1

IntroductionA plan to develop electrical power

with Laser Fusion

in 35 yearsless

than

John Sethian (NRL)Steve Obenschain (NRL), Camille Bibeau (LLNL), and Steve Payne (LLNL)

With lots of help from: ReferencesD. Weidenheimer, Titan PSD Sombrero Power Plant StudyL. Brown and D. Goodin, GA National Ignition FacilityW. Meier, LLNL "2 MJ Laser Facility" by M.W. McGeoch

Presented to FESAC Development Path PanelGeneral AtomicsJanuary 14, 2003

2

Lasers and direct drive targets can lead to an attractive power plant…

Spherical targetElectricity Generator

Dry wall (passive) chamber

Targetfactory

Modular LaserArray

Final optics

Modular, separable parts: lowers cost of development AND improvements

Targets are simple spherical shells: “fuel” lends itself to automated production

Pursuing dry wall (passive) chamber because of simplicity

Past power plant studies have shown concept economically attractive

3

040506070809101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 3132333403

040506070809101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 3132333403

00010299

00010299

Summary of Elements, Cost, and Schedule to developLaser Fusion Energy

Phase II•IFE Science &Technology•Full scale beam lines•High Gain Physics•Integration Experiments

Phase III: Engineering Test Facility •Full size driver ( 2 MJ)•Optimize Targets for High Yield•Develop/optimize chamber comp•Electricity Production (~300 MWe)

YEAR

Phase IApplied IFE R&D

DEMOHigh AvailabilityCommercial worthy

$140 M

$650 M($65M/yr)

$4,947 M($350M/yr)

$ 1,000M ??Specific Criteria must be met beforeproceeding to the next phase

Costs include Capital, Operating, Contingency, Fees, Management

4

Chambers & Materials WISCONSIN: Yield spectrum / Chambers LLNL: Alt chamber concepts, materials UCSD/ANL/INEEL: Chamber dynamics SNL: Materials response x-rays/ions ORNL/UCLA/UCSB/Wisconsin: Materials

Phase I: Develop Science and Technologyfor Laser Fusion Energy as an integrated system.

( 8 Government labs, 7 Universities, 8 Private Industries)

Target FabricationGA: Fab, charac, mass productionLANL: Adv foamsSCHAFER: DvB foams

Direct Drive Target DesignNRL: Target designLLNL: Yield spectrum, designUR/LLE: Target Design (DP program)

Target Injection GA: Injector, injection & trackingLANL: DT mech prop, thermal resp.

Final OpticsLLNL: X-rays, ions, neutronsUCSD: Laser, debris mitigation

Targetfactory

LasersKrF: NRLTitan PSD, SAIC, PPPL, GeorgiaTech, Commonwealth TechDPSSL: LLNLCoherent, Onyx, DEI, Northrup, UR/LLE

Lasers Target Fabrication

Target Injection

Direct Drive Target Design

Chambers and Materials

Final Optics

5

Laser IFE development leverages two main thrusts in DOE

High Average Power Laser (HAPL) Program Currently funded through NNSA/Defense Programs

Rep-Rate LasersHigh Gain Target Design & ExperimentsMass Production of TargetsTarget InjectionFinal OpticsChambers

Fusion Program(Office of Science):

System Studies (ARIES)Blanket/BreedersMaterials

ICF Program(NNSA/Defense Programs):

Target DesignTarget ExperimentsSingle Shot Target Fab

6

A Typical Direct Drive Target

High Gain Target(sector of spherical target)

DT Vapor

DT Fuel

Foam + DT2

mm

rad

ius

1-D Pellet Gain 120-180- sufficient for Energy

Gai

n

Pd thickness (Angstroms)

0

50

100

150

200

0 500 1000 15000 500 1000 15000

4.0 MJ KrF laser

1.48 MJ KrF laser

0

NRL

2-D single Mode Calculations

Pulse Gain ShellShape Break-up

Normal 180 83%"Pickett" 110 2%

LLNL, (UR/LLE, NRL)0 10 20 30

time (nsec)

