Skip to main content
European Commission logo print header

Article Category

Content archived on 2022-12-07

Article available in the following languages:

Public funding must continue, say fusion experts

Fusion research is 'big' science: the budgets needed for research are big; the size of a fusion experimental reactor is enormous; the timeframe for designing, building and exploiting such facilities is vast and the task of persuading funding bodies of the need for fusion resea...

Fusion research is 'big' science: the budgets needed for research are big; the size of a fusion experimental reactor is enormous; the timeframe for designing, building and exploiting such facilities is vast and the task of persuading funding bodies of the need for fusion research is, frankly, huge. In addition, what is at stake is 'big': 'The importance of energy which is in increasing demand, environmental concerns, and the limitations in available energy resources drive the search for new energy sources, capable of providing a substantial response to the world's future needs', says the External Advisory Group on the European Commission's Key Action on "Controlled Thermonuclear Fusion" (EAG 'Fusion'). But, on the other hand, there has also been an impressive progress in fusion research over the last decades, which is huge, too. One example is the production of 16 MW of fusion power at the JET Joint Undertaking - Joint European Torus (UK) in 1997. Looking at the scientific and technological achievements and the strategy of the European fusion programme, one of the key messages to emerge from the work of the EAG 'Fusion' is that the European Union must continue funding research on fusion. The EAG, in its Opinion of 13 January 1999, stated that 'global increases in demand for energy, especially for electricity, will be difficult to satisfy at the same time as meeting the serious concerns for impact on the environment. The EAG believes that fusion energy could possibly make a substantial contribution to electricity production in the future and that its development should be pursued by the European Union'. The European fusion programme forms one of the two Key Actions of the Euratom Framework Programme (1998-2002) and is managed in the frame of the programme for Energy, Environment and Sustainable development. The Key Action for Fusion is different from the other 22 Key Actions of FP5 because its work is not mapped out by the Commission using calls for proposals. The European fusion programme fully integrates all activities in magnetic confinement fusion in the Member States, Switzerland and the seven Eastern European countries newly associated to FP5. A strong bottom-up approach is used to determine the areas of research and projects that are most in need of Community funding. The Fusion EAG members focus their discussion on the implementation and orientation of the programme and its possible future role as an energy option. And, they underline, for a long term endeavour such as fusion RTD, part of the success of the programme lies in continued funding and support, which has made possible the construction and operation of JET and the participation in the international cooperation on the engineering design activites for ITER - the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor. In its Opinion of January 1999, the EAG 'endorses the general orientation of the European fusion programme, with its overall aim of developing the necessary basis for the future construction of an experimental reactor as Next Step. In order to be able to contribute to base-load electricity generation in the second half of the next century, fusion needs sufficient support to maintain this experimental reactor orientation'. Another important aim of the EU Energy RTD programme is to explore new concepts which will be important for economic prosperity and growth, which will promote cross border cooperation, economic development, safety and competitiveness. Indirect actions relating to controlled thermonuclear fusion are carried out, inter alia, under various multilateral contracts including the contracts of the Euratom-Fusion Associations, the EFDA agreement, and the international cooperation agreement between the Community, Japan, and the Russian Federation (and, until July 1999, the USA) concerning the engineering design activities of ITER. ITER is the international fusion community's 'Next Step' answer to finding how to harness heat from the same reaction that powers the sun and stars. The concept is based on the use of strong magnetic forces and electrical currents to confine light atomic nuclei and to heat them up by internal and external means until they fuse together in thermonuclear reactions thereby releasing energy. Fusion experts, like Vice-Chairman of the EAG 'Fusion' Professor D'haeseleer, believe that harnessing power from fusion reactions - which is emitting no greenhouse gases - could be one of the sources of energy in a future where fossil fuels are becoming scarcer and the earth ecological environment is possibly stronger burdened by the greenhouse effect. Since 1986 scientists and engineers from Europe, Japan, Russia, and the United States have collaborated extremely successful on an unprecedented scale to design ITER. But recently the project has been plagued politically by the financial scale it involves. Scientists and engineers estimated that about 6 billion euros would be needed to construct the full size version of ITER. But both the Soviet Union and Japan have suffered national economic crises and the United States has withdrawn from ITER mid last