Transcript Document

Why on Earth Fusion?
Fusion: Energy Source for the Future
AAAS Annual Meeting
John Clarke & Jae Edmonds
19 February 2005
Joint Global Change Research Institute
Washington, DC
Thanks to
The Organizer of the Session
Dale Meade, PPPL.
The
US DOE Office of Science,
EPRI
&
The many other sponsors of the
Global Technology Strategy Project
2
Why on Earth Fusion?
Other energy sources are plentiful.
Yes, population is growing and there are issues of
supply, cost and environment with each source.
But, historically speaking, technology development has
proved deft at addressing such issues.
So why on earth fusion?
Over the years many reasons have been suggested, but
today I believe one is paramount.
While there are many uncertainties about future energy
needs, the dominant role of carbon based fuel for the
next fifty years is not one of them and . . .
We really do need some non-carbon energy
options.
3
Three Propositions Related to
Climate & Fusion Energy
Development
Human induced climate change is a long-term
issue with a characteristic time scale of 100
years or more, but with implications for present
decision making.
Climate change is all about technology and
managing the development and deployment of
succeeding generations of energy technology
over the century ahead.
Stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations
means that the largest changes to the global
energy system are in the second half of the 21st
century.
4
Implications for Fusion
The good news: The climate driven need for
new technology will be largest when fusion is
most likely to become available.
The bad news: It’s a competitive world.



It takes more than a climate constraint to bring a
non-emitting technology into the market.
If a technology cannot deliver on cost, performance,
other environmental concerns, health, and safety
issues, its competitors will.
Even if technically successful, fusion will compete
with a portfolio of other technology responses.
5
Bottom Line
Fusion benefits from a climate constraints, but
the benefit is relative.
On the other hand, the value to successful
fusion technology development is potentially
very high.
6
Stabilizing CO2
Concentrations
Stabilization of
greenhouse gas
concentrations is the
goal of the Framework
Convention on
Climate Change
Stabilizing the
concentration of CO2
is a very long term
problem
Stabilization means that GLOBAL emissions must peak in
the decades ahead and then decline indefinitely thereafter.
7
Stabilizing CO2 :
Base Case and “Gap” Technologies
Assumed Advances In
• Fossil Fuels
• Energy intensity
• Nuclear
• Renewables
The “Gap”
Gap technologies
e.g.
• C Capture &
Sequestration
• Fusion
• Biotech Energy
8
There Are No “Silver Bullets”
When It Comes to Stabilization
Energy Intensity
Improvements



Industry
Buildings
Transportation
Wind and Solar
Biotechnology



Soils
Biomass crops
Advanced biotechnology
Nuclear


Fission
Fusion
Carbon Dioxide Capture
and Storage


Geologic
Terrestrial (soils, trees)
Advanced Transformation
Systems



Electricity
Hydrogen
Bio-derivative fuels
Non-CO2 Greenhouse
Gases
9
Timing is Everything:
Emissions Mitigation Under WRE
Emissions Reductions
from Reference
OGF
to Reach WRE Path
700
500
2005-2050
2050-2095
652
400
464
300
328
200
248
208
84
22
pp
m
v
pp
m
v
40
65
0
pp
m
v
55
0
pp
m
v
0
75
0
100
45
0
Billions of tonnes C
600
10
So If Fusion Technology Was
Available After 2050:
Fusion energy would benefits from carbon
taxes . . . the Carbon “Subsidy”
Each $100/tonne C is worth
$0.011 to $0.018/kWh
(depending on the fossil fuel alternative)
11
Timing of Emissions Mitigation
Under WRE
1200
$/tonne C
1100
1000
450 ppmv
900
800
550 ppmv
700
750 ppmv
650 ppmv
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1990 2005 2020 2035 2050 2065 2080 2095
12
Estimates of the Potential of
Fusion Power in a ClimateConstrained World
1996 GTSP Study “The Economic Value of
Fusion Energy” assumed:
Fission phased out in W. Eur. & USA
 Elsewhere Fission's Costs Decline @ 0.5 %/yr.
 No Carbon Capture & Sequestration
 Fusion technology available beginning in 2035, but not
commercially available until 2050.
 Costs of operation declining to between $0.03/kWh and
$0.10/kWh.

13
GTSP Modeling Results
Growing share of fusion power generation in the
second half of the 21st century as costs decline.
Obviously, a greater share of power generation
the lower the cost.
But only modestly greater market penetration
under a climate constraint

Due to competition driven technology advances.
14
However, The Value of
Commercially Available Fusion
Energy in 2050 Is Still Large
Value of Having vs. Not Having Fusion - CBF
964,2
2,500
2,000
416,1
1,500
852,1
Billion 1996 $
863
681
262
713
w
st
we
Lo
Lo
721
222
h
ig
H
id
M
57
104
625
st
he
450 ppmv
133
ig
H
Battelle Memorial Institute
701
650 ppmv
581
-
395
237
323
550 ppmv
500
166
750 ppmv
1,000
150,1
15
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
The Economic Bottom Line
Fusion benefits from a climate constrained
world, but the benefit is relative.
Unless it can provide energy at a competitive
cost—and the competition is not standing still—
its role as an energy technology will be limited.
On the other hand, the value to successful
technology development is potentially high.
Demonstrating the technical feasibility of
fusion has a large option value.
16
Fusion Research is Ready for a
Burning Plasma Experiment
Computational, diagnostic advances have laid a solid scientific
basis for understanding key physical phenomena at different time
and spatial scales.

ARIES-RS (Q = 25)
Magnetohydrodynamics, microturbulence, plasma transport
However, like human biology or climate, fusion plasma behavior is
the sum of non-linearly coupled interactions at all of these scales.
After nearly sixty years of research, ITER will explore the ultimate
regime of fusion plasma phenomena.



Internal fusion reactions will dominate the plasma.
The fusion plasma will reveal its final, self-organized characteristics.
The operational and technological hurdles will be clear.
17
And If ITER Succeeds . . .
ITER Project Office Magnetic Fusion Roadmap (December 2003)
18
Estimated Development
Cost for Fusion Energy Has Been
Essentially Unchanged Since 1980
Cumulative Funding
1/6-1/30 Value of
Avoided Carbon @
550ppm
35000
25000
Magnetic F usion
Engineering Act
of 1980
20000
15000
F usion Energy Dev elopment
Plan, 2003 (MF E)
ITER
ITER
ITER
FED
10000
Actual
5000
2035
2030
2025
2020
2015
2010
2005
2000
1995
1990
1985
0
1980
$M, FY02
Demo
Demo
Demo
Demo
30000
So why on earth fusion?
In a climate constrained world uncertainty abounds:




Carbon sequestration is the determining factor for fossil fuel
electric generation.
A paradigm shift to a hydrogen economy is also needed to
allow continued use of fossil fuels for transportation.
The competitive economics of hydrogen from non-carbon
energy sources depends on both fossil and non-fossil
technology development . . . and their social acceptability.
Energy availability, relative technological progress,
environmental preferences and security issues will all play a
role in determining the outcome.
Given large uncertainties, durable policy conflicts, and
potential consequences of delay:
Fusion’s Option Value Is Very
Large.
20