1.0

0.1

0.01

0.001

Laser Power

1.0

0.1

0.01

0.001

NORMAL

PICKETT

0 10 20 30time (nsec)

1.0

0.1

0.01

0.001

Laser Power

1.0

0.1

0.01

0.001

NORMAL

PICKETT

7

Two types of lasers are under development for Fusion Energy

Diode Pumped Solid State Lasers(DPPSL)--- "Mercury" at LLNL

E-beam Pumped Krypton Fluoride Laser(KrF)---- "Electra" at NRL

Both lasers recently achieved first lightBoth have the potential to meet IFE requirements, but have different challenges

electronbeam

Kr+FLASERgas

LASER

CrystalDiodes

8

Both DPPSL and KrF lasers demonstrated first light

Target design advances: picket, high gain

Projected targets cost of 16 cents each

Made foam shells of required dimensions

Target injector/tracking system nearing completion

Enhanced DT ice smoothness w/ foams and at 16 degrees K

Grazing incidence metal mirrors exceed required laser damage threshold

Less helium retention in tungsten when cycled at elevated temps

Four facilities used for matl's evaluation (x-rays and ions)

First generation chamber dynamics code completed

Chamber operating windows identified with both advanced and current materials

Highlights of Progress to dateSee 12/6/02 meeting summary for further details :

http://aries.ucsd.edu/HAPL/SUMMARIES/02-12-16HAPLmtgSummary.pdf

1 10 100 1000L mode number

CumulativeSurfaceRoughnessRMS (?m)

1.41.21.00.80.60.40.20

Previous best

Latest, over foam

Single crystal

1 10 100 1000L mode number

CumulativeSurfaceRoughnessRMS (?m)

1.41.21.00.80.60.40.20

Previous best

Latest, over foam

Single crystal

Single Crystal

50 step doses vs. single dose (10 19/m2)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

12500 13000 13500 14000

Energy (keV)

Counts

50 steps annealed between

whole dose then annealed

9

040506070809101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 3132333403

040506070809101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 3132333403

00010299

00010299

Elements, Cost, & Schedule to develop Laser Fusion Energy

Phase II $650M($65M/yr)

Phase III: ETF: $4,947 M ($350M/yr)

DEMO $ 1,000M ??

Phase I $140 M

Lasers: $105 M

Targets$15 M

Optics$4.8 M

Chamber$7.0 M

Materials$6.8 M

10

Criteria to go from Phase I to Phase II (page 1 of 3)

LASERS• Develop technologies that can meet fusion energy requirements for

efficiency (> 6%), repetition rate (5-10 Hz), and durability (>100,000,000 shots continuous).

• Demonstrate required laser beam quality and pulse shaping.

• Laser technologies employed must scale to reactor size laser modules and project have attractive costs for commercial fusion energy.

FINAL OPTICS• Meet laser induced damage threshold (LIDT) requirements of more

than 5 Joules/cm2, in large area optics.

• Develop a credible final optics design that is resistant to degradation from neutrons, x-rays, gamma rays, debris, contamination, and energetic ions.

11

Criteria to go from Phase I to Phase II (page 2 of 3)

CHAMBERS• Develop a viable first wall concept for a fusion power plant.

• Produce a viable “point design” for a fusion power plant.

TARGET FABRICATION• Develop mass production methods to fabricate cryogenic DT targets

that meet the requirements of the target design codes and chamber design. Includes characterization.

• Combine these methods with established mass production costing models to show targets cost will be less than $0.25.

12

Criteria to go from Phase I to Phase II (page 3 of 3)

TARGET INJECTION AND TRACKING• Build an injector that accelerates targets to a velocity to traverse the

chamber (~6.5 m) in 16 milliseconds or less.

• Demonstrate target tracking with sufficient accuracy for a power plant (+/- 20 microns).

TARGET DESIGN/PHYSICS• Develop credible target designs, using 2D and 3D modeling, that have

sufficient gain (> 100) + stability for fusion energy.

• Benchmark underlying codes with experiments on Nike & Omega.

• Integrate design into needs of target fab, injection and reactor chamber.

