DOCSLIB.ORG

Fusion Energy 101

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fusion Energy 101 Fusion Energy 101 Jeff Freidberg PSFC & NSE January 2012 1 Outline 1. What is fusion’s role in energy production 2. How does fusion work? 3. Where is fusion research now? 4. Where might fusion be in the future? 2 Consumption of Energy by Sector Heating Transportation Electricity EIA – DOE 2010 3 Where does fusion fit in? • Goal of fusion: make electricity • Lots of it! • Base load electricity – 24/7 4 Electricity Production Gas 19% Coal 49% Nuclear 21% Hydro 6% Other 4% EIA – DOE 2010 5 Electricity Production – Other 4% Oil 22% Wind 53% Biomass 25% Geothermal 9% 6 The Big Picture Fusion Pros: • Huge resources – a renewable • No CO2 emissions • No pollution • Inherently safe • No proliferation issues • Small radiation and waste disposal problems • Small power plant footprint 7 The Big Picture Fusion Cons: • It doesn’t work yet 8 How does fusion work? Science • Nuclear physics • Plasma physics Engineering • Materials • Magnets • Blanket design • Economics 9 Nuclear Physics Two types of nuclear reactions: • Fission – split heavy atoms (Uranium) • Fusion – fuse light atoms (Deuterium) 10 The easiest fusion reaction D-T D + T → He + n + 17.6 MeV 11 Fuel Inventory - Coal 12 Fuel Inventory - Fusion 13 Fuel Supply - Fusion • Plenty of D from the ocean • No natural T – half life = 12 years • Need to breed T in the reactor Li-6 + n → He + T + 4.8 MeV • Li-6 is 7% of natural lithium • 1000’s of years of natural lithium 14 A Big Problem • Like charges repel + + • Huge energies are needed to overcome the repulsive force • This turns the gas into a plasma 15 Definition of a Plasma Electrons have enough energy to detach from nucleus Temperature is a measure of energy Energy is measured in electron volts (eV) 1 eV = 11,300 C = 20,400 F Fusion plasma = 15 keV = 17,000,000 C 16 One example of a plasma 17 Properties of a fusion plasma 20− 3 • We need enough plasma: nm = 10 (air/100,000) • At a high enough temperature: T = 15 keV (air x million) • Holding its heat for a long enough time: τ = 2 sec • For a sustained fusion plasma – Lawson Criterion pτ >−8 atm sec 18 Picture of a fusion plasma 19 The Dick and Jane Fusion Reactor • Alphas stay in and heat the plasma • Alphas (He) stay in and heat the plasma • Plasma cools down by thermal conduction • Balance determines the temperature • Neutrons enter and heat the blanket – makes electricity • Blanket also breeds tritium 20 Basic Plasma Physics Questions • How do we hold a plasma together? • How do we heat it to 15 keV 21 Hold a plasma together – some ideas • Put it in a container – dumb idea • Gravity – not on earth • Inertial confinement – hurry up • Magnetic confinement – no hurry 22 Magnetic confinement • Cyclotron orbits • Good confinement perpendicular to B • No confinement parallel to B 23 Too bad about ends 24 A simple solution • Homer Simpson “Donuts. Is there anything they can’t do?” 25 Too simple! • Field is weaker on the outside • Plasma wants to expand • Hole gets bigger • Need to wrap the field lines around the plasma like on a barber pole • Can do this by passing a current around the plasma • Can do this with corkscrew magnets 26 Many attempts at good magnetic field configurations Belt pinch Reversed field pinch Cusp Screw pinch Elmo bumpy torus Spherical tokamak Field reversed configuration Spheromak Force free pinch Stellarator Heliac Stuffed caulked Cusp High beta stellarator Tandem mirror Levitated dipole Theta pinch Mirror Tokamak Octopole Tormac Perhapsatron Z pinch Plasma focus Z pinch – hard core 27 Two have risen to the top – why? Tokamaks • Best plasma physics performance • But two tough problems remain Stellarators • Performance approaching that of tokamaks • May be able to solve tokamak problems • But other engineering problems