Upload
kimberly-parsons
View
217
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Fusion Energy Sciences Program
Department of Energy Perspective
February 23, 2004
www.ofes.fusion.doe.gov
EExcellent xcellent SScience in cience in SSupport of upport of AAttractive ttractive EEnergynergy
US Department of Energy
by Sam BerkOFES Team Leader for Technology
0
1
98 9995 97 00 0176
94 02 03 04
01/14/04
05
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
800
Fiscal Year
700
1000
US Fusion Program Budget History (in 2005 $M)
Fis
cal Y
ear
Bud
get (
FY
200
5$ in
Mil
lion
s)
77 79 82 86 90 92 96 98 9978 80 84 88 91 93 95 97 00 01767573 74 94 0283 8781 85 8972 03 04
01/14/04
05
900
FY 2005 Fusion ProgramCongressional Budget Request ($M)
143.9
84.5
27.4
6.8
262.6
FY 2004Approp.
Science
Facility Operations
Technology
SBIR/STTR
OFES Total
DIII-DC-ModNSTXNCSXIFE/HEDP
144.0
85.5
27.8
6.8
264.1
FY 2005Cong.
54.021.533.616.713.9
56.022.234.716.715.1
136.2
66.2
38.3
6.2
246.9
FY 2003Actual
51.919.230.111.717.0
01/13/04
o +$1 M for MSTo No $3 M increase for SciDAC/FSP as plannedo No increase of $0.8 M for NCSX research in support of constructiono All other programs funded at about FY 2004 appropriations level
Summary of US Fusion Program FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request
ITER
o Direct Funding of $7 M: $1 M for procurement of S/C wire and $6 M in reserve to be allocated following decision on organization to host US Project Office and other decisions
o $38 M designated for support of US preparations toward ITER tasks
o +$4 M for ITER direct funding o Operation of facilities reduced from FY 2004 plan of 18 weeks each to 14 weeks each (-$3.2 M)o NCSX kept at FY 2004 level instead of the planned $4.8 M increaseo Funding for ORNL move stretched out
Facilities Operations ($85.5 M, +$1 M)
o Fusion Technologies closed out in FY 2004: all IFE work brought to conclusion and ITER-relevant parts of MFE work moved to Plasma Technologies
o All areas of Plasma Technologies: increased budgets and redirection toward ITERo FIRE program completed with Physics Validation Review in FY 2004o Materials research reduced $.2 M
Technology ($27.8 M, +$.4 M)
Science ($150.8 M, +$.1 M)
Major Fusion Facilities Operating Times
0
15
20
25
30
FY 2005 Congressional
FY 2002 FY 2004Appropriations
Years
Wee
ks
DIII-D C-MOD NSTX
8
12
18
12
1818
10
5
01/13/04
Full Utilization Level
FY 2003Actual
4*
1314
*NSTX operating time was reduced due to the failure of one of the magnetic coils in February. Operations are expected to begin again this month.
141414
Fusion Program Resources in Preparation for ITER ($M)
Elements FY 2004 Approp.
Fusion Plasma Theory and Computation (SciDAC)
DIII-D Experimental Program
Alcator C-Mod Experimental Program
ITER Project (Direct Funding)
Plasma Technology
Total
1.0
3.0
1.0
3.0
0
8.0
01/13/04
FY 2005 Cong.
3.0
10.0
5.0
7.0
13.0
38.0
TechnologyFY 2005 Congressional Budget Request ($M)
13.7
3.0
3.1
7.6
27.4
FY 2004Approp.
Plasma Technologies
Fusion Technologies
Advanced Design
Materials Research
Total
17.8
0
2.6
7.4
27.8
FY 2005Cong.
13.6
11.1
5.9
7.7
38.3
FY 2003Actual
01/13/04
ITER TBM-Related Funding ($M)
FY 2004Approp.
FY 2005Cong.
01/13/04
Fusion Technologies
MFE Chamber Technologies
Plasma Technologies
Plasma Chamber Systems
.9
0 1.4
0
Current source of funding:
Future source of funding:
Office of Science
“These Department of Energy facilities are used by more than 18,000 researchers from universities, other government agencies, private industry and foreign nations.”
- Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham
20 Year Facilities Plan
DOE Office of ScienceStrategic Plan
February 2004
• 4 Strategic Goals for Fusion Program– First goal: Demonstrate with burning plasmas the scientific and
technological feasibility of fusion energy (through ITER project)– Fourth goals: Develop new materials, components, and
technologies needed to make fusion energy a reality
• Strategic Timeline– Toward 4th goal (materials, components, and technologies):
“By 2013, deliver to ITER for testing the blanket test modules needed to demonstrate the feasibility of extracting high-temperature heat from burning plasmas and for a self-sufficient fuel cycle”
Fusion Energy Sciences Budget
Tokamak$86.9
General Plasma Science$11.7
Other*$13.6
Alternates$88.5
FY 2005 Cong.