13

Description of Phase II (page 1 of 5)

Top Level Objective:1. Establish Science and Technology to build and JUSTIFY the Engineering

Test Facility (ETF). 2. Phase II will consist of six components.

1. Laser Facility--primary function

Lasers: Build a full-scale (power plant sized) laser beam line using the best laser choice to emerge from Phase I:

(KrF: 60 kJ)(DPPSL: 6 kJ)

 Final optics/target injection: Use the above beam line to repetitively hit a target injected into a chamber, with the required precision. Measure optics "Laser Induced Damage Threshold" (LIDT) durability.

14

What are Full Scale Beam Lines?Full scale is defined as the size that will be replicated N times for the ETF, M times for DEMO. N may equal M.

Laser60 kJ

Gas-cooled frequency converter

Diode-pump delivery system

Target chamber

Gas-cooled amplifier head

Power supplies

Gas blowers

Deformable mirror

Front End

Gas-cooled frequency converter

Diode-pump delivery system

Target chamber

Gas-cooled amplifier head

Power supplies

Gas blowers

Deformable mirror

Front End

Venus Laser: 6 kJ ~ 3 kJ / aperture 2 “bundled” apertures

Requires 3x scaled up crystal growth

40 kJ/e-beam16 bundled electron beams

KrF Laser Amplifier 60 kJ

Requires 10x scaled e-beam diodes

Forty 60 kJ Amps ~2.4 MJ ETF 12 bundled apertures = Terra (36 kJ) 60 x Terra = Helios ~2.1 MJ ETF

(page 2 of 5)

15

Description of Phase II (page 3 of 5)

2. Laser Facility--secondary functions

Chamber Dynamics: Evaluate chamber dynamics models with “Mini Chamber”

Chamber materials: Study candidate wall and/or optics materials

Full energyLaser Beam Line

(6-60 kJ)

Injected target(may be cryo,

but not layered)Main Chamber

Final optic

Mini chamber

16

Description of Phase II (page 4 of 5)

3. Cryogenic Target Facility

Target fabrication: “Batch mode” mass production of fusion class (cryogenic) targets.

Target Injection: Repetitive injection of above targets into a simulated fusion chamber environment.

CryoTargetfactory

Cryogenic,layered target

“mass” production

Tracking & characterization

IFE Chamberenvironment(e.g. right gas, wall temp, etc)

17

Description of Phase II (page 5 of 5)

4. Power Plant Design• Produce a credible design for a laser fusion power plant that meets the

technical and economic requirements for commercial power.

5. Chamber and final optics materials/structures:• Evaluate candidate materials/structures in a non-fusion environment.

 6. Target Physics: • Develop viable, robust high gain targets for fusion energy using

integrated high-resolution 3D target modeling. • Validate design codes with target physics experiments at fusion scale

energies, (e.g. on NIF).

18

Cost Breakdown for Phase II: KrF

TotalsSub

Totals

Full energy KrF laser beam line 286.08

Building and infrastructure 10 Electra $2M/7000 sq feet; IRE 35,000 sq ft

Single scale diode + pulsed power 11.6 Scaled from Electra + pulsed power studies

Three pulsed power + seven diodes 37.5 Scaled from Electra + pulsed power studies

Front end (50 J) 5.1 Scaled from Electra + pulsed power studies

Driver amp (4.0 kJ) 30.2 Scaled from Electra + pulsed power studies

Final eight diodes 65 Scaled from Electra, 80% for mass prod

All connecting optics 15 Nike Laser + vacuum tubes

Diagnostics.data aquisition 4 Pulsed power + laser

Onsite labor 60 30 FTE x 200k/FTE = 6M/yr x 10 years = 60M

Contingency 47.68 took 20%

Target Chamber (for laser facility) 27

Target Chamber inc final optics 12 includes mini chamber for chamber dynamics

Diagnostics 5 Nike experience

Chambers/materials experiment support 10 5 FTE x 200k/FTE = 1M/yr x 10 yrs = 10 M

19

Cost Breakdown for Phase II: DPPSL

Vendor Readiness ($22M): - Contracts ($10), Crystal growth ($6.5), Overhead ($5.3)