arise 28 How does a tokamak work? A tokamak needs three types of magnets • A toroidal field magnet • An ohmic transformer • Poloidal field magnet 29 The toroidal field magnet 30 The ohmic transformer ⊗ 31 The poloidal field magnet ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ 32 The total magnet system 33 Tokamak magnetic field lines 34 A real life tokamak-Alcator C-Mod 35 Picture of a fusion plasma held together by a magnetic field 36 What is good about a tokamak? The B field holds enough plasma together in a stable way for a reactor Stable Unstable 37 What is good about a tokamak? + = Plasmas are heated by microwaves or RF waves to fusion reactor temperatures 38 Picture of a fusion plasma confined by a magnetic field heated by microwave power 39 What is good about a tokamak? • The cooling down time is long enough to sustain the plasma in a fusion reactor 40 Tokamak Progress 41 Two tokamak problems • The need for steady state • Avoidance of major disruptions 42 The need for steady state • Transformers do not work in steady state t t Primary current Plasma current • Mechanical and heat cycling bad for structural integrity • Need a way to drive the plasma current indefinitely • This can be accomplished by microwave current drive 43 Microwave current drive • Launch waves in one direction around the torus • Choose the frequency and wave velocity carefully • Wave scoops up electrons as it travels • Preferential scooping produces a current 44 Current drive analogy 45 How well does current drive work? • The good news: current drive works • The bad news: it is not very efficient • 1 amp requires 10 watts of absorbed power • 15 MA requires 300 MW of wall power • Whole reactor produces 1000 MW wall power • Not economical 46 Possible solution • Depend on the good will of the plasma • Naturally occurring transport driven current • Known as the “bootstrap” current • Carefully tailored profiles can produce 75% bootstrap current • Not easy to tailor the profiles in a reactor • Plasmas are not your friends 47 Disruptions • Rapid quenching of the plasma pressure • Rapid quenching of the plasma current • Physical damage to the first wall • Tolerable in existing experiments • Intolerable in a fusion reactor 48 The tough little plasma • Start with a little ohmically heated baby plasma • Feed it some current • Feed it some particles • Feed it some energy • Plasma grows bigger and stronger • Just a little more to become a grown up “fusion plasma” 49 Too much! 50 Possible solutions • Build a very sturdy first wall – not really feasible • Avoid disruptions – leads to puny plasma • Disruption “extinguisher” – good to prevent damage 51 The bottom line • Tokamak plasma physics work reasonably well • Steady state is doable but tough • Disruption avoidance is doable but tough 52 Stellarators may be a better way • Inherently steady state – no net current flows in the plasma • Without net current, stellarators do not observe major disruptions 53 Two big stellarators • LHD in Japan • W7-X in Germany 54 Stellarators have their own problems • Magnets are very complicated • Cooling down time is not quite as long as for a tokamak – at least not yet 55 The next big fusion experiment - ITER Power out = 500 MW thermal Pulse length = 500 – 2500 sec Major radius = 6.2 m Minor radius = 2.0 m Plasma current = 15 MA Toroidal field = 5.3 T Heating power = 73 MW Cost = $4B, $10B, $20B 56 Goals of ITER Test most plasma physics, some engineering 57 Switch from physics to engineering What are the key fusion engineering problems? • Materials • Magnets • Blankets • Economics 58 The problems are tough but • We can see a possible solution for magnets • We can see a possible solution for blankets • Way too little funding for engineering research 59 The first wall materials problem • Survive heat load • Survive neutron load • Maintain good mechanical properties • Maintain good thermal properties • Maintain good electrical properties • No cracking or becoming brittle • Can’t do it right now 60 Leading contenders for new materials • Superbium • Miraculum • Unobtainium • Major research effort needed • Not well funded 61 Economics – a tough problem • Which costs more? 62 Which costs more? 63 Power Plant Economics Capital + O&M + Fuel = COE($/kwh) Compare fission and fusion economics • Key point: Capital separates into two components • Nuclear island – basically the “furnace” • Balance of plant – turbines, buildings, etc. 65 Fission vs. Fusion Type Capital + Operating + Fuel = COE Fission (4.2 + 2.8) + 1.3 + 0.7 = 9 c/kwh Fusion (8.4 + 2.8) + 1.3 + 0.7 = 13.2 c/kwh 66 But Fusion has other advantages • Safety • Waste disposal • Proliferation resistance Will this be enough? 67 A long range fission problem • Natural uranium will run out: 50 -100 yrs • What then? • Fission solution: Breeder reactors • Breeder reactors: • More costly • More delicate to operate safely • Takes 10 – 20 yrs to breed • Entire fleet must be converted to breeders $$$$ 68 Fusion-Fission Hybrid • Fusion reactor is surrounded by a lithium blanket • Replace it with a fission blanket • Fusion neutrons make a lot of fission fuel • 1 fusion reactor fuels 5 – 8 LWR fission reactors • High fusion cost leveraged against multiple LWRs • No need to convert fission fleet • Plasma physics easier, engineering comparable • Fission energy for 1000’s of years • Hybrid – Optimum or Pessimum? 69 Hybrid economics Crossover point between hybrids and breeders CLWR = cost of an LWR fission reactor CBRE = cost of a breeder reactor CHYB = cost of a hybrid N = number of LWRs per hybrid Break even point where hybrids win CC HYB < NBRE −≈1 2.5 CCLWR LWR 70 Summary • Fusion has enormous potential • Problems greater than anticipated • Funding less than anticipated • Hybrids may serve as an intermediate goal • Hybrids may even serve as an end goal • Problems are incredibly interesting It is worth the effort!! 71 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Table 2.Iii.1. Fissionable Isotopes1
    FISSIONABLE ISOTOPES Charles P. Blair Last revised: 2012 “While several isotopes are theoretically fissionable, RANNSAD defines fissionable isotopes as either uranium-233 or 235; plutonium 238, 239, 240, 241, or 242, or Americium-241. See, Ackerman, Asal, Bale, Blair and Rethemeyer, Anatomizing Radiological and Nuclear Non-State Adversaries: Identifying the Adversary, p. 99-101, footnote #10, TABLE 2.III.1. FISSIONABLE ISOTOPES1 Isotope Availability Possible Fission Bare Critical Weapon-types mass2 Uranium-233 MEDIUM: DOE reportedly stores Gun-type or implosion-type 15 kg more than one metric ton of U- 233.3 Uranium-235 HIGH: As of 2007, 1700 metric Gun-type or implosion-type 50 kg tons of HEU existed globally, in both civilian and military stocks.4 Plutonium- HIGH: A separated global stock of Implosion 10 kg 238 plutonium, both civilian and military, of over 500 tons.5 Implosion 10 kg Plutonium- Produced in military and civilian 239 reactor fuels. Typically, reactor Plutonium- grade plutonium (RGP) consists Implosion 40 kg 240 of roughly 60 percent plutonium- Plutonium- 239, 25 percent plutonium-240, Implosion 10-13 kg nine percent plutonium-241, five 241 percent plutonium-242 and one Plutonium- percent plutonium-2386 (these Implosion 89 -100 kg 242 percentages are influenced by how long the fuel is irradiated in the reactor).7 1 This table is drawn, in part, from Charles P. Blair, “Jihadists and Nuclear Weapons,” in Gary A. Ackerman and Jeremy Tamsett, ed., Jihadists and Weapons of Mass Destruction: A Growing Threat (New York: Taylor and Francis, 2009), pp. 196-197. See also, David Albright N 2 “Bare critical mass” refers to the absence of an initiator or a reflector.
