![[Plasma and Fusion Research]](/PFR/pfr_header.gif)
Plasma and Fusion Research
Volume 7, 2405119 (2012)
Regular Articles
- Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464-8601, Japan
Abstract
We analyzed several types of fusion reactors, tokamak (TR), spherical tokamak (ST), helical (HR), and inertial fusion reactor (IR) using physics, engineering and cost (PEC) code, which evaluates economic and life-cycle energy amount quantitatively. We compared the cost of electricity (COE) and the energy payback ratio (EPR) of each fusion reactors with those of fission power plant. Especially, we focus on the EPR of TR with several blanket and shield designs having scarce materials such as silicon carbide (SiC), vanadium alloy (V), and ferritic steel (FS). As the result, we found that the EPR of TR with SiC/LiPb blanket/shield model is the lowest. The COEs and the input energy of TR (βN = 4.0) and IR are lower than those of ST and HR. The COE of fusion reactor is two times higher than that of fission power plants. However the EPR of fusion reactor is as high as that of fission reactor.
Keywords
EPR, COE, tokamak reactor, helical reactor, spherical reactor, inertial fusion reactor, blanket
Full Text
References
- [1] K. Yamazaki and T.J. Dolan, Fusion Eng. Des. 81, 1145 (2006).
- [2] K. Tokimatsu et al., J. Plasma Fusion Res. 74, 54 (1998) (in Japanese).
- [3] S.W. White, UWFDM-1093, Fusion Technology Institute, University of Wisconsin (1998).
- [4] ARIES group, “ARIES-AT Engineering Design Parameters” http://www-ferp.ucsd.edu/ARIES/DOCS/ARIES-AT/ENG-BOOK/ (Last Update: January 4, 2001).
- [5] ARIES group, “ARIES-RS Engineering Design Parameters” http://www-ferp.ucsd.edu/ARIES/DOCS/ARIES-RS/ENG-BOOK/(Last Update: August 30, 1996).
- [6] Fusion Reactor System Laboratory, JAERI-M 91-081 (1991).
- [7] O. Amano, J. At. Energy Soc. Jpn 48, No.10, 759 (2006) (in Japanese).
This paper may be cited as follows:
Kanae BAN, Kozo YAMAZAKI, Hideki ARIMOTO, Tetsutarou OISHI and Tatsuo SHOJI, Plasma Fusion Res. 7, 2405119 (2012).