National Academies
Study on a Strategic Plan forU.S. Burning Plasma ResearchFusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee MeetingFebruary 1-2, 2017
Gaithersburg Marriott Washingtonian Center
Gaithersburg, MD 20878
James Lancaster, BPA Director

Burning Plasma Study Background• May 2016 – DOE released the report “U.S. Participation in theITER Project”– Reviews the project, recommends U.S. continues to participate inITER so long as reforms are continued, additional measures aretaken.
– Recommends revisiting this recommendation as part of the FY
2019 budget process.
– Indicates that DOE will ask the Academies to conduct a study• How best to “advance the fusion energy sciences in the U.S., given thedevelopments in the field since the last Academy studies in 2004, thespecific international investments in fusion science and technology, andthe priorities for the next ten years developed by the community andFES that were recently reported to Congress.”• Will also “address the scientific justification and needs for strengthening
the foundations for realizing fusion energy given a potential choice ofU.S. participation or not in the ITER project, and will develop futurescenarios in either case.”

2Study Development• Worked with Plasma Science Committee(PLSC), BPA members from plasma sciencecommunity• Prepared white paper, held several rounds ofdiscussion with DOE• Proposal submitted – August 2016
• Project Funded – December 2016

3

Burning Plasma Work Plan
• Committee of about 15 experts – plasma andfusion science and engineering communities;
other physics disciplines; policy experts,international researchers;• Meet ~6 times over 20 months;• Significant engagement of domestic andinternational plasma science and fusion
research communities – site visits, town halls.

4

Statement of Task
A committee of the National Academies will be formed to study thestate and potential of magnetic confinement-based fusion
research in the United States and provide guidance on a longterm strategy for the field. The study will focus on research that
supports understanding the magnetically confined burning plasmastate but will take a broad view beyond plasma confinement
science, and as such consider capabilities such as simulation andmaterials. Specifically, the committee will prepare an interim reportthat will:– Describe and assess the current status of U.S. research that
supports burning plasma science, including current and planned
participation in international activities, and describe international
research activities broadly.
– Assess the importance of U.S. burning plasma research to thedevelopment of fusion energy as well as to plasma science andother science and engineering disciplines.
5

Statement of Task (cont’d)
The committee will also prepare a final report, building on the interim
report, which will:• Consider the scientific and engineering challenges andopportunities associated with advancing magnetic confinement
fusion as an energy source, including the scientific and technicaldevelopments since the 2004 NAS study on burning plasma
research.
• In two separate scenarios in which, after 2018, (1) the UnitedStates is a partner in ITER, and (2) the United States is not apartner in ITER: provide guidance on a long-term strategic plan
(covering the next several decades) for a national program ofburning plasma science and technology research which
includes supporting capabilities and which may include
participation in international activities, given the U.S. strategicinterest in realizing economical fusion energy in the long term.
6Factors to consider•••••••••••The priorities for the next ten years developed by the community and FES that wererecently reported to Congress.
The current level of participation by U.S. scientists in international activities as well as
what role international collaboration should play over the next 20 years.
The health of the domestic fusion research sectors (universities, national labs, industry).
Prior work of the Academies, FESAC and the domestic and foreign communities.
The committee is not to compare fusion as an energy source against other current or
potential energy sources.
Any strategic plan should ensure that the U.S. maintains a leadership role in this field.
The committee will consider the budget implications of its guidance but will not makerecommendations about the budget for burning plasma research itself.
Only magnetically confined burning plasma research is within the study’s purview.
The committee may make recommendations or offer comments on organizational
structure and program balance, with accompanying supporting discussion of theevidentiary bases.
The committee may assume that economical fusion energy within the next several
decades is a U.S. strategic interest.
The committee may take into account how unanticipated events or innovations may
necessitate mid-course re-directions.
7Any Questions?
David Langdlang@nas.edu
202-334-2395
Jim Lancasterjlancaster@nas.edu
202-334-1936

8