Wagner, F.Becoulet, A.Budny, R.Erckmann, V.Farina, D.Giruzzi, G.Kamada, Y.Kaye, A.Koech, F.Lackner, K.Marushchenko, N.Murakami, M.Oikawa, T.Parail, V.Park, J. M.Ramponi, G.Sauter, O.Stork, D.Thomas, P. R.Tran, Q. M.Ward, D.Zohm, H.Zucca, C.2010-11-172010-11-172010-11-17201010.1088/0741-3335/52/12/124044https://infoscience.epfl.ch/handle/20.500.14299/57664WOS:000284406600046This paper considers the heating mix of ITER for the two main scenarios. Presently, 73MWof absorbed power are foreseen in the mix 20/33/20 for ECH, NBI and ICH. Given a sufficient edge stability, Q = 10 the goal of scenario 2 can be reached with 40MW power irrespective of the heating method but depends sensitively inter alia on the H-mode pedestal temperature, the density profile shape and on the characteristics of impurity transport. ICH preferentially heats the ions and would contribute specifically with Q < 1.5. The success of the Q = 5 steady-state scenario 4 with reduced current requires discharges with improved confinement necessitating weakly or strongly reversed shear, fbs > 0.5, and strong off-axis current drive (CD). The findings presented here are based on revised CD efficiencies &#947; for ECCD and a detailed benchmark of several CD codes. With ECCD alone, the goals of scenario 4 can hardly be reached. Efficient off-axisCDis only possible with NBI.With beams, inductive discharges with fni > 0.8 can be maintained for 3000 s. The conclusion of this study is that the present heating mix of ITER is appropriate. It provides the necessary actuators to induce in a flexible way the best possible scenarios. The development risks of NBI at 1MeV can be reduced by operation at 0.85MeV.scenariotokamakheatingITERfusioncureent drivetext::journal::journal article::research article