Status of the ARIES Industrial Advisory Committee

1
Status of the ARIES Industrial Advisory Committee

• Ken Schultz
• General Atomics
• ARIES Project Meeting
• GIT, 12-13 December, 2007

2
The ARIES Pathways Program

• What are the remaining major RD areas?
• What is the data base needed to field a Demo and
  a commercial power plant (e.g., licensing,
  operation, reliability, etc.)?
• What is the impact of each RD item on the
  attractiveness of the final product (metrics for
  prioritization of RD)?
• Which of the remaining major RD areas can be
  explored in existing devices or simulation
  facilities (i.e., fission reactors)?
• What other major facilities are needed (CTF, Fast
  track, etc.)
• What are the possible embodiments for CTF and
  what are the their cost/performance attributes?

• A major focus of the work is to identify what
  needs to be done in order to convince private
  industry to participate in the Demo and build
  commercial units.

3
The first meeting of the ARIES Industrial
Advisory Committee (IAC) meeting was held on June
13-14, 2007.

• ARIES Program had a utility advisory committee
  in Early 90s.
• Their input was used subsequently in all ARIES
  Designs.
• They helped define Mission of a Demonstration
  Power Plant
• Discussion in the first meeting of the new
  Industrial Advisory Committee was focused on
  review and update of the work of the previous
  ARIES utility advisory committee.

4
IAC Reviewed Original Criteria for Practical
Fusion Power Systems

• Have an economically competitive life-cycle cost
  of electricity
• Gain Public acceptance by having excellent safety
  and environmental characteristics
• No disturbance of publics day-to-day activities
• No local or global atmospheric impact
• No need for evacuation plan
• No high-level waste
• Ease of licensing
• Reliable, available, and stable as an electrical
  power source
• Have operational reliability and high
  availability
• Closed, on-site fuel cycle
• High fuel availability
• Capable of partial load operation
• Available in a range of unit sizes

5
Comments from the IAC on the criteria for
practical fusion power

• Generally agreed with our prioritization of the
  EPRI Criteria for fusion power. Comments include
• Available in a range of unit sizes Not
  critical, however, there is a strong correlation
  between discount rates and the needed capital
  (penalty for large unit sizes).
• Need for high-thermal efficiency Will reduce
  thermal footprint. Dry cooling desirable.
• Steady-state operation Steady state electrical
  output essential. Cost of BOP for a pulsed power
  source would be extremely high.
• Capable of partial load operation Base-load
  machine would be run at full power. However, we
  need to demonstrate that machine can go through
  its initial licensing steps (e.g., for fission
  this include, critically at very low power, 5,
  10, 20, and 50 level power certification).
• Plant operators Personnel expertise should be
  comparable to similar technologies

6
Demo Mission as produced by our original Utility
Advisory Committee

• We are developing a source of energy to be
  commercialized by the U.S. industry, licensed by
  U.S. regulatory agencies, deployed by U.S.
  utilities/independent power producers, and used
  by American Public (and hopefully exported
  overseas).
• We have to use the DEMO terminology of the above
  groups!
• Demo Mission Successful operation of the DEMO
  convinces the above users that a commercial power
  plant can successfully meet all its objectives.
• There is very little difference between a fusion
  Demo and a fusion power plant.
• The first-generation'' plant MUST be attractive
  in terms of economics, safety, regulation, and
  environmental characteristics.
• This does not preclude improvements. Rather,
  There is a minimum set of required
  characteristics for a fusion power plant.

7
Comments from the IAC on the Demo Mission

• Challenge The Mission is a very high bar for the
  Demo if industry to invest (e.g., initial
  availability of 70 which can get to 90 within
  2-3 years!). Discussion mainly focused on cost
  and risk (what needs to be done before Demo)
• Cost Costs are believable only if an industrial
  supply chain exists (transition to industry
  should occur before Demo).
• Risk Facilities prior to Demo should create the
  data base and experience necessary to convince
  investors and regulators that fusion is a viable
  power source. The choice of materials and plant
  systems must be finalized and sufficient testing
  and operational experience in an integrated,
  prototypical environment are needed.

8
The IAC recognized a change in paradigm for
technology development

• A major shift to modeling and simulation to
  minimize testing requirements and development
  costs in engineering disciplines.
• Relying on 3-D multi-physics codes which are
  based on first principles to analyze components.
• This approach, however, requires a different
  development approach
• Accurate understanding of fundamental physics
  principles (single effect issues)
• Experiment planning such that it highlights
  multi-physics interaction (instead of traditional
  approach of testing integrated systems to failure
  repeatedly).
• Final validation in an integrated, prototypical
  environment.

9
Future directions for the IAC

• ARIES Pathways Directions document drafted.
  IAC should review
• There is strong belief that the technologies
  demonstrated in ITER/TNS/other for Demo must be
  those needed for successful commerical fusion
  power. Can IAC help sort these out?

10
The challenge of fusion development

• There is strong feeling that the physics and
  technologies that must be demonstrated in ITER,
  TNS and other facilities for Demo must be those
  needed for at least the first fusion power
  plants.
• There is no consensus in the fusion community or
  even the ARIES Team as to what these physics and
  technologies should be.
• The more attractive an option appears, the more
  risk and development it entails.

11
Can IAC help sort out technologies?

• Can IAC help identify the minimum entry point for
  fusion power?
• Present the spectrum of physics and technologies
  ARIES has considered
• Physics modes
• Magnet technologies
• First wall and divertor technologies
• Blanket and power conversion technologies
• Present the risks and unknowns of the options
• Ask IAC to help us define which are required for
  the first fusion power plant
• Should multiple options be carried? How far?

12
Proposal for next ARIES meeting

• 1. Recap of ARIES Pathways Study and Role of
  Advisory Committee
• 2. Overview of ARIES designs, physics and
  technologies -- in some detail
• Show the depth of analysis that has been done
• Show the options that are available
• Show the risks and development needs
• 3. Review of ITER design and technology
• What can we expect to learn, and what not to
  learn
• 4. Discuss the options and development
  requirements for Demo and Pre-Demo machines to
  bridge from ITER to commercial fusion.
• What is needed for the first fusion power plant?
• When do we have to make choices?