FIRE
An Opportunity to Explore Burning Plasmas
Dale M. Meadefor the FIRE Study Team
MFE Final Plenary
2002 Fusion Summer Study
Snowmass, COJuly 19, 2002

FIRE

Lighting the Way to Fusion

http://fire.pppl.gov

Magnetic Fusion needs New Facilities to Explore,
and Expand the Frontiers of Fusion Energy Science

VLBA

CHANDRA??
NIF & LMJ

HST (NGST)

SNS

MFES

APS

Three Options for a Major Next Step in Magnetic Fusion(same scale)

IGNITOR

FIRE

ITER

Italian Based
Int'l Collaboration

US BasedInternational Portfolio

EU, JA or CA Based
International Partnership

FIRE, the U.S. National Activity on a Next Step OptionOrganization• National activity managed by the Virtual Laboratory for Technology withparticipation by more than 15 institutions.
• Benefited from prior participation in ITER, and earlier BPX design activities.
Purpose:• to investigate and assess various opportunities for advancing the scientificunderstanding of fusion energy, with emphasis on plasma behavior at highenergy gain and for long duration.
• tasks to be pursued include investigation of a multi-machine pathway, with initialemphasis on the burning plasma experiment (e.g., FIRE).
Program Advisory Committee• I5 members from the U.S. and abroad.
• Extensive PAC Reports provide detailed recommendations for the FIRE activity
to address. NSO-PAC reports are on FIRE (http://fire.pppl.gov).

FIRE, A Laboratory to Explore Burning Plasmas
http://fire.pppl.gov

Design Features• R = 2.14 m, a = 0.595 m• B = 10 T
• Wmag= 5.2 GJ• Ip = 7.7 MA

1,400 tonne• Paux ≤ 20 MW• Q ≈ 10, Pfusion ~ 150 MW• Burn Time ≈ 20 s ( 2 tau_cr)• Tokamak Cost ≈ $351M (FY02)• Total Project Cost ≈ $1.2B(FY02)

Mission: Attain, explore, understand and optimize
magnetically-confined fusion-dominated plasmas.
FIRE has adopted the Advanced Tokamak features identified
by the Advanced Reactor Studies (ARIES)Quasi-Stationary Burning Plasma in FIRE
50

Bt
Bt

Power (MW)40

Ip = 7.7 MA

Q ≈ 13Ip

30

B = 10 T

Ip

Alpha Power20

R = 2.14 m
A = 3.6

Auxiliary Power

10Ohmic Power0-504812

16 20 24
Time (sec)2832• ITER98(y, 2) with H(y, 2) = 1.1, n(0)/〈n〉 = 1.2, and n/ nGW = 0.67
• Burn Time ≈ 20 s ≈ 21τE ≈ 4τHe ≈ 2τCR
Q = Pfusion/( Paux + Poh)

Advanced Burning Plasma Physics
could be Explored in FIRE
Self-Heating Dominant

Self-Current Drive Dominant
Fully Non-Inductive for > 1 τCRPower(MW)50

Q = 5.7, fα = 53%
Alpha

40
ICRF + LHCD

30

LHCD

20
10Cyclotron

0bremsstrahlung

0102030
Time (s)40

8.5 T, 5.4 MA,Ip(MA) Total noninductive current
5bootstrap
4 Ip
3fBS = 65%
LH21FW
0010203040
Time (s)Tokamak simulation code results for H(y, 2) = 1.4, βN = 3.5 , would require RW
mode stabilization. q(0) = 2.9, qmin = 2.2 @ r/a = 0.8, 8.5 T, 5.5 MA

Diversified International Porfolio for Magnetic Fusion
Second Phase
ScientificFeasibility

Third Phase

Fourth Phase

Fusion Science and Technolgy
Feasibility

Electric Power
Feasibility

Three Large Tokamaks

Several Large Facilities

JT-60 UFIRE

JET

KSTAR, JT-60 SC

TFTR

Nuclear Tech Dev

Commercialization
Phase
EconomicFeasibility

Choice ofConfiguration

Base Program
Plasma Science
Scientific Simulation Initiatives

Advanced
Test Reactor

Scientific Foundation

Advanced DEMO

Fusion Technology

Non-Tokamak Configurations

Technology Demonstration

Long Pulse Adv. Stellarator
Spherical Torus, RFP(the overall portfolio approach includes IFE)

Spheromak, FRC, MTF

1985

2005

Reduced Technical Risk

2050

2020
Streamlined Management Structure

Increased Technical Flexibility

Better Product/Lower Overall Cost

Faster Implementation

Is this the lowest cost most efficient path to fusion? Modular Strategy9aSnowmass Assessment - FIRE’s Response
A challenging process that required hard work by many
• Thanks to the Working Groups and Snowmass participants for their outstanding
effort and constructive criticism.
• Thanks to the FIRE Team for their tireless efforts in rising to the occasion.

FIRE’s Plan – Use the results to make FIRE the best it can be.
• Let us build on all this hard work and continue Community participation in FIRE.
• FIRE will review advice, update design goals, improve design as appropriate• Review with the Community, Program Advisory Committee and DOE.
• Be ready to move ahead to Conceptual Design and initiate R&D if we are asked

The U.S. Fusion Program is at a Fork in the Road
There is an opportunity to expand the frontier of fusion science while moving
toward the fusion energy goal by initiating a burning plasma program.

Let’s Take It.
• Let’s explore the international opportunity with ITER.
• We must do our cost/benefit homework prior to negotiations.
• We should set a date certain for completion of negotiations.

• Let’s continue to develop FIRE as a U.S. based experiment in the context of aninternational portfolio.
• We will incorporate the advice from this assessment.
• We should continue to advance the FIRE design and initiate critical R&D.
Consistent with HR-4: Energy Policy Act of 2002

“I want you to develop fusion energy for the world”
Let’s Do It !

Fusion Snowmass 2002