> home
> About
> Contact Us
> Editorial Info
> IEEE-USA

12.09

''New Age" in Fusion Energy R&D Now At Hand, Experts Tell Congressional Hearing

By Barton Reppert

An exciting "new age" in fusion energy research and development is now beckoning, including important advances expected to be achieved at the ITER international experimental reactor in France, fusion experts have testified before a congressional panel.

"We are on the verge of a new age in fusion science during which researchers will undertake fundamental tests of fusion energy's viability," said Dr. Edmund Synakowski, associate director for fusion energy science at the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science, appearing at a 29 October hearing before the House Science and Technology Committee's Energy and Environment Subcommittee.

Synakowski added that "the scientific community's excitement and optimism about our progress and readiness to enter this new era of fusion research is amplified by the high awareness worldwide of the need to fundamentally alter our energy landscape in this country. Fusion can be part of that landscape shift. But it is no secret that fusion on earth is difficult. Establishing a deep scientific understanding of the requirements for harnessing and optimizing this process on earth is critical, and the progress has been dramatic."

Another witness at the hearing, Dr. Stewart C. Prager, director of the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, testified that "fusion energy is perhaps one of the most challenging physics and engineering quests ever undertaken; its realization will be key to solving what is perhaps the most pressing problem confronting the world today — the absence of sustainable energy. By any measure, we are far along the road to commercial fusion power."

At the same time, however, Prager said that in recent years there has been significant erosion in U.S. fusion energy programs, which have been surpassed by other countries. "The U.S. effort has dwindled to a fraction of that of the European Union and Japan," he said. "The time is ripe for the United States to reverse its slide. Opportunities abound to restore the United States to world leadership and move us aggressively toward carbon-free, abundant fusion energy."

IEEE-USA recently has adopted two position statements on fusion energy — a general statement on fusion energy R&D, approved by the IEEE-USA Board of Directors in June 2006; and a statement focused on ITER (the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor), adopted in November 2008. Both statements were developed by IEEE-USA's Energy Policy Committee (EPC).

The June 2006 statement said "IEEE-USA endorses research and development in fusion power aimed at deriving the knowledge base to exploit fusion as a virtually inexhaustible, environmentally attractive and economical power source for electric power generation and other industrial processes."

The November 2008 statement on ITER said IEEE-USA urges federal legislators to "maintain consistent and adequate funding" for the international fusion project, calling American participation in ITER ''the centerpiece of the U.S. fusion research program... Its importance to the future of the nation, and the world, has never been greater."

Dr. Ned R. Sauthoff, an EPC member and director of the U.S. ITER Project Office at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, told Today's Engineer Online that in FY 2008, the regular appropriation was $10.6 million, well below the requested amount, while later in the year a supplemental appropriation added $15.5 million. In FY 2009 the appropriated funding was $124 million, and for FY 2010 it is budgeted at $135 million.

"These amounts are sufficient for the U.S. contributions to the ITER project, to meet its international commitments," Sauthoff said.

Asked what he views as the greatest engineering challenges which need to be dealt with in order to effectively move fusion energy R&D toward eventually achieving commercial-scale energy generation, Sauthoff said in an e-mail interview: "The current worldwide program focuses on the plasma physics of magnetically confined plasmas: creating and sustaining a magnetic bottle that stably holds the plasma and its energy while it is heated by a neutral particle beam and radio waves. ITER will extend this study to the self-heated phase in which the plasmas are nearly 'burning' -the fusion power itself dominates the heating of the plasma."

Sauthoff added: "Attractive fusion reactors also need research and development on materials to withstand the plasma power and the associated radiation damage by the neutron flux. This research is presently conducted at a modest level but must be accelerated to enable timely demonstration and deployment of fusion power. The combination of ITER's burning plasma and the materials and technology studies will be integrated into a demonstration reactor, which will also include the power conversion systems to produce electricity and hydrogen."

In an opening statement at the 29 October hearing, Rep. Brian Baird, D-Wash., chair of the subcommittee, said that "we all know that a working fusion reactor has been much more difficult to achieve than our atomic age scientists initially expected. Over the years, there were also some overly optimistic or even fraudulent proclamations by self ­identified fusion researchers who skipped the peer review process and went straight to the media, further complicating the popular and political assessment of the extent to which the federal government should continue to support this research."

Baird noted that the ITER experimental reactor, about to begin construction in Cadarache, France, "is designed to produce five times more energy than it consumes for several consecutive hours, as well as 10 times more for at least 500 seconds."

He added that if ITER and other fusion test reactors are successful, "they will represent a dramatic turning point in developing a viable, commercial fusion reactor. Big questions still remain, such as how affordable fusion can be in comparison to other options, and what the appropriate choices are for materials in a device which contains gases that can be hotter than the sun. But the U.S. fusion program needs to do all it can to ensure these successes, and be ready to take advantage of them if and when they occur."

Prager of the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory told the subcommittee that he was strongly concerned over reductions in the size and scope of the U.S. fusion R&D effort.

"When I began my research career the United States was the world leader in fusion," he testified. "We had the best facilities and arguably the most innovative program. Scientists the world over flocked to our labs. The Japanese government sent research teams to then­moderm U.S. facilities to learn the trade. An alarming reversal of that flow of scientists is now underway. The United States has not built a major new fusion facility in decades. The rest of the world is seizing the opportunities. Major facilities, more ambitious than anything in the United States, are starting operation or are under construction in China, Japan, South Korea, Germany and France."

Synakowski of DOE's Office of Science was more upbeat in assessing the situation. "In the next 10 years, the U.S. fusion research program will strive to be at the forefront of the burning plasma age, one in which research students grow a strong connection to fusion's future and potential," he testified. "It will be an age where more is asked of advanced computation than ever, where computer simulations are relied upon to close the gaps between one research step and another, and reduce project costs and increase confidence. . . . It will be an era in which the best combination of scientific depth and richness is combined with the highest sense of urgency to help the world address its energy challenges successfully to improve our quality of life."

Barton Reppert is an independent science and technology writer, focusing mainly on Washington coverage of S&T policy issues. Previously he worked for 18 years as a reporter and editor with The Associated Press in Washington, New York and Moscow.

Comments may be submitted to todaysengineer@ieee.org.