Fusion and the World Energy Scene Chris Llewellyn Smith Director UKAEA Culham Chairman Consultative Committee for Euratom on Fusion (CCE-FU)

1
Fusion and the World Energy Scene Chris
Llewellyn SmithDirector UKAEA CulhamChairman
Consultative Committee for Euratom on Fusion
(CCE-FU)
2

• If chance of zero or very small ? should stop
  achieving viable fusion RD
• fusion power is reasonable ? should develop as
  fast as possible
• What is a reasonable chance depends on
• Security of future access to fossil fuels (in era
  of rapidly increasing energy use) very country
  dependent
• Degree of concern about continuing use of fossil
  fuels
• View of potential of other alternatives to fossil
  fuels
• View of cost of fusion development
• (will touch on all these issues)

3

• According to Clive Cookson (Science Editor of the
  Financial Times)
• Even if ITER runs well over budget, its
  spending is unlikely to exceed 1bn a year. That
  would be a small price to pay even for a 20
  chance of giving the world another energy option
  I hope to convince you that
• - This is right
• - Chance of success is gt 20
• OUTLINE
• The Energy Challenge - world energy scene
  climate change
• Meeting the challenge - portfolio of necessary
  measures
• cost targets for new energy sources
• European Fusion Power Plant Conceptual Study
• Culham Fast Track Study
• What should we be doing in parallel to building
  ITER?
• The cost of fusion RD
• Conclusions

4
World Energy Scene (I)

• 1) The world uses a lot of energy
• Average power consumption 13.6 TWs, or 2.2 kWs
  per person
• world energy electricity market 3
  trillion 1 trillion pa
• - very unevenly (OECD 6.2kWs/person Bangladesh
  0.20 kWs/person)
• 2) World energy use is expected to grow
• - growth necessary to lift billions of people
  out of poverty
• 3) 80 is generated by burning fossil fuels
• ? climate change debilitating pollution
• - which wont last for ever
• Need major new (clean) energy sources - requires
  new technology

5
World Energy Scene (II)

• 4) Use of primary energy
• - In USA 34 residential commercial 37
  industrial 26 transport
  (30 domestic)
• 1/3 of primary energy gt electricity (_at_ 35
  efficiency gt 12.4 of worlds energy use))
• Fraction ? electricity development (14.3 USA
  6.0 Bangladesh) and is likely to grow
• Fuel ? electricity very country dependent
• e.g. coal 35 in UK, 54 in USA, 76 in
  China
• falling as EU emission directives gt closure of
  coal power stations without new nuclear build
  the UK likely to be 70 reliant on (mainly
  imported) gas by 2020

6
Future Energy Use

• The International Energy Agency (IEA) expects the
  worlds energy use to increase 60 by 2030 (while
  population expected to grow from 6.2B to 8.1B) -
  driven largely by growth of energy use and
  population in India (current use 0.7
  kWs/person, vs. OECD average of 6.2 kWs/person)
  and China (current use 1.3 kWs/person)
• Strong link between energy use and the Human
  Development Index (HDI life expectancy at birth
  adult literacy and school enrolment gross
  national product per capita at purchasing power
  parity) need increased energy use to lift
  millions out of poverty

7
HDI ( life expectancy at birth adult literacy
school enrolment GNP per capita at PPP)
versus Primary Energy Demand per Capita (2002) in
tonnes of oil equivalent (toe) pa 1 toe pa
1.33 kWs
8

• Note shoulder in HDI vs energy-use curve at 3
  toe pa 4.0 kWs per capita
• To bring those using less than 3 toe up to the
  shoulder, world energy use would have to
• double at constant population
• increase by a factor 2.6 with the predicted 2030
  population of 8.1B
• If those using more reduced consumption to 3 toe
  pa pc, the factors would be
• 1.8 at constant population
• 2.4 with 8.1B

