Loading…

Report of panel 3: Concept improvement

The charge to Panel 3 was to look at the idea of concept improvements in the context of US DOE management of the magnetic fusion program. The panel suggested that if DOE were commited to the idea of concept improvement, it needed to overcome the existing impression it was not receptive to new ideas....

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of fusion energy 1992-12, Vol.11 (3-4), p.163-169
Main Authors: Dean, Stephen O., Ripin, Barrett H., Batchelor, Don, Berkner, Klaus, Ellis, William R., Gentle, Kenneth W., Kaye, Stanley M., Logan, B. Grant, Marmar, Earl, Navratil, Gerald, Ness, Norman F., Ohkawa, Tihiro, Siemon, Richard E., Steiner, Don, Weitzner, Harold
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c258t-f049078584c6c0e1d32fb3fc3fd0290a8a6d815a5e96dd1b095607459eaeb1b63
cites
container_end_page 169
container_issue 3-4
container_start_page 163
container_title Journal of fusion energy
container_volume 11
creator Dean, Stephen O.
Ripin, Barrett H.
Batchelor, Don
Berkner, Klaus
Ellis, William R.
Gentle, Kenneth W.
Kaye, Stanley M.
Logan, B. Grant
Marmar, Earl
Navratil, Gerald
Ness, Norman F.
Ohkawa, Tihiro
Siemon, Richard E.
Steiner, Don
Weitzner, Harold
description The charge to Panel 3 was to look at the idea of concept improvements in the context of US DOE management of the magnetic fusion program. The panel suggested that if DOE were commited to the idea of concept improvement, it needed to overcome the existing impression it was not receptive to new ideas. In part the long time scale for development of fusion energy, coupled with the rate of change of scientific programs and research based on emerging knowledge, means that in general the program will be much different ten to twenty years in the future. To be able to meet this changing direction, the US program must maintain an openness to look at promising alternative ideas, spend money on developing the ideas, and consider funding some to intermediate development levels. Stellerator research was offered as one alternative to consider in light of present international work. The panel urged supporting the development of new concepts and ideas, as well as continued support for plasma physics basic research.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/BF01059520
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>crossref_osti_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_osti_scitechconnect_6448417</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10_1007_BF01059520</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c258t-f049078584c6c0e1d32fb3fc3fd0290a8a6d815a5e96dd1b095607459eaeb1b63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkE1LxDAUAIMoWFcv_oLiwYNQfa_5aOJNi6vCgiB6Dmn6gpVtU5og-O91WcHTXIY5DGPnCNcI0NzcrwFBGlnDAStQNnVlpMFDVgAqUQFHfsxOUvoEAKOFKdjlK81xyWUM5ewm2pb8tmzj5GnO5TDOS_yikaZ8yo6C2yY6--OKva8f3tqnavPy-NzebSpfS52rAMJAo6UWXnkg7HkdOh48Dz3UBpx2qtconSSj-h47MFJBI6QhRx12iq_Yxb4bUx5s8kMm_-HjNJHPVgmhBTa_0tVe8ktMaaFg52UY3fJtEexug_3fwH8ABeJM4w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Report of panel 3: Concept improvement</title><source>Springer LINK Archives</source><creator>Dean, Stephen O. ; Ripin, Barrett H. ; Batchelor, Don ; Berkner, Klaus ; Ellis, William R. ; Gentle, Kenneth W. ; Kaye, Stanley M. ; Logan, B. Grant ; Marmar, Earl ; Navratil, Gerald ; Ness, Norman F. ; Ohkawa, Tihiro ; Siemon, Richard E. ; Steiner, Don ; Weitzner, Harold</creator><creatorcontrib>Dean, Stephen O. ; Ripin, Barrett H. ; Batchelor, Don ; Berkner, Klaus ; Ellis, William R. ; Gentle, Kenneth W. ; Kaye, Stanley M. ; Logan, B. Grant ; Marmar, Earl ; Navratil, Gerald ; Ness, Norman F. ; Ohkawa, Tihiro ; Siemon, Richard E. ; Steiner, Don ; Weitzner, Harold</creatorcontrib><description>The charge to Panel 3 was to look at the idea of concept improvements in the context of US DOE management of the magnetic fusion program. The panel suggested that if DOE were commited to the idea of concept improvement, it needed to overcome the existing impression it was not receptive to new ideas. In part the long time scale for development of fusion energy, coupled with the rate of change of scientific programs and research based on emerging knowledge, means that in general the program will be much different ten to twenty years in the future. To be able to meet this changing direction, the US program must maintain an openness to look at promising alternative ideas, spend money on developing the ideas, and consider funding some to intermediate development levels. Stellerator research was offered as one alternative to consider in light of present international work. The panel urged supporting the development of new concepts and ideas, as well as continued support for plasma physics basic research.