Design ($12M): - Personnel ($7.2), Overhead ($4.8)

Procurement and Construction ($135M): - Personnel ($10) - Diodes (assumed cost $1.2 / Watt, 30 MW) ($39.6) - Crystals ($10) - Laser Hardware ($12.9) - Power Conditioning ($17) - Facilities and Utilities ($22.9) - Overhead ($22.3)

Activation ($22M): - Personnel ($8.1), Crystals ($4.8), Procurements ($1.2), Overhead ($7.6)

Integrated experiments ($36M): - Personnel ($12.0), Crystals ($3.6), Procurements ($1.8), Overhead ($18.6)

$277M Personnel and Laser Hardware ($168M + $50M contingency) - LLNL Overhead ($59M; Assumes 30% reduction in tax base)

Vendor readiness $22M

Construct &Procure $135M

LaserDesign $12M

Laser Activation$22M

Integrated experimentsLaser:$36M; Chamber:$10M

Timeline for DPSSL- IRE (6 kJ Venus Laser ) development and operation

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Construct & Procure $6M

ChamberDesign $0.5M

Chamber Activation $9.5M

20

Cost Breakdown for Phase II: Other R & D

Target Physics 100

Code development + experiments 77 IFE specific

Super computer Dev + support 23 IFE specific

Target fab and Injection Facility 89

Target fab R & D 27 Per General Atomics, LB 02/06/14

Target injection facility 42 Per General Atomics, LB 02/06/14

Target injection experiments 20 10 FTE x 200k/FTE = 2M/yr x 10 yrs = 20 M

Final Optics 24 24 (HAPL level x 2)

Chambers 26 26 (HAPL level x 2.2)

Materials 28 28 (HAPL level x 2.2)

Point design ETF and DEMO 20 20

The IFE laser "Runner-Up" 40 40

Phase II Program Direction 10 10

Total Non Laser Components 337

21

040506070809101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 3132333403

040506070809101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 3132333403

00010299

00010299

Elements, Cost, & Schedule to develop Laser Fusion Energy

Phase II $650M($65M/yr)

Phase III: ETF: $4,947 M ($350M/yr)

DEMO $ 1,000M ??

Phase I $140 M

Target Physics: $100 M

Other Comp: $150 M

?

Laser Facility:$275M (laser) +27 M (chamber)

DESIGN CONST OPERATION

Target Facility: $99 MDESIGN CONST OPERATION

Lasers: $105 M

Targets$15 M

Optics$4.8 M

Chamber$7.0 M

Materials$6.8 M

22

Criteria to go from Phase II to Phase III (ETF) (1 of 2)

1. Lasers: • Full functionality of laser beam line using the best laser choice to emerge

from Phase I. (full energy beam line KrF, full aperture DPSSL)• Meets all the fusion energy requirements:

• efficiency rep rate cost basis• rep-rate durability• pulse shaping illumination uniformity

2. Final optics/target injection: • Laser beam can be hit injected target with the required precision.• Required optics LIDT durability.

3. Target fabrication:• “Batch mode” mass production of fusion class (cryogenic) targets.

4. Target Injection:• Repetitive injection, tracking, and survival of targets into a simulated fusion

chamber environment.

23

Criteria to go from Phase II to Phase III (ETF) (2 of 2)

5. Power Plant Design:• Produce a credible design for a laser fusion power plant that meets the

technical and economic requirements for commercial power.• Demonstrate candidate materials / structures can survive in a non-fusion

environment.• Develop one or more credible blanket concepts.

6. Chamber and final optics materials/structures:• Evaluate candidate materials/structures in a non-fusion environment. 7. Target Physics: • Develop viable, robust high gain targets for fusion energy using

integrated high-resolution 3D target modeling. • Validate design codes with target physics experiments at fusion scale

energies, (e.g. on NIF).

24

Description of Phase III (ETF)

The ETF will have operational flexibility to perform four major tasks:

•Full size driver with sufficient energy for high gain.•2 MJ Laser• Replications of the beam line developed in Phase II. But allow improvements.

•Optimize targets for high yield.• Address issues specific to direct drive and high yield.