$264.1 M
NCSX$16.7
Technology$27.8
Theory & SciDAC
$28.6
IFE/HEDP$13.9
NSTX$33.6
01/20/04
ITER$7.0
Other Alts$24.3
$246.9 M
Tokamak$82.8
General Plasma Science
$9.0
Other*$12.4
Alternates$76.7
FY 2003 Actual
Techn
ology
$38.3
Theory & SciDAC
$27.7
IFE$17.0
NSTX$30.1NCS
X$11.7
Other Alts$22.1
Tokamak$89.6
General Plasma Science$11.7
Other*$13.8
Alternates$88.5
FY 2004 Approp.
Technology$27.4
Theory & SciDAC
$28.6
IFE/HEDP$15.1
NSTX$34.6
NCSX$16.7
Other Alts$23.2
$262.6 M
ITER$3.0
*SBIR/STTR GPP/GPE ORNL Move Reserve Environmental Monitoring
($ in Millions)
*NSF/NIST/NAS/AF/Undesignated funds
Institution Types
FY 2005 Congressional$264.1M
Fusion Energy Sciences Funding Distribution
Universities28%
Industry22%
Other*5%
Laboratory45%
Functions
Science54%
FacilityOperations+
30%
Technology10%
SBIR/STTR3%
+Includes NCSX Project
ITER Direct3%
Shifts in Priorities and Directionsfor Blanket R&D
• Shift focus of blanket R&D from science of higher risk concepts (APEX Project for advanced, innovative, and revolutionary) to development issues of lower risk concepts (conventional and evolutionary) that will be basis for Test Blanket Modules (TBMs) in early ITER operation
• Maintain some effort on higher risk concepts that might be tested as TBMs in later stages of ITER operation
Changing Views on Prospects for
Blanket Structural Materials
Recent change in structural materials R&D portfolio balance due to:
– Concerns about prospects for developing insulator coatings to control MHD effects in V/Li blanket
– More positive outlook on prospects of developing advanced (nanocomposited) ferritic steels that can operate at much higher temperatures than present-day steels
Past Allocation
Present Allocation
Target Future
AllocationStructural Material
ClassFunding
Allocation
V alloys: > ½
FS: < ¼
SiC: ¼
V alloys: < 1/2 and declining
FS: > 1/4 with AFS research increasing
SiC: ¼
About 1/3 for each if prospects for insulator
coatings improves
Reduce V alloys further if prospects for insulator
coatings does not improve
Changing Views on Prospects for
Blanket Structural Materials
Change in Portfolio Allocation
US Priorities for Coolant /Breeder Choices with
LA F/M Steel
• Solid Breeder: He-cooled ceramic breeder
• Liquid Breeder: Evaluating options
– Molten Salt (self-cooled and separately cooled) and PbLi (separately cooled)
Recent US Developments Related to
Blanket & Materials R&D
• Reduced budgets for blanket R&D
• Shifts in priorities and directions for blanket R&D
• Changing views on prospects for blanket structural materials
Recent US Developments Related to
Blanket & Materials R&D
• Reduced budgets for blanket R&D
• Shifts in priorities and directions for blanket R&D
• Changing views on prospects for blanket structural materials
Shifts in Priorities and Directionsfor Blanket R&D
• Shift focus of blanket R&D from science of higher risk concepts (APEX Project for advanced, innovative, and revolutionary) to development issues of lower risk concepts (conventional and evolutionary) that will be basis for Test Blanket Modules (TBMs) in early ITER operation
• Maintain some effort on higher risk concepts that might be tested as TBMs in later stages of ITER operation
Changing Views on Prospects for
Blanket Structural Materials
Recent change in structural materials R&D portfolio balance due to:
– Concerns about prospects for developing insulator coatings to control MHD effects in V/Li blanket
– More positive outlook on prospects of developing advanced (nanocomposited) ferritic steels that can operate at much higher temperatures than present-day steels
Past Allocation
Present Allocation
Target Future
AllocationStructural Material
ClassFunding
Allocation
V alloys: > ½
FS: < ¼
SiC: ¼
V alloys: < 1/2 and declining
FS: > 1/4 with AFS research increasing
SiC: ¼
About 1/3 for each if prospects for insulator
coatings improves
Reduce V alloys further if prospects for insulator
coatings does not improve
Changing Views on Prospects for
Blanket Structural Materials
Change in Portfolio Allocation
US Priorities for Coolant /Breeder Choices with
LA F/M Steel
• Solid Breeder: He-cooled ceramic breeder
• Liquid Breeder: Evaluating options
– Molten Salt (self-cooled and separately cooled) and PbLi (separately cooled)