N E W S & V I E W S O N T H E P R O G R E S S O F F U S I O N R E S E A R C H

FUSION IN EUROPE

3 | 2014

HELPING ITER PROTECT ITS VESSELWALLDISRUPTION MITIGATION EXPERIMENTS AT JET

WHAT WILL DEMO LOOK LIKE?

NEW MANUFACTURING TECHNIQUEFOR DEMO DIVERTOR COMPONENTS

Contents

EUROfusion3 Dear reader4 EUROfusion officially launched 5 Another facility for EUROfusion: WEST6 What will DEMO look like?8 Helping ITER protect its vessel wall:

Disruption mitigation experiments at JET10 Safety at the heart of DEMO design activities

Research units11 New manufacturing technique for DEMO

divertor components12 Handling extreme temperature gradients

13 FUSION IN EUROPE invites: Daniel Clery

People14 Francesco Romanelli bids farewell to

EUROfusion 15 Young faces of fusion – Edmund Highcock 16 Outstanding plasma research and technology

In dialogue17 Record attendance for 4th FuseNet PhD event

Discussing fusion energy with teachers,students, and Euromouse

Newsflash18 Czech brochure on “The history of controlled

thermonuclear fusion research”LEGO scientists at workImprint

Fuel for Thought

Moving Forward

Community

Perspectives

FUSION IN EUROPE

Picture: CCFE

The official launch of EUROfusiontook place on October 9 inBrussels. Robert-Jan Smits,Director-General of DG Research& In no vation, and Prof. SibylleGünter, Chair of the EUROfusionGeneral Assembly, signed thegrant agreement betweenEUROfusion and the EuropeanCommission.

18LEGO scientists at work

3 | 2014

Picture: Teamwork © Fred Guerdin

6What will DEMO look like?

14Francesco Romanelli bids farewell to EUROfusion

14Francesco Romanelli bids farewell to EUROfusion

18LEGO scientists at work

6What will DEMO look like?

NEW YEARGREETINGS

3

| Moving Forward | EUROfusion |

The first year of EUROfusion is behind us. It is a greatachievement that the Grant Agreement and the

Consortium Agreement are finally signed and that theEUROfusion consortium is now in full swing. Many peo-ple – in the European Commission, in the Research Unitsand in the Programme Management Unit – have beenworking very hard to get EUROfusion put in place. Letme take this opportunity to thank everyone involved insetting up the new organisation. EUROfusion broughtwith it considerable changes for its members, the Eu ro -pean fusion laboratories. Instead of conducting their re-search in a rather independent way, they are now subjectto a more central guidance based on set priorities. It willtake time for all Research Units to find their place withinEUROfusion and to optimise their contributions by mak-ing best use of their competences. e Programme Man -age ment Unit will fully support that process.

EUROFUSION MARKS THE BEGINNING OFA NEW ERA. European fusion research is now moreefficient. e European Fusion Roadmap, developed underEUROfusion’s predecessor EFDA, sets the priorities forour research. It is the central guideline used by Europe tofund research projects. Within the new framework,Europe’s fusion community also employs its infrastructuremore efficiently. While the Joint European Torus or JETremains the most important fusion device for Europe’sfusion researchers, EUROfusion also has direct access tovarious national experiments. e medium-sized toka-maks, ASDEX Upgrade, TCV and MAST are part of theEUROfusion tokamak programme. New is that the pri-orities for all tokamak research – experimental as well astheoretical and modelling – are set in Europe-wide dis-cussions based on the programme headlines defined inthe roadmap. en the best experiment to execute the

specific research elements is chosen. A coherent set ofdevices is available for research in the exhaust physicsand plasma facing component fields. is set includestokamak platforms like WEST, but also various linear de-vices and electron beam facilities.

2015 BRINGS EXCITING OPPORTUNITIES.After a successful start with ASDEX Upgrade, EUROfusionwill phase the second medium-sized tokamak, TCV, intoits programme. At JET, 2015 and early 2016 will be filledwith experiments supporting preparation for the deu-terium-tritium campaign planned for 2017. e Europeanfusion community is looking forward to the start of oper-ation of Wendelstein 7-X, the world’s most advanced stel-larator. Based on the results achieved in the fields of exhaustphysics and plasma facing components, an assessmentneeds to be carried out close to the end of 2015 to judgewhether there is sufficient support for the construction ofa Divertor Test Tokamak, a device to test novel exhaustconcepts for application in the DEMO reactor.

e Power Plant Physics and Technology section ofEUROfusion have started the conceptual design ofDEMO. New is that a system engineering approach willbe followed and that industry participants will be involvedright from the start. One important activity planned for2015 will be the definition of the high-level requirementsfor DEMO, which will be carried out in close discussionwith various stakeholders like utilities, networks, and in-dustries.

I wish you all a very good, successful, healthy and exciting2015. n

Tony Donné

4

FUSION IN EUROPE | Moving Forward |

EUROfusionOFFICIALLYLAUNCHED

MORE INFORMATION: https://www.euro-fusion.org/2014/10/ribbon-cut-road-open/

On 9th October 2014, the European Com -mission officially launched the EuropeanConsortium for the Development of FusionEnergy, EUROfusion for short. EUROfusionmanages the European fusion research ac-tivities on behalf of Euratom, which awardsthe appropriate grant to the consortium.

