The ARIES-AT advanced tokamak, Advanced technology fusion power plant

Najmabadi, F.; Abdou, A.; Bromberg, L.; Brown, Thomas G.; Chan, Vincent; Chu, Ming-Sheng; Dahlgren, F.; El-Guebaly, L.; Heitzenroeder, P.; Henderson, D.; John, H.E. St.; Kessel, C.E.; Lao, L. L.; Longhurst, G.R.; Malang, S.; Mau, T. K.; Merrill, B.J.; Miller, R.L.; Mogahed, E.A.; Moore, Richard L.; Pétrie, T.W.; Petti, D.A.; Politzer, Peter; Raffray, A.R.; Steiner, D.; Sviatoslavsky, I.N.; Synder, P.; Syaebler, G.M.; Turnbull, A. D.; Tillack, M. S.; Waganer, Lester M.; Wang, X.; West, P.; Wilson, Paul P. H.

doi:10.1016/j.fusengdes.2005.11.003

Cited by 204 publications

(132 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

130

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is a very large potential gain if the LiPb0SiC blanket and shield can be assumed, as it was in the ARIES-AT tokamak power plant study. 25 The large reduction in the CoE with the LiPb0SiC blanket and shield would allow a larger value for^R axis &, which could ease access constraints, reduce p n,wall,max and replacement costs, and improve the engineering design. Figure 33 , the overall TBR is 1.1, and the overall energy multiplication is 1.1.…”

Section: Xe Advanced Lipb/sic Blanketmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systems Studies and Optimization of the ARIES-CS Power Plant

Lyon

El-Guebaly

et al. 2008

Fusion Science and Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Xe Advanced Lipb/sic Blanketmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systems Studies and Optimization of the ARIES-CS Power Plant

Lyon

El-Guebaly

et al. 2008

Fusion Science and Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Critics tend to focus on specific technological issues such as production of tritium fuel or development of neutron-resistant materials (Moyer, 2010), for which there are solutions under development (Hazeltine et al, 2010). There is an appropriate overall concern that fusion power plants will be large and complex high-tech facilities, and as a result their economic practicality cannot be assured at this time despite favorable projections (Maisonnier et al, 2005, Najmabadi et al, 2006. Very considerable R&D is required to move from scientific feasibility to technological feasibility to practical demonstration (FESAC, 2003, USBPO, 2009) allowing commercialization by mid-century.…”

Section: Fusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate change, nuclear power, and nuclear proliferation: Magnitude matters

Goldston

2012

AIP Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integrated energy, environment and economics modeling suggests that worldwide electrical energy use will increase from 2.4 TWe today to ~12 TWe in 2100. It will be challenging to provide 40% of this electrical power from combustion with carbon sequestration, as it will be challenging to provide 30% from renewable energy sources derived from natural energy flows. Thus nuclear power may be needed to provide ~30%, 3600 GWe, by 2100. Calculations of the associated stocks and flows of uranium, plutonium and minor actinides indicate that the proliferation risks at mid-century, using current light-water reactor technology, are daunting. There are institutional arrangements that may be able to provide an acceptable level of risk mitigation, but they will be difficult to implement. If a transition is begun to fast-spectrum reactors at mid-century, without a dramatic change in the proliferation risks of such systems, at the end of the century global nuclear proliferation risks are much greater, and more resistant to mitigation. Fusion energy, if successfully demonstrated to be economically competitive, would provide a source of nuclear power with much lower proliferation risks than fission.climate change, nuclear power, nuclear proliferation IntroductionNuclear power has the potential to produce very large amounts of electrical energy with minimal atmospheric emission of carbon dioxide. It also has the potential to facilitate the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The damage to humanity and the world environment from either climate change or nuclear war would be very severe. Both could have devastating impact on the heritage passed on to future generations. This paper uses recent energy, environment and economics modeling for the period up to 2100 to estimate the scale of a meaningful role for nuclear energy in mitigating climate change, and then uses calculations of stocks and flows of fissile materials based on recent technological studies to assess the key characteristics of such an undertaking. A quantitative time-dependent perspective is provided on the nuclear proliferation risks that would result, for comparison with the climate change risks that would be mitigated by nuclear power. This supplements earlier work by Williams

show abstract

“…In the 1980s, the US temporarily impeded the large-scale tokamak studies to investigate several alternate concepts (refer to Figure 1). The tokamak studies were resumed in the early 1990s by the ARIES team, delivering a series of advanced tokamak power plants: ARIES-I [19], ARIES-II and ARIES-IV [20], ARIES-RS [21], and ARIES-AT [22]. Improvements were apparent in all designs, progressing from ARIES-I to ARIES-AT.…”

Section: Magnetic Fusion Conceptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…TITAN delivered two different designs for compact, high mass power density power plants. More recently, Miller [41] modified the TITAN characteristics by introducing the modern engineering and economic approaches of ARIES-AT [22]. [42].…”

Section: Magnetic Fusion Conceptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fifty Years of Magnetic Fusion Research (1958–2008): Brief Historical Overview and Discussion of Future Trends

El-Guebaly¹

2010

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fifty years ago, the secrecy surrounding magnetically controlled thermonuclear fusion had been lifted allowing researchers to freely share technical results and discuss the challenges of harnessing fusion power. There were only four magnetic confinement fusion concepts pursued internationally: tokamak, stellarator, pinch, and mirror. Since the early 1970s, numerous fusion designs have been developed for the four original and three new approaches: spherical torus, field-reversed configuration, and spheromak. At present, the tokamak is regarded worldwide as the most viable candidate to demonstrate fusion energy generation. Numerous power plant studies (>50), extensive R&D programs, more than 100 operating experiments, and an impressive international collaboration led to the current wealth of fusion information and understanding. As a result, fusion promises to be a major part of the energy mix in the 21 st century. The fusion roadmaps developed to date take different approaches, depending on the anticipated power plant concept and the degree of extrapolation beyond ITER. Several Demos with differing approaches will be built in the US, EU, Japan, China, Russia, Korea, India, and other countries to cover the wide range of near-term and advanced fusion systems.

show abstract

The ARIES-AT advanced tokamak, Advanced technology fusion power plant

Cited by 204 publications

References 21 publications

Systems Studies and Optimization of the ARIES-CS Power Plant

Systems Studies and Optimization of the ARIES-CS Power Plant

Climate change, nuclear power, and nuclear proliferation: Magnitude matters

Fifty Years of Magnetic Fusion Research (1958–2008): Brief Historical Overview and Discussion of Future Trends

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About