year. The international Fusion community's response has been to call for a new ITER design to continue on a more modest scale. The alternative they advise is called the ITER-FEAT. This experimental facility, they say, will be a about half-price, smaller scale attempt to achieve the 'Next Step' but would - although having reduced technical objectives - still satisfy the overall programmatic objective which is to demonstrate the scientific and technological feasibility of fusion energy for peaceful purposes. Europe is the world leader in fusion research and thus there is enough know-how in Europe to build such a facility, says Professor D'haeseleer. But the final decision on ITER-FEAT construction and on its site will also be based on financial and political considerations. While fusion research in Europe is funded both at national and European level, it is Community funding that strengthens the cohesion and coordination and that drives Community research efforts says Professor D'haeseleer. This support must continue, he urges: 'If energy is an issue, and many believe it is, and fusion research is energy related, the cost of the device is not exaggerated. Nobody can predict the future and it would be irresponsible to cut off a potentially successful line of research.' As to bringing the fusion energy option closer to the public at large, fusion is a complex concept, he continues, which is difficult to sell, also due to the quite abstract fusion plasma physics it involves, agrees Dr. Steinmetz, who liaises between the Fusion EAG and the European Commission. Professor D'haeseleer says that the EAG 'Fusion' is also looking into detail how to improve the communication between the fusion community, decision makers and the public at large. An inherent issue in fusion research is the long times scales involved. It can take many years before substantial results from new large experiments can be seen due to the relatively long design and construction times of such facilities. In the 1950s, scientists believed they would be able to harness power from a fusion reaction within decades. In reality though this clearly has not been the case. 'But fusion researchers have made enormous progress in the last 20 years', Professor D'haeseleer points out, highlighting scientists' achievements with the JET experimental facility in Abingdon, in the UK. Built in 1983, JET - the largest fusion device in the world - enabled the propagation of fusion reactions producing quite large amounts of power - although less than that invested to make the reaction go. Japanese researchers also recently were quite successful with a similar type of facility. To release more power than invested and to demonstrate the feasibility of a fusion power station, scientists need a machine bigger and more powerful than JET, capable of sustaining a burning plasma of fusion producing matter for about 10 minutes or longer. ITER-FEAT would be this machine: The Next Step. 'Building such a machine requires a wedding of technology and fusion plasma physics', says Professor D'haeseleer, 'and the continued reactor orientation of the programme is very important for developing fusion as a viable energy option'. Presently, fusion is preparing its funding request for the forthcoming Framework Programme. 'If there is a decision by the international fusion community to build ITER, the construction could begin in three to four years,' says the Professor, i.e. in the frame of the forthcoming Framework Programme. ITER-FEAT would be nearly 20 metres wide by 15 metres high and would be housed in a complex looking not unlike an electric power plant. It would take around ten years to build and another ten or so to be exploited, before the design of a demonstration project could be finalised. 'We are unlikely to see the first inroads of fusion power to the energy market for another 50 years', says the EAG Vice-chairman, 'and probably the only thing that could shorten this delay is a major energy crisis'. But he says that the EAG 'Fusion' fully supports that ITER-FEAT must be built, and preferably in Europe, to ensure that expertise in fusion science is not lost. If Community funding of fusion is not sufficient, some Member States might give up their efforts, and young researchers will be cautious about pursuing a career with no job opportunities. They will go elsewhere and the science competence will be lost, Professor D'haeseleer fears. 'Fusion research is not something you can put in the freezer because people will lose the knowledge', he says. 'It would be a major cost to reinvent fusion.' For now though, the EAG on fusion is pleased with the published results of research funded through the Framework Programme. 'Fusion researchers in Europe have been doing a great job, if you realise the complexities they've been facing', says the Vice-chairman. Presently, the fusion community's biggest challenge is persuading funding bodies and the public that their work needs continued strong support. The liberalisation of the gas and electricity market has brought the price of power down - camouflaging the actual enormous use of resources - and many people advocate that alternative energy sources like wind turbines and solar power will provide for all of our future energy requirements. But Professor D'haeseleer and his colleagues do not agree with this extreme view: 'The EAG's viewpoint is to invest in all potential energy options, and fusion could provide an important contribution to future base-load electricity supply. We are calling upon a European energy strategy including fusion as a future energy option', he said.