•Test, develop, and optimize chamber components• Includes first wall and blanket, tritium breeding, tritium recovery.• Requires thermal management (125 MWth).

•Electricity production (300-400 MW) with potential for high availability.• Chamber with blanket and electrical generator (1250 MWth).• Laser, final optics and target technologies should be mature and reliable by now

25

ETF-Tasks 1 & 2 (driver demo and optimize gain)

Targetfactory

Target fabrication & injection. DEMO Scale. Capable of continuous 5 Hz runs

Laser : DEMO Scale~ 2.2 MJ> 106 shots MTBF for entire system(Beam lines > 108 from Phase II)

Final Optics: DEMO Scale (Full LIDT threat & debris)Chamber: see next Viewgraph

OPTIMIZE TARGETS FOR HIGH GAINSingle shot and burst mode

26

ETF-First Generation Chamberfor Tasks 1, 2, and

Task 3 (materials/components blanket development)

FIRST WALL (6.5 m radius)

Full laser energy & yield (250 MJ)10 shot bursts @ 5 Hz105 shots< 0.02 micron erosion/shot

Full laser energy with 10% yield107shots at 5 Hz

negligible erosion/shot

Design allows annual replacement

BLANKET / COOLING

125 MWth (10% yield @ 5 Hz)Breed Tritium (Sombrero TBR= 1.25 (LiO2)

Full yield, rep-rate, burst -- target physics, chamber dynamics10% yield, rep-rate, continuous -- material/component testsTWO MODES:

Test multiple blanketconcepts, if needed

40cm x 40 cmcooled samples@ 2 m radius

COULD BE CTF?

27

ETF-Task 4 (Electricity Production)

Upgrade chamber materials based on R&D

Upgrade to best blanket to come out of R&D

Upgrade chamber cooling: (125MW to 1.3 GW thermal)

Generate 300-400 MW electricity(expect 250 MW net to Grid by 2028)

28

Cost Breakdown for ETF: KrF laser

COMPONENTTotals

Sub Totals

2.4 MJ KrF Laser

Forty 60 kJ amplifiers 1072Scale Electra + mass prod, pulsed power systems studies

Forty 4 kJ driver amps 347Scale Electra + mass prod, pulsed power systems studies

Ten 400 J front ends 124Scale Electra + mass prod, pulsed power systems studies

50 J front end 5Scale Electra + mass prod, pulsed power systems studies

Optics (multiplexing/demux) 120 From McGeoch

Diagnostics/data aquisition 40

Onsite labor 15060 FTE x 250k/FTE = 15M/yr x 10 yrs =150M

Contingency 371 took 20%

Total 2228Total Laser Cost 2228Administrative 290 13% from MW McGeoch

Building 260 260 100,000 sq feet (use NIF cost)

TOTAL LASER + BUILDING 2778

29

Cost Breakdown for ETF: DPPSL

The ETF costs were estimated using the NIF cost basis

NIF Elements

• Facility• Driver - Optics - Optical pump - Pulsed power - Gain media - Cooling - KDP - Pockels cell - Deformable mirror - Front end

• Controls and data acquisition

• Diagnostics

DPSSL costs

Similar

SimilarMuch more (diodes vs flashlamps)More (rep-rated efficient design) More (crystals vs glass)More (gas flow vs passive cooling)SimilarSimilarSimilarSimilar

Similar

Similar

Total ~$1.5 B ~$1.5 + $1.0 (diodes) + $0.5 (misc + contingency)

Projected driver costs for:- ETF is $3.0 B, 1st of kind- IFE plant is $1.0 B, 10th of kind ($500/J)

30

Cost Breakdown for ETF: other technologies

TotalsSub

TotalsCOMPONENT

Target Physics 280Diagnostics 80

Operating 200 80 FTEx 250k=20M/yr x 10 = 200 M

Target fab and Injection Facility 339Target fab/inj Const 146 Based on GA, L. Brown 12/20/02