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0164-0313</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1572-9591</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/BF01059520</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>290500 - Energy Planning &amp; Policy- Research, Development, Demonstration, &amp; Commercialization ; 70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY ; 700412 - Magnetic Confinement Devices- (1992-) ; 700490 - Fusion Technology- Economics- (1992-) ; ADVISORY COMMITTEES ; CLOSED CONFIGURATIONS ; CLOSED PLASMA DEVICES ; CONFINEMENT ; ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY ; MAGNETIC CONFINEMENT ; MAGNETIC FIELD CONFIGURATIONS ; NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS ; PLASMA CONFINEMENT ; RECOMMENDATIONS ; RESEARCH PROGRAMS ; STELLARATORS ; THERMONUCLEAR DEVICES ; US DOE ; US ORGANIZATIONS</subject><ispartof>Journal of fusion energy, 1992-12, Vol.11 (3-4), p.163-169</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c258t-f049078584c6c0e1d32fb3fc3fd0290a8a6d815a5e96dd1b095607459eaeb1b63</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.osti.gov/biblio/6448417$$D View this record in Osti.gov$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dean, Stephen O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ripin, Barrett H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Batchelor, Don</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berkner, Klaus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ellis, William R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gentle, Kenneth W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaye, Stanley M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Logan, B. Grant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marmar, Earl</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Navratil, Gerald</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ness, Norman F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ohkawa, Tihiro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siemon, Richard E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steiner, Don</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weitzner, Harold</creatorcontrib><title>Report of panel 3: Concept improvement</title><title>Journal of fusion energy</title><description>The charge to Panel 3 was to look at the idea of concept improvements in the context of US DOE management of the magnetic fusion program. The panel suggested that if DOE were commited to the idea of concept improvement, it needed to overcome the existing impression it was not receptive to new ideas. In part the long time scale for development of fusion energy, coupled with the rate of change of scientific programs and research based on emerging knowledge, means that in general the program will be much different ten to twenty years in the future. To be able to meet this changing direction, the US program must maintain an openness to look at promising alternative ideas, spend money on developing the ideas, and consider funding some to intermediate development levels. Stellerator research was offered as one alternative to consider in light of present international work. The panel urged supporting the development of new concepts and ideas, as well as continued support for plasma physics basic research.</description><subject>290500 - Energy Planning &amp; Policy- Research, Development, Demonstration, &amp; Commercialization</subject><subject>70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY</subject><subject>700412 - Magnetic Confinement Devices- (1992-)</subject><subject>700490 - Fusion Technology- Economics- (1992-)</subject><subject>ADVISORY COMMITTEES</subject><subject>CLOSED CONFIGURATIONS</subject><subject>CLOSED PLASMA DEVICES</subject><subject>CONFINEMENT</subject><subject>ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY</subject><subject>MAGNETIC CONFINEMENT</subject><subject>MAGNETIC FIELD CONFIGURATIONS</subject><subject>NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS</subject><subject>PLASMA CONFINEMENT</subject><subject>RECOMMENDATIONS</subject><subject>RESEARCH PROGRAMS</subject><subject>STELLARATORS</subject><subject>THERMONUCLEAR DEVICES</subject><subject>US DOE</subject><subject>US ORGANIZATIONS</subject><issn>0164-0313</issn><issn>1572-9591</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1992</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpFkE1LxDAUAIMoWFcv_oLiwYNQfa_5aOJNi6vCgiB6Dmn6gpVtU5og-O91WcHTXIY5DGPnCNcI0NzcrwFBGlnDAStQNnVlpMFDVgAqUQFHfsxOUvoEAKOFKdjlK81xyWUM5ewm2pb8tmzj5GnO5TDOS_yikaZ8yo6C2yY6--OKva8f3tqnavPy-NzebSpfS52rAMJAo6UWXnkg7HkdOh48Dz3UBpx2qtconSSj-h47MFJBI6QhRx12iq_Yxb4bUx5s8kMm_-HjNJHPVgmhBTa_0tVe8ktMaaFg52UY3fJtEexug_3fwH8ABeJM4w</recordid><startdate>199212</startdate><enddate>199212</enddate><creator>Dean, Stephen O.</creator><creator>Ripin, Barrett H.</creator><creator>Batchelor, Don</creator><creator>Berkner, Klaus</creator><creator>Ellis, William R.</creator><creator>Gentle, Kenneth W.</creator><creator>Kaye, Stanley M.</creator><creator>Logan, B. Grant</creator><creator>Marmar, Earl</creator><creator>Navratil, Gerald</creator><creator>Ness, Norman F.</creator><creator>Ohkawa, Tihiro</creator><creator>Siemon, Richard E.