Robert-Jan Smits, Director-General of DG Research &Inno vation, and Prof. Sibylle Günter, Scientific Director ofMax-Planck-Institute for Plasma Physics and Chair of theEUROfusion General Assembly, signed the grant agreementbetween EUROfusion and the European Commission.

“Europe sets the path tocommer cial isation of fusionenergy.” Günther Oettinger

The launch of EUROfusion was celebrated in the heart of theEuropean Quarter, the Solvay Library.

Pictures: Teamwork © Fred Guerdin

5

| Moving Forward | EUROfusion |

Another facilityfor EUROfusion:WEST

The WEST configuration (Picture: CEA)

WEST stands for Tungsten (W) Environment inSteady-state Tokamak. e device is currently be-

ing built by CEA via an upgrade of the Tore Supra toka-mak. EUROfusion will use WEST as a facility to test so-called plasma facing components (PFCs), which line theinside of a fusion reactor wall. Understanding the inter-action between the plasma and the reactor wall surface isnot only important for the design of the wall components,but also for defining suitable plasma operating scenarios.EUROfusion laboratories operate high heat flux machinesto investigate the plasma facing components for ITERand DEMO. With its unique ability to test actively cooledPFCs in a tokamak plasma environment of long duration,WEST complements these existing facilities bringing to-gether ITER divertor high heat flux technology and toka-mak operation.

WEST is planned to start operating in the first half of2016. Up until 2017, WEST will operate with at least oneactively cooled ITER-like tungsten divertor sector. enit will shut down to implement a full actively cooled di-vertor and restart in 2018. e 2016/2017 EUROfusioncampaign at WEST will focus on testing the power han-dling capabilities of the ITER divertor. is includes, forinstance, investigating sputtering and power handling ofdamaged PFCs. Another task is the qualification of diag-nostic systems used to investigate plasma surface inter-actions. n

MORE INFORMATION: http://west.cea.fr

EUROfusion integrates the French fusionfacility, WEST, into its ITER Physics Pro -gramme. The decision follows the rec-ommendations made by the interna-tional panel in charge of the evaluationof WEST as a EUROfusion facility.

6

WHAT WILL DEMOLOOk LIkE?

THE FIRST STEPS TOWARDS A CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FOR ADEMONSTRATION FUSION POWER PLANT

FUSION IN EUROPE

Current fusion experiments were primarily designedto investigate plasma physics. However, DEMO must

demonstrate the necessary technologies not only for con-trolling a more powerful plasma than has previously existed,but for safely generating electricity consistently, and forregular, rapid, and reliable maintenance of the plant. edesign of such a plant must take account, not just of physicsrequirements, but also of engineering and technologicallimitations. Otherwise it may be, for instance, that thepower exhausted from the plasma is so high that it is notpossible to find a material with sufficient heat-resistancefor the inner reactor wall. All relevant stakeholders like in-dustry, safety regulators, utility, experts for public accept-ance and others will be involved in setting what are calledthe DEMO high-level requirements: what the plant mustdemonstrate to the outside world to prove that fusion is aviable power source. Prior to such discussions, however,one must know the design space within which parameterscan be changed in order to fulfil these demands.

SIMULATING A FUSION POWER PLANTDetermining this design space is currently carried out withthe help of a systems code that simulates the entire powerplant. is code comprises sub-models for all plant com-ponents – the fusion plasma, systems for heating and cur-rent drive, the balance of plant (e.g. the electricity genera-tion systems) and remote handling, the reactor wall blanketincluding its functions for energy harvesting and, vitally,tritium breeding, divertor or exhaust systems, magnetsand others. e systems code is self-consistent, meaning

that no sub-system is able to place demands that the othersub-systems cannot fulfil. If one sets, for instance, a certainplasma power, the system will issue an alert if this require-ment violates the material heat stress limit set for certainareas of the reactor wall and attempt to find a new solution– a different size machine, for example – which can ac-commodate the thermal load. e systems code is designed to execute very rapid cal-culations and therefore uses quite simple models for thesub-systems. e key aspect is to simulate their interac-tion. “With our calculations, we provide a starting pointfor others that model the isolated aspects and sub-systemsin more detail”, says Richard Kemp from CCFE. He workswith the PROCESS systems code, which has been usedfor the European Power Plant Conceptual Study and whichis also used for the DEMO conceptual design.

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONSUltimately, DEMO design considerations begin with thegoal set in the Fusion Roadmap: DEMO shall demonstrateproduction of electricity with a closed fuel cycle by 2050– assuming that the ITER end of construction is not sig-nificantly delayed. “Establishing realistic plant perform-ance requirements and project development schedules isexpected to be a strong driver in the selection of the tech-nical features of the device; favouring more conservativetechnology choices for near-term solutions”, explainsGian franco Federici, Head of the PPPT Department. ITERis the key facility in this strategy and DEMO design andR&D are expected to benefit greatly from the experience

How do you go about designing a power plant that uses a completely new method of gen-erating energy, based on technologies for which so far only scientific experimental devicesexist? This is basically the point at which EUROfusion’s Power Plant Physics & Technology(PPPT) Department begins the DEMO conceptual design.

