Fusion Advisory Committee Considers the Future
Late last month, the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee spent two long days considering how to allocate steadily declining federal dollars for fusion research. Of immediate concern was the allocation of the FY 1997 budget of $230.1 million.
It is clear that the Department of Energy’s fusion program is going through some rough times. This year’s budget, after adjusting for inflation, is a cut of more than 40% from the FY 1995 budget. Presentations from scores of public witnesses, members of the advisory committee, and DOE officials made clear the difficulty the Office of Energy Research (OER) will have in spending this year’s budget.
One of the major objectives of this meeting, declared the committee’s new chair, John Sheffield, was ascertaining the degree to which DOE’s budget is moving in the general direction of the program’s new strategy (see FYIs #13-16.) In opening remarks, OER Director Martha Krebs described current and future budget constrains, calling for a stabilized budget (see FYI #141.) She spoke of the opportunity Japan now has for world leadership in fusion research.
Krebs was followed by N. Anne Davies, Associate Director for Fusion Energy Sciences. She described the shift in the program’s emphasis from energy to science, with an eye towards technology. The “urgency” which had characterized the fusion program in the past has diminished, she said, with a new long-term schedule as yet undetermined. Davies said the fusion panel will be asked to consider an ITER strategy and construction plan next January or February, with negotiations to follow during the summer.
Davies presented a “straw man” FY 1997 budget that was the focus of the meeting’s discussions. Under this proposed itemized budget, alternative concept physics and basic plasma science funding would increase as compared to FY 1996, while other budgets would decline. The ITER budget would remain the same. The over-all Fusion and Plasma Science budget would increase 2% to $147.4 million, and the Fusion Technologies budget would decline 19% to $66.9 million. Davies concluded her discussion about this proposed budget saying “I don’t like it,” remarking that all programs deserve greater funding.
Following these remarks, the advisory committee received oral or written comments from 23 individuals. On the second day, committee members were given time to respond to 18 questions that would form the basis for a briefing of OER Deputy Director James Decker and a subsequent letter (see FYI #148.)
A majority of the members felt DOE was responding to the committee’s previous recommendations, but that a vision of the future was lacking. The committee generally agreed the proposed FY 1997 budget did not represent enough change, and that the FY 1998 budget sent to Congress next year should clearly define how the program was different. Various changes in the proposed FY 1997 budget were suggested, with the committee recommending that DOE make the final adjustments. Money to pay for these adjustments might be made, the committee concluded, through economies in the tokamak experimental program.