    [Show full text]
  • FT/P3-20 Physics and Engineering Basis of Multi-Functional Compact Tokamak Reactor Concept R.M.O
    FT/P3-20 Physics and Engineering Basis of Multi-functional Compact Tokamak Reactor Concept R.M.O. Galvão1, G.O. Ludwig2, E. Del Bosco2, M.C.R. Andrade2, Jiangang Li3, Yuanxi Wan3 Yican Wu3, B. McNamara4, P. Edmonds, M. Gryaznevich5, R. Khairutdinov6, V. Lukash6, A. Danilov7, A. Dnestrovskij7 1CBPF/IFUSP, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2Associated Plasma Laboratory, National Space Research Institute, São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil, 3Institute of Plasma Physics, CAS, Hefei, 230031, P.R. China, 4Leabrook Computing, Bournemouth, UK, 5EURATOM/UKAEA Fusion Association, Culham Science Centre, Abingdon, UK, 6TRINITI, Troitsk, RF, 7RRC “Kurchatov Institute”, Moscow, RF [email protected] Abstract An important milestone on the Fast Track path to Fusion Power is to demonstrate reliable commercial application of Fusion as soon as possible. Many applications of fusion, other than electricity production, have already been studied in some depth for ITER class facilities. We show that these applications might be usefully realized on a small scale, in a Multi-Functional Compact Tokamak Reactor based on a Spherical Tokamak with similar size, but higher fields and currents than the present experiments NSTX and MAST, where performance has already exceeded expectations. The small power outputs, 20-40MW, permit existing materials and technologies to be used. The analysis of the performance of the compact reactor is based on the solution of the global power balance using empirical scaling laws considering requirements for the minimum necessary fusion power (which is determined by the optimized efficiency of the blanket design), positive power gain and constraints on the wall load. In addition, ASTRA and DINA simulations have been performed for the range of the design parameters.
    [Show full text]
  • Iter: Os Caminhos Da Energia De Fusão E O Brasil (2015)
    ITER Os caminhos da energia de fusão e o Brasil MINISTÉRIO DAS RELAÇÕES EXTERIORES Ministro de Estado Embaixador Mauro Luiz Iecker Vieira Secretário -Geral Embaixador Sérgio França Danese FUNDAÇÃO ALEXANDRE DE GUSMÃO Presidente Embaixador Sérgio Eduardo Moreira Lima Instituto de Pesquisa de Relações Internacionais Diretor Embaixador José Humberto de Brito Cruz Centro de História e Documentação Diplomática Diretor Embaixador Maurício E. Cortes Costa Conselho Editorial da Fundação Alexandre de Gusmão Presidente Embaixador Sérgio Eduardo Moreira Lima Membros Embaixador Ronaldo Mota Sardenberg Embaixador Jorio Dauster Magalhães e Silva Embaixador Gonçalo de Barros Carvalho e Mello Mourão Embaixador José Humberto de Brito Cruz Embaixador Julio Glinternick Bitelli Ministro Luís Felipe Silvério Fortuna Professor Francisco Fernando Monteoliva Doratioto Professor José Flávio Sombra Saraiva Professor Eiiti Sato A Fundação Alexandre de Gusmão, instituída em 1971, é uma fundação pública vinculada ao Ministério das Relações Exteriores e tem a finalidade de levar à sociedade civil informações sobre a realidade internacional e sobre aspectos da pauta diplomática brasileira. Sua missão é promover a sensibilização da opinião pública nacional para os temas de relações internacionais e para a política externa brasileira. Augusto Pestana ITER Os caminhos da energia de fusão e o Brasil Brasília, 2015 Direitos de publicação reservados à Fundação Alexandre de Gusmão Ministério das Relações Exteriores Esplanada dos Ministérios, Bloco H Anexo II, Térreo 70170 ‑900 Brasília–DF Telefones:(61) 2030 ‑6033/6034 Fax:(61) 2030 ‑9125 Site: www.funag.gov.br E ‑mail: [email protected] Equipe Técnica: Eliane Miranda Paiva Fernanda Antunes Siqueira Gabriela Del Rio de Rezende Luiz Antônio Gusmão André Luiz Ventura Ferreira Projeto Gráfico e Capa: Yanderson Rodrigues Programação Visual e Diagramação: Gráfica e Editora Ideal Impresso no Brasil 2015 P476 Pestana, Augusto.