7

| Moving Forward | EUROfusion |

gained with the ITER design process in the past and withits construction and operation. e main performancerequirements, i.e. pulse length and power generation, arecombined with technology and physics boundary condi-tions, for instance for plasma power, divertor or magnets.On the basis of these conditions, the systems code calcu-lates a set of parameters, i.e. for plasma volume tempera-ture and density, magnetic fields and for the heating andcurrent drive systems, and provide the input for moredetailed models. Any input parameters and modules ofthe systems code which result in too much discrepancyin these more detailed calculations, are subsequently re-fined in an iterative process.

e design concept, which is currently under development,foresees a plant which provides 500 megawatts of electricalpower to the grid and runs with a pulse length of 2 hours.e selection of these values is supported by systems codecalculations that were carried out to explore the conse-quences of various combinations of electricity output andpulse lengths on electricity costs, capital investment andthe inevitable uncertainty of machine performance.

Firstly, sensitivity studies are being carried out to determinewhich parameters’ changes have the strongest influenceon the performance of DEMO. ese will test the robust-ness of the operating point. Secondly, lower scale assess-ments – e.g. of more parameters at a time, or a more de-tailed examination of still uncertain physics like the plasmatransport – are to be carried out in order to develop abetter understanding of the different operating points con-sidered and where technological or physics improvementswould have the greatest benefits. Finally, the systems codeis used to investigate a more daring DEMO concept,DEMO2. is study aims to show what would be possibleif DEMO was given extended development time allowingthe use of less mature technologies which would add somemore unknown factors to the design. n

CONTACT AND INFORMATION: Gianfranco Federici, Head of EUROfusion Power PlantPhysics and Technology Richard Kemp, CCFER. Kemp et al.: “DEMO Design Point Studies”, IAEA 2014Fusion Energy Conference contribution

An artist’s impression of a fusion power plant based on the European Power Plant Conceptual Study.

8

FUSION IN EUROPE

Helping ITER protect its vessel wall:

DISRUPTION MITIGATIONEXPERIMENTS AT JET

One focus of the last two experimental campaigns atJET was to investigate methods that can be used to

mitigate disruptions. Disruptions are events during whichthe plasma loses all its energy within a very short period oftime. eir effects are more severe for fusion reactors witha metal wall than they are for the traditionally used carbonwalls. Metal may melt when impacted by extreme heat orby very intense particle beams. Furthermore, fusion plas-mas in metal vessels contain fewer impurity ions and there-fore radiate less energy. Consequently, the plasma mustlose its energy via alternative routes – often resulting instrong heat loads and forces on the wall.

The ITER-Like Wall makes JET the best machine to investigate novelmethods for ITER.

9

| Moving Forward | EUROfusion |

e plasma-facing components (PFCs) of ITER are madeof the metals beryllium and tungsten and therefore ITERmust take great care to avoid or at least mitigate disruptionsin order to minimise repair down times. It falls on JETwith its ITER-Like Wall to investigate methods to demon-strate their ability to offer effective disruption mitigationin ITER.

MASSIVE GAS INJECTIONOne issue with disruptions in metal wall vessels is thepurity of the plasma and its resulting inability to lose energyvia radiation. Erosion, due to both physical and chemicalprocesses, causes atoms from carbon PFCs to enter theplasma. ese impurity ions absorb plasma energy and ra-diate it. Metal walls erode less due to an almost completeabsence of chemical processes and thus the plasma lacksradiating impurities. A suitable method of mitigating dis-ruptions in metal wall vessels is therefore the injection oflarge amounts of gas such as neon or argon. Once insidethe plasma, the gas ions enable energy radiation. If the gasis injected just at the onset of a disruption, it helps to triggera more controlled, less powerful disruption. ere are cur-rently two methods of massive material injection used intokamaks: Disruption Mitigation Valves which incorporatelarge amounts of gas and the injection of large pellets whichare shattered against a target plate. JET employs the firstmethod, using a fast valve developed at FZ Jülich, and cur-rently features two such valves.

MITIGATING HEAT LOADS AND FORCESUsing one or two of these valves, JET carries out experi-ments designed to characterise the disruption mitigationby massive gas injection. It has been found that the effec-tiveness of this method decreases in plasmas with highthermal energy content. Further experiments will be neededto fully understand the reasons behind this. e radiationhitting the first wall is toroidally and poloidally asymmetricdue to the localised gas injection. is asymmetry can beminimised by the simultaneous use of multiple valves. JETwill add a third valve next year which will thus allow furtherinvestigation of this aspect. e forces resulting from so-called vertical displacement events, during which the

plasma shifts vertically, and halo currents, which developwhen the plasma touches the wall and which partly flow inthe metal wall, have been reduced by massive gas injection.However, the resulting fast plasma current decay leads tolarger eddy currents. ese must be controlled in ITER asthey can lead to unacceptably high loads on in-vessel blan-ket modules. Experiments at JET will continue to furtheroptimise massive gas injection for mitigating heat loadsand forces.

