The impact of plasma physics on the timescale to a tokamak fusion power plant

Some of the main plasma physics challenges associated with achieving the conditions for commercial fusion power in tokamaks are reviewed. The confinement quality is considered to be a key factor, having an impact on the size of the reactor and exhaust power that has to be managed. Plasma eruptions can cause excessive erosion if not mitigated, with implications for maintenance and availability. Disruptions are a major concern—one large disruption could terminally damage the reactor so it is important to understand the loads they impart to the structure, and put in place appropriate protection and an effective avoidance/mitigation strategy. Managing the exhaust of heat and particles from the plasma is likely to be a significant issue, which may be mitigated if an advanced confinement regime can be identified. The advanced divertor structures that may be required to handle the exhaust have a significant impact on the design of a fusion reactor. Three strategies can be identified to take account of the physics challenges, with different implications for the timescale to fusion power: (1) a staged approach with the size of each step determined by our confidence in the predictive capability of our models; (2) a single, big step with contingency built into the design where possible to accommodate the uncertainty in physics predictions and (3) a single big step with optimistic physics assumptions and no contingency, accepting the increased financial and reputational risk that comes with such an approach. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue ‘Fusion energy using tokamaks: can development be accelerated?’.

[1]  S. Fietz,et al.  Experimental studies of high-confinement mode plasma response to non-axisymmetric magnetic perturbations in ASDEX Upgrade , 2016 .

[2]  K. Burrell,et al.  Advances towards QH-mode viability for ELM-stable operation in ITER , 2011 .

[3]  K. Ikeda Progress in the ITER Physics Basis , 2007 .

[4]  S. Sharapov,et al.  Full-orbit and drift calculations of fusion product losses due to explosive fishbones on JET , 2018, Nuclear Fusion.

[5]  P. Cochat,et al.  Et al , 2008, Archives de pediatrie : organe officiel de la Societe francaise de pediatrie.

[6]  E. Doyle,et al.  The physics of edge resonant magnetic perturbations in hot tokamak plasmasa) , 2006 .

[7]  J. Contributors,et al.  Scaling of the tokamak near the scrape-off layer H-mode power width and implications for ITER , 2013 .

[8]  J. Contributors,et al.  Integrated modelling of H-mode pedestal and confinement in JET-ILW , 2017 .

[9]  G. Fishpool,et al.  Overview of ITER physics deuterium-tritium experiments in JET , 1999 .

[10]  G. Gantenbein,et al.  Experiments on neoclassical tearing mode stabilization by ECCD in ASDEX Upgrade , 1999 .

[11]  Maxim Umansky,et al.  Stability and dynamics of the edge pedestal in the low collisionality regime: physics mechanisms for steady-state ELM-free operation , 2007 .

[12]  J. W. Connor,et al.  Diffusion Driven Plasma Currents and Bootstrap Tokamak , 1971 .

[13]  J. Contributors,et al.  Understanding the physics of ELM pacing via vertical kicks in JET in view of ITER , 2016 .

[14]  C. Roach,et al.  Kinetic instabilities that limit β in the edge of a tokamak plasma: a picture of an H-mode pedestal. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[15]  R. H. Bulmer,et al.  The super X divertor (SXD) and a compact fusion neutron source (CFNS) , 2010 .

[16]  N. W. Eidietis,et al.  First demonstration of rapid shutdown using neon shattered pellet injection for thermal quench mitigation on DIII-D , 2016 .

[17]  J. Contributors,et al.  Recent progress in the quantitative validation of JOREK simulations of ELMs in JET , 2017 .

[18]  L. Lao,et al.  Edge localized modes and the pedestal: A model based on coupled peeling–ballooning modes , 2002 .

[19]  H R Wilson,et al.  Theory for explosive ideal magnetohydrodynamic instabilities in plasmas. , 2004, Physical review letters.

[20]  H. R. Wilson,et al.  A first-principles predictive model of the pedestal height and width: development, testing and ITER optimization with the EPED model , 2011 .

[21]  M. Beurskens,et al.  The role of the density profile in the ASDEX-Upgrade pedestal structure , 2016 .

[22]  S. Coda,et al.  Power distribution in the snowflake divertor in TCV , 2013 .

[23]  H. Zohm,et al.  ELM pacing and high-density operation using pellet injection in the ASDEX Upgrade all-metal-wall tokamak , 2014 .

[24]  R. Scannell,et al.  Evolution of filament structures during edge-localized modes in the MAST Tokamak. , 2006, Physical review letters.

[25]  Overview of recent physics results from MAST , 2016, 1611.06047.

[26]  Martin Greenwald,et al.  Multi-scale gyrokinetic simulation of tokamak plasmas: enhanced heat loss due to cross-scale coupling of plasma turbulence , 2015 .

[27]  C. Roach,et al.  Pedestal evolution physics in low triangularity JET tokamak discharges with ITER-like wall , 2017 .

[28]  R. L. Miller,et al.  Magnetohydrodynamic stability of tokamak edge plasmas , 1998 .