Fusion in the footsteps of fission from basic research into building reactors

Transcription

1 VTT TECHNICAL RESEARCH CENTRE OF FINLAND LTD Fusion in the footsteps of fission from basic research into building reactors SYP/NST 2016 Marina Congress Centre, 2 November, 2016 Antti Hakola on behalf of the FinnFusion consortium

2 Nuclear fusion: ultimate solution for the energy problems of mankind? Absolutely correct from the basic physics viewpoint: Two light nuclei merge together and release energy Largest energy release for the lightest isotopes of H and He Û largest change in binding energy D + T à 4 He + n MeV ( kwh/g) Requires: ü high enough temperatures (T~10 8 K) Þ plasma ü Sufficient density n and reasonable confinement time t for the plasma ü and small power losses 2

3 Fusion in power plants? Conceptually, fusion and fission power plants exhibit many similarities but also distinct differences Fission power plant Fusion power plant What is similar? Thermal cycle to produce electricity Activation of materials, production of n and g Nuclear safety during operations Waste handling What is different? Different fuel and fuel economy Different activation products Different safety and accident scenarios Different initiation of energy production 3

4 What kind of concepts are foreseen for a fusion power plant? Based on confining the plasma using helical magnetic fields Tokamak simple doughnut geometry Part of the field generated by current in the plasma Þ Basic concept pulsed device Þ Susceptible to disruptions 218 tokamaks built of which 45 in operation today Central solenoid Stellarators add complexity in the design Entire field produced by external coils Þ Continuous operation possible Þ Easier to operate than tokamaks Improved computational capacities increased interest in stellarators Coils Plasma Vertical coils Plasma current Plasma Helical field lines Toroidal coils 4

5 How far are we right now? Nuclear fusion was declassified in late 1950 s Þ overoptimism in the air Major achievements made during the last 60 years Þ only now realistic to think about designing and building a fusion reactor Examples of major achievements: Plasmas can be heated to several kevs without degrading their confinement Stable plasmas can be produced for up to 1000 s Net fusion gains (Q>1) possible in future devices Techniques available to tame intensive bursts of energy and particles from the plasma onto walls Þ Extrapolation to future fusion reactors possible using scaling laws 5 Standard technician

6 And what are the remaining problems? Being addressed right now: How to predict, mitigate, and prevent major disruptions of the plasma? How to find materials that survive the hot kisses of the plasma during long periods? Only recently taken on the agenda: What will happen to materials when exposed to fusion g and n? How to get as close to continuous production of fusion energy as possible? And: building huge fusion plants is far more challenging and expensive than Länsimetro or Olkiluoto 3 6

7 The present path to fusion energy ITER DEMO Fusion Power Plant (FPP) A single step between ITER and FPP!? Based on tokamak design Construction in , operation until 2040 Goal: demonstrate Q=10 operation Construction in Start of operations in Goal: demonstrate generation of electricity and economic viability Commercial production of electricity for national grid by 2050 In Europe outlined in Fusion Roadmap, R&D under the EUROfusion Consortium European procurements to ITER via Fusion for Energy (F4E) 7

8 Fusion research in Finland History: Tekes and Euratom-Tekes programs ( ); European funding via European Fusion Development Agreement (EFDA) Now: Finland is part of the EUROfusion Consortium (2014+) VTT in charge of co-ordination of the program, program funded by Tekes Volume: ~5 M /year (~40% from EU) Key R&D areas: Fusion technology, experimental and computational plasma physics Materials research Remote handling systems and technology Robotics and welding technology Program has been very successful in terms of cash flow from EU for R&D and ITER procurements 8

9 FinnFusion Consortium all together for the common goal Puts together the expertise and know-how of Research institutes (VTT), Universities (Aalto, University of Helsinki, LUT, TUT, Åbo Akademi), and Industry (e.g., CSC, DIARC-Technology, Fortum, Luvata, Metso) Benefits: Win-win situation: everybody benefiting from the collaboration Education and research seamlessly integrated International community: visits abroad already in the MSc and PhD phases Also the industrial involvement more prominent within FinnFusion VTT selected as co-ordinator for a task on Remote Maintenance (RM) introduced by EUROfusion for industrial companies in summer 2016: Design Assessment and Review of DEMO RM systems, technologies and requirements Contract with Fortum P&H and LUT now running à December 2016 Novel contribution by Loviisa NPP maintenance experts: experience and best practices 9

10 Shift of paradigm: from basic research into building reactors Be W JET - Joint European device in Culham - ITER-relevant Be and W wall ASDEX Upgrade - Mid-sized tokamak in Garching (Max- Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik) - DEMO relevant full- W wall coverage Previously: obtain deep understanding of the physics of hot plasmas via experiments in different test reactors (e.g., JET, ASDEX Upgrade) Finland deeply involved in these studies: ü Participation in experiments and modelling activities ü Task Force Leader positions in various projects ü Development of wall components for specific experiments in collaboration with industry 10

11 Shift of paradigm: from basic research into building reactors W7-X stellarator just completed its first experimental campaign IFMIF (International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility) will produce fusion-relevant n irradiation; D + injector just commissioned ITER status in April 2016 Now: large share of European R&D activities devoted to designing fusion power plants as well as on studies on new test devices (e.g., W7-X, IFMIF) Simultaneously, construction of ITER means more opportunities for direct contracts with ITER or grants from F4E 11

12 This has led Finland to focus its R&D on a few strategic areas Power Plant Analyses and Materials Provide new data and knowledge for the design of fusion power plants Carry out predictive modelling for processes occurring in ITER and DEMO Participate in major fusion experiments Develop new technologies and advanced materials Remote Operations and Virtual Reality Develop Systems Engineering (SE) and Remote Handling (RH) skills Design and develop SE- and RH-based solutions for ITER and DEMO Experimental studies using the DTP2 platform in Tampere Arc-discharge cleaning system for efficient T removal from the wall structures 12

13 What has fusion to learn from the fission community? The goals of fusion and fission are not that different fission is just at a more mature level Knowledge transfer on engineering aspects and operating reactors Adopting new research areas from the world of reactor physics ü Reactor design ü Neutronics and thermohydraulics ü Activation of materials and radiation damage/swelling/fracturing/ Dedicated code packages and software to be included in the toolbox: ü Neutronics calculations (e.g., SERPENT) ü Overall plant design (e.g., APROS) Socio-economic questions and competitive cost of fusion energy? ü Need to be addressed within the next 20 years Out-of-the-box ideas can go into reverse direction, too: ü Wall cleaning in fission reactors ü Nuclear waste transmutation by fusion neutrons 13

14 Fusion will now face the challenges that the fission community has been facing and solving already long ago Today, constructing a working fusion power plant in a reasonable time scale is much more likely than 50 years ago 14/11/