SUPPRESSING RUNAWAY-ELECTRONSJET experiments have also investigated the effects of a mas-sive gas injection on the suppression of so-called runawayelectrons. ese very intense and highly energetic electronbeams develop during disruptions and can cause local melt-ing of metal walls. e experiments have shown that a gasinjection just at the onset of a disruption can prevent theserunaways. ey have also shown that timing is critical: ifthe gas injection is delayed, runaways occur. On behalf ofITER, JET took these experiments one step further anddeliberately produced runaway electrons in order to findways to eliminate them. However, a massive gas injectiondid not have a significant effect on an already developedbeam of runaway electrons. Similar observations have beenmade in earlier experiments at smaller tokamaks. Now thereasons for this effect need to be investigated further.

Meanwhile the third mitigation valve that has been installedand JET offers even more ITER-like conditions for testingthe application of massive gas injections to mitigate dis-ruptions and to suppress runaway electrons. n

CONTACT AND INFORMATION: Hans Rudolf Koslowski, Forschungszentrum JülichLorne Horton, JET Exploitation

10

FUSION IN EUROPE

Even though fusion power relies on a nuclear processand uses radioactive tritium as one of its fuels, it does

offer excellent performance with regard to safety and theenvironment. Importantly, there is no chain reaction sincea fusion plasma shuts down naturally in any abnormalsituation, there are only relatively low energies present todrive an accidental sequence, and the radioactive inven-tories are well confined by barriers already inherent inthe design.

But to fully realise the potential safety performance, caremust be taken to implement safety within the design.Today fusion power is investigated in scientific experi-ments. ITER’s successor DEMO is the first fusion devicewhich will be planned like a power plant. e DEMO de-sign process is incorporating nuclear safety issues fromthe very beginning of conception. at’s why, on 6th

November, engineers working on the conceptual designof DEMO met with nuclear safety specialists to discussthe safety requirements and their implementation in thedesign. Around 30 people were present at the meeting,held at KIT, with many more participating remotely fromthe Research Units engaged in EUROfusion’s DEMO pro-gramme.

Safety and the environment is one of the eight missionsof Europe’s Fusion Roadmap and the respective projectcalled the meeting and invited all other groups workingon different systems of the DEMO design, to submit theirsafety questions and implications for design requirementsin advance. High on the meeting agenda were the safetyrequirements designed to eliminate or minimise the riskof radioactive material being released into the environ-ment either during normal operation or theoretical acci-dents.

Discussions focussed on the extent to which differentcomponents in the DEMO design may contribute to theconfinement of radioactive material, and on the targetsthat will be set for maximum radiological doses, even inextremely unlikely accident scenarios. Setting require-ments that are both challenging yet achievable is a processthat must involve both the safety team and the designerswho are tasked with meeting the requirements. is meet-ing was an important step in the ongoing safety/designersinteraction that will continue throughout the designprocess, thus ensuring the best possible safety and envi-ronmental performance of the DEMO plant. n

Neill Taylor, CCFE

CONTACT AND INFORMATION: Neill Taylor, CCFEGianfranco Federici, Head of EUROfusion Power PlantPhysics and Technology

SAFETYAT THE HEARTOF DEMO DESIGNACTIVITIES

11

| Moving Forward | Research Units |

Tungsten is the material of choicefor the reactor wall surface of ITER’s

successor DEMO. e divertor, where plasmaimpurities and ash from the fusion process are removed,is specifically exposed to extreme heat and particle fluxes.Tungsten is able to withstand such high heat stress, but itis difficult to process. e metal is extremely brittle and,therefore, traditional machining methods such as millingor turning are time consuming and expensive. Powder Injection Moulding (PIM) offers an alternative.is process moulds a metal powder – mixed with a bind-ing material – under high pressure into the desired shape.After removing the mould, you have a part with near-net-shape precision which does not require further treat-ment. PIM thus offers a cost-efficient method of massfabrication that will enable the production of extremelyprecise metal parts at an industrial scale. In the last five years, researchers at KIT have successfullyadapted the PIM process to be used with tungsten. eypro duced parts from a microgearwheel 3 millimetres indiameter and with a weight of 0.050 grams, up to a 1.4 kiloplate with the dimensions 60 x 60 x 20 mm. us the re-searchers not only demonstrated the suitability of thePIM process for tungsten, they also showed its scalabilityand its ability to produce complex shapes with great pre-cision. Another advantage of moulded tungsten parts isthe isotropic characteristic of all material properties. Partsmachined from plates or rods do not feature such uniaxialgrain orientation and therefore do not offer full placementflexibility.

IDEAL TOOL FOR JOINING MATERIALSAnother issue for DEMO is the joining of tungsten-mate-rials with different doping methods. Doping tungsten with

NEW MANUFACTURING TECHNIQUEFOR DEMO DIVERTORCOMPONENTSKIT developsindustrial scaleproduction processfor tungsten parts

titanium carbide or yttrium oxide enables a wide range oftuning mechanical properties like ductility and strength.Traditional joining methods like brazing would requirededicated materials for the brazing process. KIT researchershave developed a two-component PIM process which en-ables joints to be produced without any additional materi-als. KIT is currently developing the PIM process furtherwith respect to producing doted materials and with regardto its suitability for mass production.

