Regular Articles

Full Text / References

Research on Economics and CO₂ Emission of Magnetic and Inertial Fusion Reactors

Kenjiro MORI, Kozo YAMAZAKI, Tetsutarou OISHI, Hideki ARIMOTO and Tatsuo SHOJI

Department of Energy Engineering and Science, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 466-8603, Japan

(Received 7 December 2010 / Accepted 6 May 2011 / Published 16 September 2011)

Abstract

An economical and environment-friendly fusion reactor system is needed for the realization of attractive power plants. Comparative system studies have been done for magnetic fusion energy (MFE) reactors, and been extended to include inertial fusion energy (IFE) reactors by Physics Engineering Cost (PEC) system code. In this study, we have evaluated both tokamak reactor (TR) and IFE reactor (IR). We clarify new scaling formulas for cost of electricity (COE) and CO₂ emission rate with respect to key design parameters. By the scaling formulas, it is clarified that the plant availability and operation year dependences are especially dominant for COE. On the other hand, the parameter dependences of CO₂ emission rate is rather weak than that of COE. This is because CO₂ emission percentage from manufacturing the fusion island is lower than COE percentage from that. Furthermore, the parameters dependences for IR are rather weak than those for TR. Because the CO₂ emission rate from manufacturing the laser system to be exchanged is very large in comparison with CO₂ emission rate from TR blanket exchanges.

Copyright (c) 2011 The Japan Society of Plasma Science and Nuclear Fusion Research

Keywords

tokamak reactor, inertial fusion reactor, COE, CO₂ emission amount rate, scaling formula

DOI: 10.1585/pfr.6.2405126

Full Text

PDF format (629Kbytes)

References

• [1] K. Yamazaki, S. Uemura, T. Oishi et al., Nucl. Fusion 49, 055017 (2009).
• [2] K. Yamazaki and T.J. Dolan, Fusion Eng. Des. 81, 1145 (2006).
• [3] S. Uemura, K. Yamazaki et al., Trans. At. Energy Soc. Japan 8, 34 (2009).
• [4] ITER Physics Basis Editors et al., Nucl. Fusion 39, 2137 (1999).
• [5] K. Yamazaki et al., Fusion Technol. 38, 147 (1992).
• [6] M.A. Abdou et al., Fusion Eng. Des. 23, 251 (1993).
• [7] T. Goto et al., Fusion Eng. Des. 81, 2785 (2006).
• [8] K. Tokimatsu et al., Nucl. Fusion 38, 885 (1998).
• [9] J. Sheffield et al., Fusion Technol. 9, 199 (1986).
• [10] R. Krakowski and J.G. Delene, Fusion Energy 7, 49 (1988).
• [11] Y. Kozaki et al., J. Plasma Fusion Res. 82, 817 (2006), 83, 3 (2007) (in Japanese).
• [12] H. Hondo et al., Energy requirements and CO₂ emissions in the production of goods and services: Application of input-output table to life-cycle analysis, Socio-economic Research Center, Y95013 (1996).
• [13] H. Hondo et al., Evaluation of Power Generation Technologies based on Life Cycle CO2 Emissions, Socio-economic Research Center, Y99009 (2000).
• [14] Y. Uchiyama, Life cycle analysis of power generation systems, Socio-economic Research Center, Y94009 (1995).
• [15] S.W. White, Net Energy Payback and CO2 Emission from Helium-3 Fusion and Wind Electric Power Plants, Ph. D. Thesis University of Wisconsin, UWFDM-1093 (1998).

This paper may be cited as follows:

Kenjiro MORI, Kozo YAMAZAKI, Tetsutarou OISHI, Hideki ARIMOTO and Tatsuo SHOJI, Plasma Fusion Res. 6, 2405126 (2011).