    [Show full text]
  • ESTIMATION of FISSION-PRODUCT GAS PRESSURE in URANIUM DIOXIDE CERAMIC FUEL ELEMENTS by Wuzter A
    NASA TECHNICAL NOTE NASA TN D-4823 - - .- j (2. -1 "-0 -5 M 0-- N t+=$j oo w- P LOAN COPY: RET rm 3 d z c 4 c/) 4 z ESTIMATION OF FISSION-PRODUCT GAS PRESSURE IN URANIUM DIOXIDE CERAMIC FUEL ELEMENTS by WuZter A. PuuZson una Roy H. Springborn Lewis Reseurcb Center Clevelund, Ohio NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D. C. NOVEMBER 1968 i 1 TECH LIBRARY KAFB, NM I 111111 lllll IllH llll lilll1111111111111 Ill1 01317Lb NASA TN D-4823 ESTIMATION OF FISSION-PRODUCT GAS PRESSURE IN URANIUM DIOXIDE CERAMIC FUEL ELEMENTS By Walter A. Paulson and Roy H. Springborn Lewis Research Center Cleveland, Ohio NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION For sale by the Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Information Springfield, Virginia 22151 - CFSTl price $3.00 ABSTRACl Fission-product gas pressure in macroscopic voids was calculated over the tempera- ture range of 1000 to 2500 K for clad uranium dioxide fuel elements operating in a fast neutron spectrum. The calculated fission-product yields for uranium-233 and uranium- 235 used in the pressure calculations were based on experimental data compiled from various sources. The contributions of cesium, rubidium, and other condensible fission products are included with those of the gases xenon and krypton. At low temperatures, xenon and krypton are the major contributors to the total pressure. At high tempera- tures, however, cesium and rubidium can make a considerable contribution to the total pressure. ii ESTIMATION OF FISSION-PRODUCT GAS PRESSURE IN URANIUM DIOXIDE CERAMIC FUEL ELEMENTS by Walter A. Paulson and Roy H.
    [Show full text]
  • LANL Fusion Capabilities
    LANL Fusion Capabilities INFUSE workshop Jan 22-23, 2019 1 Managed by Triad National Security, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy’s NNSA Los Alamos has a long history of fusion research James Tuck, Ivy Mike, 1952 Perhapsatron, 1953 • Today magnetic and inertial fusion work resides in the Physics Division, Theory Division, and X Division (Weapons). There are also related capabilities in detectors, radiation damage, and tritium handling. • Dr. John Kline ( [email protected] ) is the present Fusion Energy Sciences (and Inertial Fusion) program manager, and a point-of-contact. 2 Managed by Triad National Security, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy’s NNSA 3 Managed by Triad National Security, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy’s NNSA FRC’s were developed in Russia and Los Alamos FRC’s are high beta plasmas, with many interesting features 4 Managed by Triad National Security, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy’s NNSA Today FRC plasmas are still being explored 5 Managed by Triad National Security, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy’s NNSA Magnetized Plasma Team in P-24 Plasma Physics We do experimental plasma work for FES, APRA-E, and NNSA sponsors, with national and international partners, including small businesses. We use our knowledge of plasma diagnostics, pulsed power expertise, and HED plasmas in the areas of fusion energy, weapons support, and basic plasma science. Team Leader: Glen Wurden ([email protected]) Staff: Hsu, Weber, Langendorf, Dunn, Shimada Postdocs: Tom Byvank, Kevin Yates, John Boguski Student: Chris Roper (Summer) 6 Managed by Triad National Security, LLC for the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Compilation and Evaluation of Fission Yield Nuclear Data Iaea, Vienna, 2000 Iaea-Tecdoc-1168 Issn 1011–4289