PROMISING TEST RESULTSe tungsten parts produced by KIT have undergone heatflux tests at FZ Jülich’s electron beam facility JUDITH-1.ermal shock and thermal fatigue tests have shownpromising results. e next step will be studies with re-spect to plasma-wall-interaction. Divertor parts manu-factured for ASDEX Upgrade will be tested there in 2015.Other parts are investigated at the test rig GLADIS atIPP. e PIM process is very flexible and allows a varietyof new designs and shapes. e tungsten PIM monoblockswill be assembled into a divertor element and proposedfor tests in the WEST experiment in France. n

CONTACT AND INFORMATION: Steffen Antusch, KIT S. Antusch, L. Commin, M. Müller, V. Piotter, T.Weingaertner: Two-component tungsten Powder InjectionMolding – an effective mass production process. Journalof Nuclear Materials 447 (2014) 314–317.

KIT researchers have produced various tungsten components usingPowder Injection Moulding. (Picture: KIT, Tanja Meißner)

12

FUSION IN EUROPE

Literally one of the hottest issues in developing thedemonstration fusion power plant DEMO is the re-

actor heat exhaust. Known as the divertor, it is the onlyarea of the reactor wall which comes into contact withthe hot plasma edge. e concept developed by CCFEand KIT foresees a DEMO divertor target made up ofthousands of water-cooled solid tungsten blocks designedto withstand the high heat and particle fluxes from theplasma.

TEMPERATURE DROPS BY 1000°CWithin a distance of only about 7 mm between the tungstensurface and the cooling water flowing through a copperalloy pipe, the temperature drops from around 1300 to200 degrees Centigrade. Such a steep temperature gradientposes a challenge for thermal insulation between the tung-sten block and the copper alloy pipe. Furthermore, tungstenand copper feature different thermal distortions. As a result,mechanical stress builds up at the tungsten-copper inter-face. e solution may lie in a suitable intermediate layerplaced between the two components.

A SPONGY INTERLAYERA CCFE team has been addressing this issue within CCFE’sTechnology Programme since 2011. Working with a collab -o rating team at KIT producing tungsten components, thegroup came up with the idea that the intermediate layermust be spongy. at way it is able to act as a thermal bar-rier and also accommodate the differences in deformationof the tungsten and copper components. With the help ofan automated design process based on computer models,they proposed an intermediate layer made from copperthreads forming a felt-like structure. Together with thegroup at KIT, mock-ups were produced and tested inCCFE’s laboratory. e teams will develop their concept further within the5-year EUROfusion divertor project. More design studieswill be carried out and divertor target mock-ups will beproduced and tested in the high heat flux test facilitiesoperated by EUROfusion laboratories. n

CONTACT AND INFORMATION: Tom Barrett, CCFE

HANDLING EXTREMETEMPERATURE GRADIENTSCCFE and KIT develop a new water-cooled tungsten monoblock concept for the DEMOdivertor target. The work is funded within the EUROfusion DEMO divertor project.

Water-cooled tungsten mock-ups produced by CCFE and KIT: A spongy intermediate layer between the tungsten block and the copper alloy pipe insulatesthe 200 degree Centigrade water coolant from the 1300 degree Centigrade hot tungsten surface. (Picture: JJ Cooper and Mathew Banks, CCFE)

13

ose with just a passing acquaintance with fusion energycan be forgiven for thinking it is a two horse race: eithermagnetic fusion or inertial fusion will one day get the formularight and achieve breakeven or ignition and the path topower generation will be clear. For most of the 10 years I’vespent writing about fusion for Science magazine and otherpublications – and writing a book about the topic – thoseparallel tracks have been the focus. Government-funded fusion researchers understandably con-centrate on the technology that works the best. But themonoculture we have today, with ITER being the focus ofmuch of the world’s fusion effort, has its downsides. Fromthe point of view of the public and politicians, not muchhas happened in fusion since 1997, when JET made itsrecord-setting DT shots, and not much is likely to happenat ITER for another decade. is lack of eye-catching resultsmakes it hard to keep funders and fans interested – comparefusion with the constant stream of discoveries made in as-tronomy and particle physics, for example. e high cost of ITER has put a strain on fusion programseverywhere. In the U.S., politicians cannot understand whythey are continuously pouring ever-increasing sums of moneyinto a project that is being (rather badly) managed overseas,beyond their control. As a result, they keep funding low sothat the U.S. can neither maintain its commitments to ITERnor keep a vibrant research community working at home. Inertial fusion in the United States is in a similar bind. NIFwas built on the back of its utility for nuclear weapons testing,but its cost was so great that other forms of inertial fusion –direct drive, krypton-fluoride lasers, for example – werestarved of funding. A 2013 report from the U.S. NationalAcademy of Science argued that, after NIF, the U.S. neededto fund a diverse research program covering lots of differentapproaches, not back a single horse. Some alternative approaches do struggle on. Other formsof inertial fusion are still pursued at U.S. government labsbut with minimal funding. e world’s two largest sphericaltokamaks are both being upgraded and next year will seethe inauguration of the world’s most advanced stellarator.While these are all important projects, the field does appearto lack diversity.Earlier this year I decided to write about some of the privatecompanies that were trying to achieve fusion energy. eyall seemed to be run by serious scientists, many of whom