Operating 193 L. Brown 12/20/02 ext 9 yrs

Optics (final) 40 40 per M. W. McGeoch

125 MWTh Chamber 470Fixed items 200 Meier update Sombrero

Component test modules 70 Meier update SombreroDiagnostics 50 ICF experienceOperating 150 60 FTEx 250k =15M/yr x 10yrs =150M

1250 MWTh Chamber 518 518 Meier update Sombrero

Balance of Plant 120 Based on Nuclear Industry

Full Design of ETF 100 100Administrative (inc licensing) 80 13% from MW McGeoch

Total Other Components 1947

31

040506070809101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 3132333403

040506070809101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 3132333403

00010299

00010299

Elements, Cost, & Schedule to develop Laser Fusion Energy

Phase II $650M($65M/yr)

Phase III: ETF: $4,947 M ($350M/yr)

DEMO $ 1,000M ??

Phase I $140 M

Optimize Yield: $100M

ETF Laser*: $3,000 M (inc building)DESIGN CONSTRUCTION OPERATION

Target Factory & Injector: $339 MDES CONS

TOPERATION

?

Lasers: $105 M

Targets$15 M

Optics$4.8 M

Chamber$7.0 M

Materials$6.8 M

1st Chamber: $145 MCONST

OPERATIONDES

Electricity: $638 MDES CONST OP

Blanket Dev: $200 M?

?

NIF

Target Physics: $100 M

Other Comp: $150 M

DESIGN CONST OPERATION

Laser Facility:$275M (laser) +27 M (chamber)

Target Facility: $99 MDESIGN CONST OPERATION

32

Criteria to go from ETF to DEMO

1. Demonstrate gain & reproducibility required for commercial fusion power

2. Demonstrate integrated operation of critical components--...laser + target fabrication + chamber...

3. Extends to reliable and economically attractive approach

for commercial electricity.

33

Description of Laser IFE DEMO

Could employ the core of the ETF laser driver, target fab, injection, etc with mods optimized for commercial application rather than research. Components optimized for commercial power generation.

Given the potential capability for the ETF, DEMO could be a second generation plant with significant industrial investment.

34

040506070809101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 3132333403

040506070809101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 3132333403

00010299

00010299

Elements, Cost, & Schedule to develop Laser Fusion Energy

Phase II $650M($65M/yr)

Phase III: ETF: $4,947 M ($350M/yr)

DEMO $ 1,000M ??

Phase I $140 M

ETF Laser*: $3,000 M (inc building)DESIGN CONSTRUCTION OPERATION

Target Factory & Injector: $339 MDES CONS

TOPERATION

?

Lasers: $105 M

Targets$15 M

Optics$4.8 M

Chamber$7.0 M

Materials$6.8 M

1st Chamber: $145 MCONST

OPERATIONDES

Electricity: $638 MDES CONST OP

Blanket Dev: $200 M?

?

DESIGN CONSTRUCTION OP

DEMO?

NIF

Optimize Yield: $100M

Target Physics: $100 M

Other Comp: $150 M

DESIGN CONST OPERATION

Laser Facility:$275M (laser) +27 M (chamber)

Target Facility: $99 MDESIGN CONST OPERATION

35

040506070809101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 3132333403

040506070809101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 3132333403

00010299

00010299

Elements, Cost, & Schedule to develop Laser Fusion Energy

Phase II $650M($65M/yr)

Phase III: ETF: $4,947 M ($350M/yr)

DEMO $ 1,000M ??

Phase I $140 M

Target Physics: $100 M

Other Comp: $150 M

ETF Laser*: $3,000 M (inc building)DESIGN CONSTRUCTION OPERATION

Target Factory & Injector: $339 MDES CONS

TOPERATION

?

Laser Facility:$275M (laser) + 27 M (chamber)

DESIGN CONST OPERATION

Target Facility: $99 MDESIGN CONST OPERATION

Lasers: $105 M

Targets$15 M

Optics$4.8 M

Chamber$7.0 M

Materials$6.8 M

1st Chamber: $145 MCONST

OPERATIONDES

Electricity: $638 MDES CONST OP

Blanket Dev: $200 M?

?

DESIGN CONSTRUCTION OP

DEMO?

NIF

Optimize Yield: $100M