    IAEA-TECDOC-1168 Compilation and evaluation of fission yield nuclear data Final report of a co-ordinated research project 1991–1996 December 2000 The originating Section of this publication in the IAEA was: Nuclear Data Section International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramer Strasse 5 P.O. Box 100 A-1400 Vienna, Austria COMPILATION AND EVALUATION OF FISSION YIELD NUCLEAR DATA IAEA, VIENNA, 2000 IAEA-TECDOC-1168 ISSN 1011–4289 © IAEA, 2000 Printed by the IAEA in Austria December 2000 FOREWORD Fission product yields are required at several stages of the nuclear fuel cycle and are therefore included in all large international data files for reactor calculations and related applications. Such files are maintained and disseminated by the Nuclear Data Section of the IAEA as a member of an international data centres network. Users of these data are from the fields of reactor design and operation, waste management and nuclear materials safeguards, all of which are essential parts of the IAEA programme. In the 1980s, the number of measured fission yields increased so drastically that the manpower available for evaluating them to meet specific user needs was insufficient. To cope with this task, it was concluded in several meetings on fission product nuclear data, some of them convened by the IAEA, that international co-operation was required, and an IAEA co-ordinated research project (CRP) was recommended. This recommendation was endorsed by the International Nuclear Data Committee, an advisory body for the nuclear data programme of the IAEA. As a consequence, the CRP on the Compilation and Evaluation of Fission Yield Nuclear Data was initiated in 1991, after its scope, objectives and tasks had been defined by a preparatory meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • SCIENCE and INNOVATION at Los Alamos
    SCIENCE AND INNOVATION at Los Alamos Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 1 . Fred Reines (left) helps lower Wright Langham into a detector similar to the one used by Reines to detect neutrinos for the first time. The active medium of the detector was a liquid scintillator developed by F. Newton Hayes for assays of large biological sam- ples. The availability of liquid scintillators led to the whole-body counter, a device for monitoring the amount of certain radionu- clides in the bodies of workers exposed to radioactive materials. Wright Langham was one of the world’s experts on the metabo- lism of plutonium. Lattice-gas hydrodynamics, a discrete model for fluid flow, was invented by Brosl Hasslacher at Los Alamos with U. Frisch and Y. Pomeau. This novel formulation provides a fast, efficient, reliable method for simulating the Navier-Stokes equations and two-phase flow. A modification by Ken Eggert and coworkers is now being applied to model flow through porous media, a problem of great interest to oil companies. Norman Doggett and Judy Tesmer examine a gel at the Laboratory’s Center for Human Genome Studies. The Human Genome Project, a joint DOE-NIH effort, was largely conceived at a DOE meeting in Santa Fe in 1986. Researchers at the Los Alamos Center developed a widely used technique for fingerprinting DNA, discovered the human telomere (the se- quence at the ends of every human chromosome), are developing physical maps of several human chromosomes, and are preparing chromosome-specific libraries of clones, which are extremely useful in physical-mapping projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Uranium (Nuclear)
    Uranium (Nuclear) Uranium at a Glance, 2016 Classification: Major Uses: What Is Uranium? nonrenewable electricity Uranium is a naturally occurring radioactive element, that is very hard U.S. Energy Consumption: U.S. Energy Production: and heavy and is classified as a metal. It is also one of the few elements 8.427 Q 8.427 Q that is easily fissioned. It is the fuel used by nuclear power plants. 8.65% 10.01% Uranium was formed when the Earth was created and is found in rocks all over the world. Rocks that contain a lot of uranium are called uranium Lighter Atom Splits Element ore, or pitch-blende. Uranium, although abundant, is a nonrenewable energy source. Neutron Uranium Three isotopes of uranium are found in nature, uranium-234, 235 + Energy FISSION Neutron uranium-235, and uranium-238. These numbers refer to the number of Neutron neutrons and protons in each atom. Uranium-235 is the form commonly Lighter used for energy production because, unlike the other isotopes, the Element nucleus splits easily when bombarded by a neutron. During fission, the uranium-235 atom absorbs a bombarding neutron, causing its nucleus to split