Report of the Community Planning Process - Fusion Science and Technology Presented by Nathan Howard CPP Co-Chairs Scott Baalrud University of Iowa Nate Ferraro Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Lauren Garrison Oak Ridge National Laboratory Nathan Howard Massachusetts Institute of Technology Carolyn Kuranz University of Michigan John Sarff University of Wisconsin Wayne Solomon General Atomics Brief Overview of the Process Goals ● To produce strategic recommendations for each of four topical areas: ○ Magnetic Fusion Energy ○ Fusion Materials & Technology ○ High Energy Density Plasma Physics ○ General Plasma Physics ○ Four cross-cutting areas ● Provide both near-term actionable recommendations and a long-term strategic outlook (strategic plan), highlighting opportunities for US leadership ● To the extent possible, to prioritize among these recommendations with community consensus ● To deliver these recommendations to FESAC by March, 2020 (Done) 3 Goals ● To produce strategic recommendations for each of four topical areas: ○ Magnetic Fusion Energy Fusion Science and Technology (FST) ○ Fusion Materials & Technology ○ High Energy Density Plasma Physics Discovery Plasma Science (DPS) ○ General Plasma Physics ○ Four cross-cutting areas ● Provide both near-term actionable recommendations and a long-term strategic outlook (strategic plan), highlighting opportunities for US leadership ● To the extent possible, to prioritize among these recommendations with community consensus ● To deliver these recommendations to FESAC by March, 2020 (Done) 4 What is consensus? ● Firstly: Essential everyone given an opportunity to be involved and their voice heard ○ Respect others’ opinions and views ○ Look for the positive aspects of ideas ● Consensus will involve compromise ○ It is not: I get everything I want, but is: A plan I can live with ○ It is not: A simple majority vote, but is: A widespread agreement amongst the community ○ It is not: The loudest voice that wins, but is: The best ideas that triumph ● Every public voice of disunity erodes confidence in our community and reduces support from stakeholders 5 We tried to ensure all voices were heard ● Announcements sent to DPP-CPP Google Group as well as APS-DPP, GEC, USBPO, UFA, and ANS mailing lists ● White paper submission open for months (~200 Submitted) ● >100 expert group meetings, open to anyone interested ● 5 focus groups ● 15 webinars ● 6 Town halls ● 5 dedicated workshops 6 Program Committee was Integral to Success ● The program committee put in a tremendous amount of work to enable a successful outcome in a short amount of time ● Weekly (or more) meetings of the program committees occured in the main topical areas ● Frequent Expert Group and Cross-cut Group meetings (~weekly) ● Periodic check-ins with David Newman and Don Rej ● Weekly meeting of all co-chairs ○ Biweekly meetings with Facilitator ○ Almost daily meetings among MFE +FM&T co-chairs ○ Facilitator provided training sessions for the PC on how to moderate discussions Community members Community input and ● Whitepapers feedback at every stage of ● Initiatives ● Expert Group Expert Groups the strategic plan discussions ● Discussions at Madison Strategic Workshop Blocks and Program ● Discussions at Tentpoles Committee Community College Park members at Workshop Knoxville, Menlo Draft Plan Park, and webinars Program Feedback Committee at Chicago Revised Plan Community input and Revised Community feedback at every stage of Plan members at Houston the strategic plan Feedback Program Committee Revised Community Plan members online Program Feedback Committee Final Plan FESAC Structure of the Plan The Plan is Organized into Three Main Parts Executive Summary ● DPS: Discovery Plasma Science Statement on DEI ○ Primarily based on input from GPS and HEDP topical areas ● FST: Fusion Science and Technology Discovery Plasma ○ Primarily based on input from MFE and FM&T topical areas Science ○ Includes IFE (from HEDP topical area) Fusion Science and ● CC: Cross-Cutting Opportunities Technology ○ Input sourced from all topical areas ● The order of the FST, DPS, and Cross-cut chapters is not meant to Cross-Cutting convey priority Opportunities 11 Executive Summary Statement on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Discovery Plasma Science Fusion Science and Technology Cross-Cutting Opportunities DPS Vision, Mission, & Criteria FST Vision, Mission, & Values Theory & Computation ● Recommendations DPS-Wide Program Recs. SD1: Burning Objective Measurement & Diagnostics ● Recs. DPS1: Frontiers of Plasma Sci. Plasma ● Recommendations Program Recs. Objectives Objective ● Recs. ● Recs. Enabling Technology SD2: Handle ● Recommendations DPS2: Plasma Universe Reactor Conditions Program Recs. Objectives Program Rec ● Recs. Workforce, Diversity, Inclusion ● Recs. ● Recommendations DPS3: Transformative Tech. SD3: Harness Program Rec Fusion Power ● Recs. Program Recs. Objectives ● Recs. 12 A Brief Look at the DPS Chapter Structure of the DPS chapter DPS1 DPS2 DPS3 DPS-Wide Programmatic Recommendations ○ Build ○ Support ○ Collaborate DPS1: Explore the Frontiers of Plasma Science ○ Specific programmatic recommendation(s) ○ Science Objectives ■ Recommendations (topical) DPS2: Understand the Plasma Universe ○ Specific programmatic recommendation(s) ○ Science Objectives ■ Recommendations (topical) DPS3: Create Transformative Technologies ○ Specific programmatic recommendation(s) ○ Science Objectives ■ Recommendations (topical) Build ● Invest in new facilities ○ GPS facility to investigate the solar wind in the lab ○ Multi-PW laser, increased repetition rate ○ Broad range of scales ● Upgrade current facilities ○ Upgrade LaserNetUS facilities ○ Couple long pulse multi-kJ and multi-PW lasers with an XFEL ○ Upgrade current GPS facilities ● Co-locate facilities ○ Sources with diagnostics ○ Facilities to create unique states of plasma ■ Ex: Multi-PW laser and dense multi-GeV electron beam to investigate quantum plasmas Support ● Steady funding of plasma science ○ Stabilize year-to-year variability ○ Reverse the flat/downward trend in funding ● Fundamental data needs ○ Cross sections, AMO data ○ Open access databases ● Create Science Centers ○ To address time-critical science problems ○ Flexible, frequent, allow junior faculty to join Collaborate ● Expand Networks ○ Expand support for LaserNetUS ○ Establish ZNetUS ○ Establish MagNetUSA ○ Continue support for LTP collaborative research centers ○ Establish a diagnostic support network ○ Establish a network to foster an open source programming ecosystem ● Expand Partnerships ○ Support existing partnerships: FES/NSF, FES/NNSA ○ Establish new partnerships: FES/NASA, FES/NIH, FES/BES, FES/USDA, etc A Deeper Dive into the FST Chapter The FST Chapter Outlines a Blue Sky Plan that is Comprised of Strategic Objectives and Program Recommendations ● FST Program Recommendations (PRs) connect the Science Drivers ○ The recommendations span the Strategic Objectives ○ These are not intended to be the most important recommendations ● Strategic Objectives (SOs) lie within the individual Science Drivers (with some overlap) ○ Consist of specific, time-phased activities that accomplish the stated goal and provide the information needed to resolve key decisions points This plan has a strong emphasis on near term recommendations as it is anticipated that a planning exercise should be performed every 5-7 years (as polled at Knoxville). 19 Fusion Science and Technology Plan is Advanced Through Science Drivers Control, sustain, and predict burning plasma (SO-D) Tokamak physics basis (SO-E) Stellarator physics basis (SO-F) Magnet and H&CD science & technology (SO-H) Alternative confinement approaches Handle reactor relevant conditions Design and (SO-A) PFC & PMI science & technology construction of (SO-B) Structural and functional materials science & technology fusion pilot plant at lowest Harness fusion power (SO-C) Tritium breeding science & technology possible capital Science Drivers (SO-G) Licensing, RAMI, balance of plant cost Predictive Integrated Modeling, Diagnostic Needs are Critical Across All Areas Control, sustain, and predict burning plasma (SO-D) Tokamak physics basis (SO-E) Stellarator physics basis (SO-F) Magnet and H&CD science & technology (SO-H) Alternative confinement approaches Handle reactor relevant conditions Design and (SO-A) PFC & PMI science & technology construction of (SO-B) Structural and functional materials science & technology fusion pilot plant at lowest Harness fusion power (SO-C) Tritium breeding science & technology possible capital Science Drivers (SO-G) Licensing, RAMI, balance of plant cost (PR-D) Integrated Modeling (PR-E) Diagnostic Development All Areas are Interdependent and Must be Integrated in the Design of a Fusion Pilot Plant (PR-A) Interdisciplinary FPP design studies Control, sustain, and predict burning plasma (SO-D) Tokamak physics basis (SO-E) Stellarator physics basis (SO-F) Magnet and H&CD science & technology (SO-H) Alternative confinement approaches Handle reactor relevant conditions Design and (SO-A) PFC & PMI science & technology construction of (SO-B) Structural and functional materials science & technology fusion pilot plant at lowest Harness fusion power (SO-C) Tritium breeding science & technology possible capital Science Drivers (SO-G) Licensing, RAMI, balance of plant cost (PR-B) Participation in ITER (PR-D) Integrated Modeling (PR-E) Diagnostic Development Partnership with Private Industry is a Key Element in Moving Towards Commercialization (PR-C) Growing partnership with private industry