9
Carbon dioxide levels over the last 60,000 years
- we are provoking the atmosphere!
Source University of Berne and National Oceanic,
and Atmospheric Administration
10
There is widespread evidence of climate
changee.g. Thames Barrier Now Closed Frequently
to Counteract Increasing Flood Risk (gt potential
damage 30bn)
11
Meeting the Energy Challenge Will Need

• Fiscal measures to change the behaviour of
  consumers, and provide incentives to expand use
  of low carbon technologies
• Actions to improve efficiency (domestic,
  transport,, grid)
• Use of renewables where appropriate (although
  individually not hugely significant globally)
• BUT only four sources capable in principle of
  meeting a large fraction of the worlds energy
  needs

• Burning fossil fuels (currently 80) - develop
  deploy CO2 capture and storage
• Solar - seek breakthroughs in production and
  storage
• Nuclear fission - hard to avoid if we are serious
  about reducing fossil fuel burning (at least
  until fusion available)
• Fusion - with so few options, we must develop
  fusion as fast as possible, even if success is
  not 100 certain

12
What is the cost target for a new energy source?
World industrial electricity prices (taxes
excluded) in p/kWh 1p 1 penny UK
13
Cost targets for a new energy source are

• Moving (UK electricity price has increased from
  2p/kWhr to 5p/kWhr in the last year who knows
  what it will be 35 years from now)
• Very country dependent at any moment
• Sensitive to introduction of carbon tax or
  equivalents
• EU Emissions Trading certificates (introduced
  earlier this year) were recently trading at
  30/(tonne of CO2) gt 3cents/kWhr for coal
  generation (1.5cents for gas)
• Philosophy dependent European studies target
  cost of more expensive power sources for which
  there is a market (ARIES targeted cheapest)

14
Objectives of European Power Plant Conceptual
Study

• 1. Compared to earlier European studies
• Ensure the designs satisfy economic objectives
• Update the plasma physics basis
• (For both reasons, the parameters of the designs
  differ substantially from those of the earlier
  studies)
• 2. Confirm the excellent safety and environmental
  features of fusion power

15
Selection of PPCS model parameters

• Four Models, A - D, were studied as examples of
  a spectrum of possibilities
• Ranging from near term plasma physics and
  materials to advanced
• Systems code varied the parameters of the
  possible designs, subject to assigned plasma
  physics and technology rules and limits, to
  produce economic optimum

16
Plasma physics basis

• Based on assessments made by expert panel
  appointed by European fusion programme
• Near term Models (A B) roughly 30 better than
  the original design basis of ITER
• Models C D progressive improvements in
  performance - especially shaping, stability and
  divertor protection

17
Materials basis

• Model Divertor Blanket Blanket Blanket
• structure other Temperature
• A W/Cu/water Eurofer LiPb/water 300C
• B W/Eurofer/He Eurofer Li4SiO4/Be/He 300-500C
• C W/Eurofer/He ODS steel LiPB/SiC/He 450-700C
• Eurofer
• D W/SiC/LiPb SiC LiPb 700-1100C

Eurofer low activation steel
18
Fusion power and dimensions

• All (by design) close to 1500 MWe net output
• Thermodynamic efficiency increases with
  temperature (A?D)
• So fusion power falls from A (5.0 GW) to D (2.5
  GW) also because current drive power falls
• and size (and cost) falls from A to D

19
Direct cost of fusion electricity
second figure for early model first for mature
technology
20
Direct costs scaling

• The variation of direct cost of electricity with
  the main parameters is well fitted by
• In descending order of relative importance to
  economics
• A - plant availability
• ?th - thermodynamic efficiency
• Pe - net electrical output of the plant (which
  can be chosen)
• ?N - normalised plasma pressure
• N - normalised plasma density
• It seems there are no show-stopping minimum
  values associated with any of these parameters,
  although all are potential degraders of economic
  performance

21
Disposition of activated materials

• For ALL the Models
• Activation falls rapidly by a factor 10,000
  after a hundred years
• No waste for permanent repository disposal no
  long-term waste burden on future generations
• (Figure shows data for Power Station with 1.5 GW
  net electrical output Model B others are
  similar)