Daniel Clery is a jour-nalist with Science mag-azine, the weekly jour-nal of the American As-sociation for the Ad-vancement of Science.As deputy news editorin the magazine’s Eu-rope office in Cam-bridge, U.K., Clery cov-ers physics, astronomyand European science

policy. He has previously worked for magazines includingPhysics World and New Scientist and has published articlesin the Financial Times, Popular Science, Cosmos, e Eu-ropean and Der Tagesspiegel. In 2013 he published APiece of the Sun: e Quest for Fusion Energy.

once worked in government labs or universities. What theyhad in common was an impatience with government-fundedfusion and its fixation on tokamaks and lasers. Most of themare working on concepts that were once investigated by pub-licly funded research, but passed over when results provedunpromising. ey’re applying new technology and newthinking to bring these approaches back to life. It’s true that these companies tend to make wild claims aboutwhat their devices will be able to do, but some have raisedmillions of dollars from private investors and have devicesthat show promise. Even large corporations are getting in-volved: U.S. defence firm Lockheed Martin announced inOctober that it was working on a compact fusion reactor. e articles I wrote about these private fusion efforts havegot the biggest reaction from readers of almost anythingelse I’ve written. eir tales of hardship, setbacks and break-throughs appealed to people. Which led me to think, perhapsit is time for mainstream fusion scientists to embrace thesealternative efforts. Both sides could gain. e energy andinitiative of the private companies could give fusion a muchneeded shot in the arm, and for them to take the next steptowards viability they will need much more money, andcould use support rather than disdain. Perhaps in fusion, asin biology, diversity will promote health and vitality. Andyou never know, one of them might actually work. n

FUSION IN EUROPE

INVITES Daniel CleryDOES FUSION RESEARCH LACK DIVERSITY?

13

14

FUSION IN EUROPE | Community |

As EFDA and JET Leader and interim ProgrammeManager during the first months of EUROfusion,

Francesco Romanelli was the driving force behind theEuropean Fusion Roadmap and had played a key role inthe re-definition of the fusion research programme in Ho -ri zon 2020. Interest in his presentation was so high thatnot everyone was able to obtain a seat in the crammedHans Otto Wüster lecture hall at JET. In addition, manyviewers from all over Europe watched the broadcast online.

In his talk, Francesco Romanelli briefly reviewed the his-tory of fusion research since the 1960s. Looking back onhis time at JET, he made the audience smile when hepointed out that “the average life-time of a JET directorwas either seven months or seven years. I can claim tohave stayed the longest – seven years AND seven months.”Summarising the merits of JET during his term, he con-cluded that “to me, it would make no sense to close JET in2018.“ Romanelli recalled that in 2011, when the so-calledWagner report recommended changes in the strategic ori-entation of the EU fusion programme, he saw the criticismvoiced by the paper as an opportunity. e creation of theroadmap, he continued, “was purely driven by technicalconsideration – consensus was achieved after wards.”

FRANCESCO ROMANELLI bIDSFAREWELL TO EUROFUSION

With a lecture on the subject of ”The Fusion Roadmap and the challenges of theITER era” Francesco Romanelli completed his tenure as EFDA Leader and EFDAAssociate Leader for JET on 28th November.

Romanelli also emphasised that the Commission grantedan exceptional 97 percent of the requested budget for theFusion Programme in Horizon 2020. He finished by thank-ing the many individuals and groups who made theroadmap and the successes in JET happen.

Steve Cowley, Director of CCFE, reminded the audienceof Francesco Romanelli’s scientific career in theoreticalfusion science and his papers which are still highly im-portant. “I have an enormous respect for Francesco”, hesaid, “fusion owes him a great deal”. EUROfusion Pro -gramme Manager Tony Donné paid great respect to thetre mendous amount of work which had been done underFrancesco’s leadership and underpinned that “It wouldbe scientific suicide to close JET in 2018”. Countless companions wished Francesco Romanelli all thebest and expressed their appreciation of the time spent work-ing together. “Francesco is a strong leader with a vision. Asone of his direct collaborators, I have been always impressedby his broad knowledge and technical skills and his tirelessdedication to achieve the set goals”, said, for instance,Gianfranco Federici, Head of the EUROfusion PPPTDepartment. “I wish Francesco all the best in future and Iam sure he will always strive to make fusion a success.” n

“To me, it wouldmake no senseto close JETin 2018”Francesco Romanelli

| Community | People |

15

YOUNG FACES OF FUSION –EDMUND HIGHCOCk

What are you doing now, after your PhD?I have a European two-year researcher fellowship spon-sored by EUROfusion and will continue working at theUniversity of Oxford as a post doctoral researcher.

How did you come to fusion research?Well, I had always been interested in fusion as an under-graduate. Imperial College, which is where I started myPhD, had an open day on fusion and plasma physics PhDs.I went there and found my future PhD position.

How did you hear about fusion in the first place? In Cambridge, where I did my undergraduate studies,there was no fusion or plasma physics. I read about fusionresearch in media like New Scientist and I knew aboutthe laboratory in Culham. But I had no idea that onecould actually do a PhD in fusion until I met a friend whotold me that he was going to that open day at ImperialCollege.

