B. Kuvshinnikov, ITER Office, IAEA,
Wagramer Strasse 5, P.O. Box 100, A-1400 Vienna, Austria, or Facsimile: +43 1 2633832, or e-mail: c.basaldella@iaea.org(phone +43 1 260026392).