Wednesday, 23 July 2014
masthead+quote+image
Advanced search

ITER nuclear fusion reactor design receives approval

Engineers planning the world’s largest nuclear fusion reactor have completed designs for the system’s most technically challenging component, known as the ‘blanket’.

The team at ITER based in southern France are hoping to build the first experimental nuclear fusion reactor to generate more energy than it consumes, with the aim of creating a power source that doesn’t produce carbon dioxide or large amounts of long-term radioactive waste.

The proposed blanket system that will line the inside of ITER’s doughnut-shaped 500MW tokamak reactor chamber overcomes the major challenge of how to absorb some of the 150 million °C heat that will be generated by the fusion reaction while containing the radiation produced.

ITER’s engineers say the blanket is the last major component to be designed and completion will allow the project to move to the main manufacturing stage, with procurement due to start later this year and eventual assembly of the blanket scheduled to begin in May 2021.

‘The blanket modules have to be designed to withstand electromagnetic loads on top of the already quite heavy thermal loads,’ ITER’s head of internal components, Mario Merola, told The Engineer. ‘This makes the design of the blanket system one of the most challenging of the whole ITER machine.’

The reactor will mirror the process that generates energy in the Sun: two isotopes of hydrogen are heated to extreme temperatures so they become ions (plasma) and then collided and fused together, releasing a fast-travelling neutron that transfers energy as heat.

The blanket is what will capture this energy. It will consist of 440 four-tonne modules covering a total surface of 600m2, each comprising a beryllium ‘first wall’ containing a water-cooling system to contain the plasma and absorb the heat, and a water and steel shield block to absorb the neutrons themselves.

Each first wall panel will be made from a number of ‘fingers’ attached to a central backbone through which the pressurised cooling water will flow, passing over an array of cooling fins and reaching temperatures of up to 150°C.

‘[This means] if during the manufacturing something goes wrong, at worst we reject the finger and not the whole part, which would be quite valuable,’ said Merola.

/m/w/h/TE_ITER_fusion_reactor1.jpg

Source: ITER

The experimental ITER reactor will produce around 500MW of power.

Six additional modules will be located in ports around the middle of the chamber that will test ways of releasing or ‘breeding’ tritium, one of the hydrogen isotopes used in the fusion reactor, by reacting the plasma with lithium.

Test ideas include breeding tritium from lithium held in ceramic material or from a liquid lithium lead compound. Future commercial-scale reactors would likely include tritium breeding on each of the blanket’s modules.

Previous designs for the ITER blanket featured two dedicated components for limiting the plasma but the engineers decided this would not provide enough flexibility and so redesigned the system so the entire blanket would act as a physical boundary to the plasma.

This meant each module had to be shaped to produce a curved surface so if there were any manufacturing misalignment the edges would not protrude with a sharp leading edge into the plasma and risk damage.

This issue also led the engineers to separate the shield block from the first wall so the more vulnerable, plasma-facing element could be replaced if needed without removing the entire module. Each panel is expected to be replaced at least once in ITER’s lifetime.

The first wall panels will need to absorb both the radiative heat on the surface at an intensity of up to 5MW/m2 – around 5,000 times more than that felt on a summer’s day outside in the south of France – and the volumetric heat transferred by the neutrons, which carry around 80 per cent of the energy produced by the fusion reaction.

The blanket also needs to cope with electromagnetic loads, forces exerted by magnetic fields interacting with the currents induced when the reactor shuts down abruptly.

Once the first wall has captured the neutrons’ heat, hydrogen and iron atoms contained, respectively, in the shield block’s optimal combination of water and steel will absorb the neutrons themselves.


Readers' comments (15)

  • I think that figure of 500 times a French summer's day should be 5,000 times.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • You are correct - it turns out the person we interview mispoke. Thanks for bringing this to our attention. The article has now been amended.

  • It all seems a bit Victorian and archaic to me
    Using all this technology to make a steam engine
    We should be developing a real break through in propulsion and generation with systems that do not involve combustion

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Fusion does not involve combustion.

  • this fusion project is about boiling water and making steam to drive turbines and will be unsuitable for domestic use in that the consumer will be reliant on a centralised electricity supply

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • following on from previous
    to avoid the steam raising cycle it should be possible to align the electrons in the plasma and then extract them into a electric cables
    so producing electricty directly

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I'm sure the Physics will work out - the Physicists say so. But from an engineering persepctice, this is a lot of cost and complexity to produce 500MW - I assume of thermal energy - not electricity?

    I can't see this being cheaper than Uranium based fission, and it's not really much cleaner than Thorium based fission.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Fusion does not involve combustion, but terry is right in saying that steam generation is a wrong move.

    There are many fusion concepts that can generate electricity directly from the reaction. They are smaller and theoretically more efficient.

    Tokamak has proven with JET that the concept doesn't work, I'm not saying the JET research was fruitless, but the reactors get bigger and bigger and we still don't have a net fusion gain, let alone net energy production.

    NIF is for weapons research, contrary to the political spin.

    With Tokamak, we're 50 years away from a working prototype.


    The funding needs to be spread around, with other concepts seeing greater investment.

    Fusion has the capability to fundamentally change the Energy supply.

    But we'll never succeed throwing all our eggs in one basket.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I'm curious about the use of fresh water. Is there anyway to reuse water in the cooling process?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What are the long term contamination issues from the radiation produced?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Kind of funny that I first heard about ITER by reading Alex Jones' Infowars.com site...and I think of myself as fairly well informed about science and technology...obviously not! Good to see several nations working together on this. I personally believe fusion is the ultimate answer to our energy needs. (duh...)

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @Martin, the tokamak reactors will be just as dangerous as expired fission reactors. They are bombarded with high energy neutrons for 20 years.

    There is much less radioactive waste, but the reactor building will take years to clean up, just as with fission.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page | 20 per page

Have your say

Mandatory
Mandatory
Mandatory
Mandatory

My saved stories (Empty)

You have no saved stories

Save this article

Digital Edition

The Engineer July Digi Issue

Poll

Should deepening tensions with Russia - and concerns over the impact of economic sanctions - influence the UK's energy policy?

Previous Poll

Europe's largest tidal array in the Pentand Firth off Orkney will eventually generate up to 86MW of power. What will it take for tidal energy to make an appreciable contribution to the UK's energy needs?

Read and comment on the results here