1 / 15

U.S. Industry Interests in ITER

This article explores the evolving interest of the U.S. industry in ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) and its potential impact on business growth, shareholder value, and fusion energy science. It also discusses industry perspectives on ITER project organization, procurement approaches, and the importance of industry involvement in negotiations.

theresaf
Download Presentation

U.S. Industry Interests in ITER

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. U.S. Industry Interests in ITER Presented at theFPA Annual Meeting 19 November 2003 Bob Iotti

  2. “Who” Was U.S. Industry?

  3. “Who” Now is Interested U.S. Industry?

  4. U.S. Industry Then and Now • Fewer Large Corporations • Drop-outs. • Consolidation. • Liquidation. • More Smaller Corporations • Industrial enthusiasm for fusion business has significantly waned – but this may dramatically change due to

  5. Extraordinary Administration Support Statement by Spencer Abraham, DOE Secretary, on 10 November 2003 – 20 Year Facility Priorities “So, let me now profile some of our top priorities … First on our list is fusion. The prospect of a limitless source of clean energy for the world leads with our commitment to join the international fusion energy experiment known as ITER.” Not since the early 1970s has there been such a supportive Administration policy on fusion energy. The implications are striking for Industry supporting fusion energy.

  6. U.S. Industry Objectives • Shareholder Value • Equity Appreciation and Profits. • Value Metrics • Business Base (Business Fit). • Business Growth into New Markets (e.g., Spin-offs). • New Skill Acquisition. • Business Image. • Fusion Energy Science Offers • Science. • Engineering. • Technology. • Applications.

  7. Fit of Industry Objectives and Fusion Energy Science

  8. Industry Interest in ITER is Unique in Fusion Energy Science • It is a Fusion Science and a Fusion Energy Project • It will be the first major fusion project in over 20 years. • It will absolutely require major Industry participation. • As an Energy Project, it will: • Enhance virtually all Industry Business Value Metrics. • Be professionally relevant to Industry (Engineering) staff. • Appeal to society in general and funders in particular.

  9. Industry Views on International ITER Organization and Procurement Approaches • What improvements, if any, does U.S. Industry advise for the ITER Project Organization and Procurement approaches? • Discussion of “Best Value” for the U.S. from the US Industry Perspective. • Potential impacts of Licensing and Regulatory requirements on U.S. Industry contributions • How can Industry best support the Negotiations in the context of the “likely” International ITER Organization?

  10. Possible Management Structure ITER Director General Parties Project Managers Configuration Control Board Deputy Director General Parties Resident Reps. Deputy Science Deputy Administration Deputy Construction & Integration Deputy Commissioning & Operations Deputy ESH&Q & Regulatory First decide on optimum organization to run project, then determine best way in which the Parties can interface and support the project.

  11. What is “Value?” • Obvious Metrics: • U.S. Cost = Full scope of R&D + Design + Fabrication + Installation + Check-out/Startup + Contingency. • Credit = kIUA’s assigned (or negotiated) by ITER. • “Best” is Cost = Credit. • Not Obvious: • Research participation may have linkage to type of contribution (not level) to construction activity. • Extent to which activity increases industrial capability in fusion and related technologies. • Extent to which activity builds a U.S. fusion technology work force.

  12. Industry Interest is Different than the BP PAC

  13. U.S. Industry Must be More Involved • In 1994, the DOE’s Fusion Energy Advisory Committee (FEAC) had 7 of its 15 members from Industry. Today the DOE Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) has 2 of its 17 from Industry. • From 1994 to 1998 there was an industry-organized independent Fusion Industrial Council, U.S. (FICUS) with members from 17 industries. • Until the U. S. withdrew from ITER, there was an ITER Industry Council (IIC), set up and managed by the U.S. ITER Home Team. • U.S. Industry now should decide how to increase involvement in ITER/Fusion advisory activities.

  14. Industry Support of Negotiations • Suggestion of the most “effective project organization” • Suggestions of the “most desirable” packages? • Development of industrial estimates? • Development of management plans? • Development of procurement plans? • Development of risk mitigation plans? • Liaison with Industries of other Parties? • Keep out of the way? • Other?

  15. Translating Interest into Involvement • Formally participate in the selection of preferred U.S. ITER procurement packages. • Needed are DOE request and form of Industry response. • Form a confederation of U.S. companies to: • Respond to DOE requests, • Offer specific and timely Industrial expertise to the U.S. and to the ITER Organization, and • Advise the U.S. Government on demonstrated industrial methods to achieve ITER project objectives. • Actively support the ITER in U.S. Government agencies. • Achieve these goals while avoiding Conflict of Interest.

More Related