</creator><creator>Steiner, Don</creator><creator>Weitzner, Harold</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>OTOTI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199212</creationdate><title>Report of panel 3: Concept improvement</title><author>Dean, Stephen O. ; Ripin, Barrett H. ; Batchelor, Don ; Berkner, Klaus ; Ellis, William R. ; Gentle, Kenneth W. ; Kaye, Stanley M. ; Logan, B. Grant ; Marmar, Earl ; Navratil, Gerald ; Ness, Norman F. ; Ohkawa, Tihiro ; Siemon, Richard E. ; Steiner, Don ; Weitzner, Harold</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c258t-f049078584c6c0e1d32fb3fc3fd0290a8a6d815a5e96dd1b095607459eaeb1b63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1992</creationdate><topic>290500 - Energy Planning &amp; Policy- Research, Development, Demonstration, &amp; Commercialization</topic><topic>70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY</topic><topic>700412 - Magnetic Confinement Devices- (1992-)</topic><topic>700490 - Fusion Technology- Economics- (1992-)</topic><topic>ADVISORY COMMITTEES</topic><topic>CLOSED CONFIGURATIONS</topic><topic>CLOSED PLASMA DEVICES</topic><topic>CONFINEMENT</topic><topic>ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY</topic><topic>MAGNETIC CONFINEMENT</topic><topic>MAGNETIC FIELD CONFIGURATIONS</topic><topic>NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS</topic><topic>PLASMA CONFINEMENT</topic><topic>RECOMMENDATIONS</topic><topic>RESEARCH PROGRAMS</topic><topic>STELLARATORS</topic><topic>THERMONUCLEAR DEVICES</topic><topic>US DOE</topic><topic>US ORGANIZATIONS</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dean, Stephen O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ripin, Barrett H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Batchelor, Don</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berkner, Klaus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ellis, William R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gentle, Kenneth W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaye, Stanley M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Logan, B. Grant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marmar, Earl</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Navratil, Gerald</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ness, Norman F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ohkawa, Tihiro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siemon, Richard E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steiner, Don</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weitzner, Harold</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>OSTI.GOV</collection><jtitle>Journal of fusion energy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dean, Stephen O.</au><au>Ripin, Barrett H.</au><au>Batchelor, Don</au><au>Berkner, Klaus</au><au>Ellis, William R.</au><au>Gentle, Kenneth W.</au><au>Kaye, Stanley M.</au><au>Logan, B. Grant</au><au>Marmar, Earl</au><au>Navratil, Gerald</au><au>Ness, Norman F.</au><au>Ohkawa, Tihiro</au><au>Siemon, Richard E.</au><au>Steiner, Don</au><au>Weitzner, Harold</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Report of panel 3: Concept improvement</atitle><jtitle>Journal of fusion energy</jtitle><date>1992-12</date><risdate>1992</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>3-4</issue><spage>163</spage><epage>169</epage><pages>163-169</pages><issn>0164-0313</issn><eissn>1572-9591</eissn><abstract>The charge to Panel 3 was to look at the idea of concept improvements in the context of US DOE management of the magnetic fusion program. The panel suggested that if DOE were commited to the idea of concept improvement, it needed to overcome the existing impression it was not receptive to new ideas. In part the long time scale for development of fusion energy, coupled with the rate of change of scientific programs and research based on emerging knowledge, means that in general the program will be much different ten to twenty years in the future. To be able to meet this changing direction, the US program must maintain an openness to look at promising alternative ideas, spend money on developing the ideas, and consider funding some to intermediate development levels. Stellerator research was offered as one alternative to consider in light of present international work. The panel urged supporting the development of new concepts and ideas, as well as continued support for plasma physics basic research.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><doi>10.1007/BF01059520</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0164-0313
ispartof Journal of fusion energy, 1992-12, Vol.11 (3-4), p.163-169
issn 0164-0313
1572-9591
language eng
recordid cdi_osti_scitechconnect_6448417
source Springer LINK Archives
subjects 290500 - Energy Planning & Policy- Research, Development, Demonstration, & Commercialization
70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY
700412 - Magnetic Confinement Devices- (1992-)
700490 - Fusion Technology- Economics- (1992-)
ADVISORY COMMITTEES
CLOSED CONFIGURATIONS
CLOSED PLASMA DEVICES
CONFINEMENT
ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY
MAGNETIC CONFINEMENT
MAGNETIC FIELD CONFIGURATIONS
NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
PLASMA CONFINEMENT
RECOMMENDATIONS
RESEARCH PROGRAMS
STELLARATORS
THERMONUCLEAR DEVICES
US DOE
US ORGANIZATIONS
title Report of panel 3: Concept improvement
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T01%3A17%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-crossref_osti_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Report%20of%20panel%203:%20Concept%20improvement&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20fusion%20energy&rft.au=Dean,%20Stephen%20O.&rft.date=1992-12&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=3-4&rft.spage=163&rft.epage=169&rft.pages=163-169&rft.issn=0164-0313&rft.eissn=1572-9591&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/BF01059520&rft_dat=%3Ccrossref_osti_%3E10_1007_BF01059520%3C/crossref_osti_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c258t-f049078584c6c0e1d32fb3fc3fd0290a8a6d815a5e96dd1b095607459eaeb1b63%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true