Did you find the expectations you had in your PhDwork fulfilled?Well, I remember that I wanted to do a lot of mathematicsand that I learned quite quickly that I enjoyed computa-tional physics more. I also found that, because plasma isin general very complex and chaotic, you cannot only usemathematics to get answers about how it behaves. Youneed computational physics to solve these questions.

What do you like most about your current job as a PostDoc?I very much like being able to direct my own research,and I appreciate the fact that the Culham fusion laboratoryis just 10 minutes down the road. It makes it very easy totalk to the people who actually run the experiments. It isgreat to work with students, to help them and to watchthem making progress. I suppose what I like most is thatevery single day I decide what I need to do and I do it.ere is no routine, because whenever you solve a prob-lem you never need to solve that one again. So every dayyou have to think about a new problem, you never do thesame thing twice.

What are your long-term goals? Do you have a dream-job for the far future?At this moment, I am hoping to become either a universityprofessor and have a large group working in plasmaphysics or to be working as head of theory in a major fu-sion laboratory. Who knows, that’s a long way away. n

Picture: Ernst Fessler

Edmund Highcock is a PostDoc at Oxford University. Heinvestigates ways to eliminateplasma turbulence and wasawarded the European PhysicalSociety Plasma Physics PhDaward 2014.

Edmund, congratulations on winning the EPS Physics PhD award!What is your work about?

I am working on transport within the core of a fusion plasma. e loss ofheat due to turbulence is a major issue on the way to a fusion reactor. Inthe last 15 years or so, a lot of work has been carried out on flows in theplasma and especially on those flows that are faster in the centre than atthe edge. We have found that those flows can reduce the turbulence level.I was looking at the effect of these flows, asking whether they could beused to eliminate the turbulence and under what circumstances thismight work.

16

FUSION IN EUROPE | Community |

The 2014 Hannes Alfvén Prize was awarded to PatrickMora (Centre de Physique éorique, Palaiseau,

France) for “decisive results in the field of laser-producedplasma physics, in particular for illuminating descriptionsof laser light absorption in plasmas, electron heat transportin steep temperature gradients and plasma expansion dy-namics into vacuum”. Christoph Hollenstein (Centre de Recherches enPhysique des Plasmas, EPFL, Switzerland) received the2014 Plasma Physics Innovation Prize for “instrumentalcontributions to the field of Plasma Processes in Industryand for his strong impact in spin-off activities of fusionR&D”. e PhD Research Award went to Edmund Highcock(Oxford University, UK) for his thesis entitled “e zeroturbulence manifold of fusion plasmas”. n

OUTSTANDINGPLASMA RESEARCH ANDTECHNOLOGY

From left: Patrick Mora, Edmund Highcock, Christoph Hollenstein(Picture: Ernst Fesseler)

At its 2014 annual conference in Berlin,the European Physical Society PlasmaPhysics Division honoured three research -ers for their outstanding scientific ortechnological results

The two researchers are the first recipients of the prizelaunched by the European Commission to reward ex-

cellence in innovation in the fusion research programme aswell as the quality of the researchers and industries involved.e prize was awarded during the Symposium on FusionTechnology (SOFT) in San Sebastian on 30th September.Christian Day and omas Giegerich were honoured fortheir development of a new, economic vacuum pumpingprocess for DEMO called KALPUREX (Karlsruhe liquidmetal based pumping process for fusion reactor exhaustgases). Christian Day also heads the EUROfusion Tritium,Fuelling and Vacuum project for DEMO.

n

MORE INFORMATION: http://www.itep.kit.edu/english/945.php

Simon Webster, European Commission, presents the Prize to ChristianDay. (Picture: SOFT2014)

KIT scientists Christian Day andThomas Giegerich win EuropeanPrize for Innovation in Fusion

“We are honoured to receive this prize, which promotesour recent achievements in vacuum system development.We see it as further motivation on our way to makefusion energy happen. This prize goes to the whole teambehind this work.” Christian Day

17

More than 120 PhD students from a wide distributionof European countries participated in the fourth

FuseNet PhD event that took place in Lisbon, Portugal,from 18th to 20th November. is installment was organ-ized by Instituto de Plasmas e Fusão Nuclear, IST, underthe umbrella of the FuseNet Association and with financialsupport from EUROfusion. Since 2011 the annual PhD Event has been bringing to-gether PhD students whose doctoral topic is associatedwith nuclear fusion research and who are registered at aEUROfusion member state or a FuseNet member uni-versity. Its goal is to enable students to disseminate theirresearch, develop a network of contacts and learn fromeach other’s experiences. is goal was achieved this yearby a combination of social events, PhD student presenta-tions, lectures by invited speakers, and student discus-sions.

e poster sessions were hugely crowded, but broughtlively discussions and a gave a nice insight into the currenttopics of European PhD research. In the afternoon the stu-dents had the opportunity to visit the ISTTOK tokamak atIST. Following a plenary talk on Communication in Science,an Elevator Pitch Game trained the ability of the studentsto explain their research and the importance of it to a gen-eral audience. Invited talks included topics ranging fromhistory of fusion research, fission, materials science andalternative approaches to build a fusion reactor. e high-light of the event however, were perhaps the selected oralpresentations from the PhD students themselves, that pro-vided examples of bright young students paving the waytowards the next generation of fusion professionals. n