apart into two atoms of lighter mass. The first nuclear power plant came online in Shippingport, PA in 1957. At the same time, the fission reaction releases thermal and radiant Since then, the industry has experienced dramatic shifts in fortune. energy, as well as releasing more neutrons. The newly released neutrons Through the mid 1960s, government and industry experimented with go on to bombard other uranium atoms, and the process repeats itself demonstration and small commercial plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Operational Characteristics of the Stabilized Toroidal Pinch Machine, Perhapsatron S-4
    P/2488 USA Operational Characteristics of the Stabilized Toroidal Pinch Machine, Perhapsatron S-4 By J. P. Conner, D. C. H age r m an, J. L. Honsaker, H. J. Karr, J. P. Mize, J. E. Osher, J. A. Phillips and E. J. Stovall Jr. Several investigators1"6 have reported initial success largely inductance-limited and not resistance-limited in stabilizing a pinched discharge through the utiliza- as observed in PS-3. After gas breakdown about 80% tion of an axial Bz magnetic field and conducting of the condenser voltage appears around the secondary, walls, and theoretical work,7"11 with simplifying in agreement with the ratio of source and load induct- assumptions, predicts stabilization under these con- ances. The rate of increase of gas current is at first ditions. At Los Alamos this approach has been large, ~1.3xlOn amp/sec, until the gas current examined in linear (Columbus) and toroidal (Per- contracts to cause an increase in inductance, at which hapsatron) geometries. time the gas current is a good approximation to a sine Perhapsatron S-3 (PS-3), described elsewhere,4 was curve. The gas current maximum is found to rise found to be resistance-limited in that the discharge linearly with primary voltage (Fig. 3), deviating as current did not increase significantly for primary expected at the higher voltages because of saturation vçltages over 12 kv (120 volts/cm). The minor inside of the iron core. diameter of this machine was small, 5.3 cm, and the At the discharge current maximum, the secondary onset of impurity light from wall material in the voltage is not zero, and if one assumes that there is discharge occurred early in the gas current cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Energy & the Environmental Debate
    FEATURES Nuclear energy & the environmental debate: The context of choices Through international bodies on climate change, the roles of nuclear power and other energy options are being assessed by Evelyne ^Environmental issues are high on international mental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which Bertel and Joop agendas. Governments, interest groups, and citi- has been active since 1988. Since the energy Van de Vate zens are increasingly aware of the need to limit sector is responsible for the major share of an- environmental impacts from human activities. In thropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, interna- the energy sector, one focus has been on green- tional organisations having expertise and man- house gas emissions which could lead to global date in the field of energy, such as the IAEA, are climate change. The issue is likely to be a driving actively involved in the activities of these bodies. factor in choices about energy options for elec- In this connection, the IAEA participated in the tricity generation during the coming decades. preparation of the second Scientific Assessment Nuclear power's future will undoubtedly be in- Report (SAR) of the Intergovernmental Panel on fluenced by this debate, and its potential role in Climate Change (IPCC). reducing environmental impacts from the elec- The IAEA has provided the IPCC with docu- tricity sector will be of central importance. mented information and results from its ongoing Scientifically there is little doubt that increas- programmes on the potential role of nuclear ing atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases, such power in alleviating the risk of global climate as carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane, will cause change.
