Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Nuclear fusion stands as a promising avenue for achieving a sustainable and abundant energy source. Central to this endeavor is the development of effective pilot plants capable of demonstrating the feasibility of fusion power on a commercial scale. This paper provides a comprehensive evaluation of three leading magnetic confinement fusion configurations: the Advanced Tokamak (AT), Spherical Tokamak (ST), and Compact Stellarator (CS).The Tokamak, characterized by its toroidal shape and strong magnetic fields, has been the most researched and developed fusion device. The analysis focuses on the challenges related to maintaining stability and minimizing disruptions. Furthermore, the optimization strategies involving advanced materials, superconducting magnets, and innovative plasma control techniques are discussed to enhance the Tokamak's viability. In contrast, the Spherical Tokamak, a variant with a more compact and spherical design, promises improved current advancements including the handling of higher heat loads and magnetic field configurations. The Stellarator, with its complex, twisted magnetic field structure, eliminates the need for continuous external current drive, addressing some intrinsic issues of the Tokamak. By comparing these configurations, the paper identifies the relative strengths and weaknesses of each approach in terms of confinement efficiency, operational stability, and engineering feasibility. The evaluation is supported by recent experimental data, simulation results, and technological advancements. Finally, the paper proposes a roadmap for the future development of fusion pilot plants, highlighting the need for an integrated approach that leverages the strengths of each configuration while addressing their individual challenges. The synthesis of this evaluation underscores the importance of continued research, cross-collaboration, and investment in advanced technologies to realize the goal of practical and economically viable fusion energy. This comparative analysis aims to provide a strategic framework for policymakers, researchers, and engineers in the fusion community, fostering informed decisions and prioritizing research efforts towards the most promising fusion energy configurations.
Sharma et al. (Mon,) studied this question.