Mark Scheffer, FuseNet

MORE INFORMATION: http://www.fusenet.eu/phdevent

Euromouse, the mascot of Europa Park, a theme parkin Rust, Germany, was pleased to welcome IPP at the

Science Days for the first time. e science festival tookplace from 16th to 18th October. e participating scienceorganisations came not only from Germany, but also from

France, Switzerland, Austria, Palestine, Israel, and China.Two out of the three event days were exclusively reservedfor school students and their teachers. “Such events are awonderful platform for mutual learning: Students are en-couraged to try things hands-on – which is not only funbut perhaps the most effective way to learn. And attendantscan gather new inspiration for explaining complex topicsin the best possible way”, commented IPP Director SibylleGünter. IPP was happy to welcome a large number of visitors at itsstand – students, who needed to report about experimentsthey saw at the Science Days later at school or who werespecifically collecting information about nuclear fusion fora school presentation; teachers for the STEM subjectsScience, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, who hadalready received material about plasma physics and fusionresearch in a preparatory event and who now wanted todiscuss their questions with representatives of IPP. n

Julia Sieber, IPP

DISCUSSING FUSION ENERGYwith teachers, students, and Euromouse

| Community | In Dialogue |

Karola Bald-Soliman, engineer at ASDEX Upgrade, with Euromouse –the special guest at the IPP stand. (Picture: IPP)

RECORDATTENDANCEfor 4th FuseNetPhD event

18

ImprintFUSION IN EUROPE

ISSN 1818-5355

For more information see thewebsite: www.euro-fusion.org

EUROfusion Programme Management Unit – GarchingBoltzmannstr. 285748 Garching / MunichGermanyphone: +49-89-3299-4263fax: +49-89-3299-4197email: christine.rueth@euro-fusion.orgeditors: Petra Nieckchen, Christine RüthSubscribe at newsletter@euro-fusion.org

© Tony Donné (EUROfusion Programme Manager) 2014. This newsletter or parts of it may not be reproduced withoutpermission. Text, pictures and layout, except where noted,courtesy of the EUROfusion members. The EUROfusionmembers are the Research Units of the European FusionProgramme. Responsibility for the information and viewsexpressed in this newsletter lies entirely with the authors.Neither the Research Units or anyone acting on their behalfis responsible for any damage resulting from the use ofinformation contained in this publication.

FUSION IN EUROPE | Perspectives |

NEWSFLASHNEWSFLASH

Czech brochure on “The historyof controlled thermonuclearfusion research”e Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic published a brochurereviewing the history of fusion science. e author, Milan Ripa from theAcademy’s Institute of Plasma Physics, describes the research activitiesin the former Soviet Union, the UK and the USA before continuing withmore recent science undertaken after the year 1968 and in various coun-tries. One entire chapter is dedicated to ITER.Download the brochure: http://tinyurl.com/fusionhistory-downloadOrder the brochure: http://tinyurl.com/fusionhistory-order

LEGO scientistsat workStrange things happen at the JET fu-sion experiment when the scientistsgo home at night. e LEGO fusionteam takes over …Watch this CCFE video to find outmore: http://tinyurl.com/JET-Lego

CCFE scientist Fernanda Rimini designed the JET LEGO MOC. (Picture: CCFE)

EUROPEAN CONSORTIUM FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF FUSION ENERGY

REALISING FUSION ELECTRICITY BY 2050

Austrian Academy of SciencesAUSTRIA

Ecole Royale MilitaireLaboratory for Plasma Physics

BELGIUMbulgarian Academy of Sciences

BULGARIARuđer bošković Institute

CROATIAUniversity of CyprusCYPRUS

Institute of Plasma PhysicsAcademy of Sciences of the

Czech RepublicCZECH REPUBLIC

Technical University ofDenmark

DENMARKUniversity of TartuESTONIA

Technical Research Centre ofFinland

FINLAND

Commissariat à l’énergieatomique et aux énergies

alternativesFRANCE GERMANY GERMANY

Max-Planck-Institut fürPlasmaphysikGERMANY

National Center for ScientificResearch "Demokritos"

GREECE

Wigner Research Centre forPhysics

HUNGARYDublin City UniversityIRELAND

Agenzia nazionale per le nuovetecnologie, l’energia e lo

sviluppo economico sostenibileITALY LATVIA

Lithuanian Energy InstituteLITHUANIA

Institute of Plasma Physicsand Laser Microfusion

POLANDInstituto Superior Técnico

PORTUGALInstitute for Atomic Physics

ROMANIAComenius UniversitySLOVAKIA

Jožef Stefan InstituteSLOVENIA

Centro de InvestigacionesEnergéticas Medioambientales

y TecnológicasSPAIN

Swedish Research CouncilSWEDEN

École polytechnique fédéralede Lausanne

SWITZERLAND

Foundation for FundamentalResearch on Matter

THE NETHERLANDSUNITED

KINGDOM

Our partners:

F4ESPAINFRANCE

ISSN 1818-5355l Fusion laboratoriesl EUROfusion partners

This work has been carried out within theframework of the EUROfusion Consortiumand has received funding from theEuropean Union’s Horizon 2020 researchand innovation programme under grantagreement number 633053.The views and opinions expressed hereindo not necessarily reflect those of theEuropean Commission.