22
Overall PPCS summary

• Even near-term Models have acceptable economics
  (in some parts of the world)
• All Models have very good safety and
  environmental impact, now established with
  greater confidence
• The main thrusts of the European and world fusion
  programmes are on the right lines

23
Strategic implications

• The PPCS revealed a number of needs
• In depth study of DEMO now underway
• Further RD (development and testing of
  He-cooled divertor concepts capable of tolerating
  gt 10MW/m2, remote handling facility to develop
  maintenance concepts ? high availability, further
  study of He- cooled blankets)
• It also showed that economically acceptable
  fusion power plants, with major safety and
  environmental advantages, are now accessible on a
  fast-track, through ITER and without major
  materials advances (although characterisation and
  testing at IFMIF will be essential).

24
CULHAM FAST TRACK STUDY(Builds on important
earlier work in Europe and the USA)

• Idea ? develop fast track model to conventional
  tokamak based Demonstrator Power station (DEMO)
• critical path analysis for development of
  fusion
• ? prioritise RD
• ? motivate support for, and drive forward, rapid
  development of fusion
• Work about to be taken forward by in the
  framework of EFDA (European Fusion Development
  Agreement)

25
Essence of the Fast Track (I)

• First stage
• ITER - recent site choice, with USA on-board (gt
  key intellectual contributions) is great news
• IFMIF on the same time scale (accelerated by
  using money)
• Assume Acceleration of ITER exploitation, by
  focussing programme of existing Tokamaks
  (JET,DIII-D,JT60,) on supporting rapid
  achievement of ITERs goals
• ITER IFMIF programmes prioritised DEMO
  relevance
• Second stage
• DEMO (assumed to be a conventional tokamak) for
  final integration and reliability development.
  Realistically, there may be several DEMOs,
  roughly in parallel
• Then commercial fusion power

26
Essence of Fast Track (2)

• Assume a major change of mind-set, to a
  disciplined project-oriented industrial
  approach to fusion development adequate funding
• Compare fusion with the way that flight and
  fission were developed! There were the
  equivalents of many DEMOs and many materials test
  facilities ( 24 fission materials test reactors).

27
Note

• In parallel to fast track to (conventional
  tokamak-based) DEMO need Concept Development
• Stellarators, spherical tokamaks,
• additional physics (feed ? fast track)
• basis for alternative DEMOs/power stations for
  which ITER will provide burning plasma physics
  and blanket testing
• insurance policy

28
Approach

• Targets (from power plant studies)
• Issues and their resolution by devices
• Prioritisation, focus and co-ordination to speed
  the programme
• Pillars - ITER IFMIF existing tokamaks
  (JET, DIII-D, JT60,ASDEX-U,)
• Buttresses to reduce risks, and especially in
  case of Component Test Facility (CTF) - speed up
  the programme
• DEMO phase 1 is effectively (a very expensive)
  CTF in the minimalist pillars only model, which
  leads to electricity generation sooner, but
  reliable commercial fusion power later
• Pillars only model described only because it is
  simpler

29
Pillars vs. Issues
30
Fast Track - Pillars Only
31
BUTTRESSES ? Reduce Risk/Acceleration

• Multi-beam material test facility - study damage
  from irradiation with heavy ions to material
  samples with implanted Helium ( hydrogen?)
• Satellite tokamak - to be operated in parallel
  with ITER, as part of ITER programme, to test new
  modes of operation, plasma technologies,...
• Component Test Facility (CTF) - to test
  engineering structures (joints, ) in neutron
  fluences typical of fusion power stations
• We assume that a fast track CTF (possibly a
  small spherical tokamak that would not need to
  breed tritium?) could be operating with D-T in
  2026
• Assuming successful development, it would speed
  up the advent of fusion power significantly and
  reduce risks (note that in Pillars only model
  DEMO phase 1 is effectively a very expensive and
  large CTF)