    [Show full text]
  • Subject Categories and Scope Descriptions Co Q
    International Nuclear Information System (INIS) • LU Q CD XA0202260 D) c CO IAEA-ETDE/TNIS-2 o X LU CO -I—• SUBJECT CATEGORIES AND SCOPE DESCRIPTIONS CO Q ETDE/INIS Joint Reference Series No. 2 CT O c > LU O O E "- =3 CO I? O cB CD C , LU • CD 3 CO -Q T3 CD >- c •a « C c CD o o CD «2 i- CO .3-3/33 CO ,_ CD a) O % 3 O •z. a. Renewable energy technologies • Radiation protection • Energy storage, conversion, and consumption Radioactive waste management • Energy policy • Radiation effects on living organisms • Fossil fuels INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, VIENNA, JULY 2002 ETDE/INIS Joint Reference Series No. 2 SUBJECT CATEGORIES AND SCOPE DESCRIPTIONS INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY VIENNA, JULY 2002 SUBJECT CATEGORIES AND SCOPE DESCRIPTIONS IAEA, VIENNA, 2002 IAEA-ETDE/INIS-2 ISBN 92-0-112902-5 ISSN 1684-095X © IAEA, 2002 Printed by the IAEA in Austria July 2002 PREFACE This document is one in a series of publications known as the ETDE/INIS Joint Reference Series. It defines the subject categories and provides the scope descriptions to be used for categorization of the nuclear literature for the preparation of INIS input by national and regional centers. Together with volumes of the INIS Reference Series and ETDE/INIS Joint Reference Series it defines the rules, standards and practices and provides the authorities to be used in the International Nuclear Information System. A list of the volumes published in the IMS Reference Series and ETDE/ENIS Joint Reference Series can be found at the end of this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • LA-7973-MS the Reversed-Field Pinch Reactor (RFPR) Concept O
    LA-7973-MS Informal Report The Reversed-Field Pinch Reactor (RFPR) Concept 01 O LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY Post Office Box 1663 Los Alamos. New Mexico 87545 LA-7973-MS Informal Report UC-20d MOT Issued: August 1979 The Reversed-Field Pinch Reactor (RFPR) Concept R. L. Hagenson R. A. Krakowski G. E. Cort MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS Engineering: W. E. Fox, R. W. Teasdale Neutronics: P. D. Soran Tritium: C. G. Bathke, H. Cullingford Materials: F. W. Clinard, Jr. Plasma Engineering: R. L. Miller Physics: D. A. Baker, J. N. DiMarco Electrotechnology: R. W. Moses l-neip. :«. makes s any legal inW,i» „. ,«p..nS*.lil> >"' <'« 11|lll.CSi Ulit l'ISCl • '' ! 1. Equilibrium and Stability 15b 2. Transport 155 3-. Startup . 158 4. Rundown (Quench) 159 B. T'jchnolofey Assessment 160 1. First wall 160 2. Blanket 160 3» Energy Transfer, Storage and Switching 161 4. Magnets 162 5« Vacuum and Tritium Recovery 162 C. Summary Assessment 163 APPENDIX A. RFPR BURN MODEL AND REACTOR'CODE 166 1. Plasma and Magnetic Field Models 166 2. Plasma Energy balance 169 3. Anomalous Radial Transport 17A APPENDIX B. COSTING MODEL 176 APPENDIX C. STANDARD FUSIOt: REACTOR DESIGN TABLE 185 APPENDIX D. BLANKET TRITIUM TRANSPORT MODEL 197 1. Development of Model 197 2. Evaluation of Model 200 3. Tritium Inventory Question - 202 APPENDIX E. SUMMARY REVIEW OF DESIGN POINT EVOLUTION 206 vn TABLE OF CONTENTS THL REVERSED-FIELI) PINCH REACTOR (KFPR) CONCEPT 1 ABSTRACT 1 I. INTRODUCTION 2 II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 A. Fundamental Physics Issues 4 B. Reactor Description ••* 9 1. Reactor Operation 10 2.
    [Show full text]