32
Fast Track with Buttresses
33
PPCS FAST TRACK CONCLUSIONS (I)

• 1) Power stations with acceptable performance are
  accessible without major advances (barring major
  adverse surprises)
• 2) Culham fast track study shows that
• If ITER and IFMIF start in parallel, then with
  adequate funding, a change of mind set and no
  major surprises
• DEMO phase 1 operation 2031
• DEMO phase 2 (high reliability) operation 2038
• Commercial power stations in operation 2048
• This could be speeded up ( risk reduced,
  reliabilty of first power stations increased) if
  a Component Test Facility could be operating with
  D-T in 2026
• DEMO (high reliability) operation 2034
• Commercial power stations in operation 2044

34
FAST TRACK CONCLUSIONS (II)

• The results of this study are not a prediction
  it wont happen without
• Funding to begin ITER in parallel with IFMIF
  (and also to maintain a vigorous non-ITER
  technology and physics program)
• A change of mind set
• or if there are major adverse surprises.
• c/f world electricity (energy) market 1
  trillion pa (3 trillion pa)
• Most frequent comment/question from outsiders
• The result is disappointingly slow could you go
  much faster with more money?

35
Fusion Agenda in Parallel to Building ITER

• The ITER construction budget will go mainly to
  industry
• It should ideally be accompanied by increased
  funding for accompanying fusion activities
• prepare for rapid exploitation of ITER
• train fusion scientists and engineers for the
  ITER era
• push forward fusion while ITER is being built in
  particular
• gt increased work on technology and materials,
  and start building IFMIF
• Sir David King (Chief Scientific Advisor to UK
  Government)
• It would be a total dereliction of the case for
  ITER if the material project was not up and
  running in parallel

capitalise on ITER investment
36
European Commissions Proposed Specific Fusion
Programme during Seventh Framework Programme

• To develop the knowledge basis for, and to
  realise, ITER as the major step towards the
  creation of prototype reactors for power
  stations
• The proposal includes
• The realisation of ITER
• RD in preparation for ITER, including ITER
  focussed programme at JET
• Technology activities in preparation for DEMO,
  including establishment of a dedicated project
  team and implementation of the EVEDA to prepare
  for construction of IFMIF materials and
  technology work
• RD for the longer term (including concept
  development, theory, socio-economic studies)
• Proposed that the budget will double (gt half to
  ITER construction)

37
World Energy Spending

• World energy (electricity) market 3 tr (1
  tr) pa
• Publicly funded energy RD down 50 globally
  since 1980 in real terms currently 0.3 of
  market. Private funding down also, e.g. - 67 in
  USA 1985-97
• Increased energy RD needed across the board
• Fusion spend is small on the scale of the energy
  market and the challenge
• What about relative spending on fusion and (e.g.)
  Renewables?
• Most government support for renewables consist of
  subsidies to bring relatively mature technologies
  to the market, e.g in Europe
• Energy market 700 billion
• Energy subsidies 28 billion (5.4 billion to
  renewables)
• Energy RD 2 billion (500 million to fusion)

38
EU energy subsidy and RD 30 Billion Euro (per
year)
Source EEA, Energy subsidies in the European
Union A brief overview, 2004. Fusion and
fission are displayed separately using the IEA
government-RD data base and EURATOM 6th
framework programme data
39
Final Conclusions

• In view of the impending energy crunch (supply,
  climate change), the relatively small cost, the
  promising outlook
• Fusion power should be developed as one of very
  few options for base-load power, even if the
  chance of success is not 100
• ITER site choice is great news, but in addition
  to ITER we need - to start IFMIF as soon as
  possible, increase work on materials and
  technology, continue to work on alternative
  concepts
• ITER investment almost all gt industry must
  meanwhile maintain or increase level of other
  fusion activities (gt rapid exploitation of
  ITER, train scientists and engineers for the
  ITER-era, work towards IFMIF, develop fusion
  technologies) in order to maximise return from
  ITER
• A suitably organised and funded programme can
  make fusion a reality in our lifetimes