Martha Krebs Testifies at Fusion Hearing
Detailed information on the Department of Energy’s FY 1997 Fusion Energy Sciences Program will be available next week when the Clinton Administration sends its budget request to Congress. A good indication of what can be expected is found in the written testimony of Dr. Martha A. Krebs at the March 7 hearing of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment (see FYI #39.) Selections from her testimony follow:
“The Department’s fusion program is now at a turning point. It is changing from a goal-oriented energy technology program to a fusion energy sciences program.”
“Action by this Congress in 1995 gave the program, and this Administration, an unambiguous message -- there will be dramatically fewer dollars for the foreseeable future, and the long-term focus of the program must change to research instead of technology demonstration.”
“I fully endorse, and the Department has accepted, the program mission and goals proposed by FEAC. The Department’s fiscal year 1997 budget submission will reflect a program restructured in accordance with FEAC’s recommendations.”
“The substance of the program will change significantly in response to its new mission and goals. Significant features of the new program will include:"
“A plasma science initiative. We will significantly increase funding for basic plasma science, beginning in fiscal year 1997. This initiative will broaden the academic base in the field through outreach to institutions not now involved in plasma science and will include a Plasma Science Young Investigator Award program. Over the next five years, fusion program funding for basic plasma science is projected to grow to approximately $10 million.”
“Increased emphasis on alternative concepts. We will evaluate proposals to identify one or two small alternative concept experiments for construction. One that has already been favorably reviewed is the National Spherical Tokamak Experiment proposed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, and the University of Wisconsin to be built at Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory. We will also continue our program of cooperation on large alternative experiments in Japan and Europe.”
“A changed but continuing role for Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory. The FEAC report recommends the shutdown of TFTR, after exploiting its scientific capabilities, but emphasizes the need to maintain the technical infrastructure developed through decades of investment at the Laboratory.”
“The Department will shutdown TFTR in either 1997 or 1998.... By early 1997, we will have evaluated TFTR’s work-in-progress, with the assistance of FEAC, and will either begin facility shutdown in fiscal year 1997, or will complete a focused experimental program leading to termination in fiscal year 1998.”
“No large facility construction mortgages. With the termination of the Tokamak Physics Experiment, there are no longer any plans for large construction projects. Resources will be concentrated on increasing our fusion science knowledge base, construction of a limited number of innovative small experiments funded within an essentially flat budget, and an increased program of research in basic plasma science.”
“Leverage of program resources through international collaboration. We will continue to leverage our resources through international collaboration, which is an integral part of every facet of the fusion program. We will also remain an active participant in the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) Engineering Design Activities (EDA). The ITER is the only facility presently planned that will permit the study of the physics of long-pulse ignited plasmas, a key area of fusion science. We plan to be an active participant in the ITER EDA through its completion in July 1998. Failure to do so would damage our credibility as an international partner and specifically limit our access to facilities constructed by the much larger Japanese and European fusion programs. Continued participation in the EDA also maintains the option of participation in construction in a way consistent with U.S. program needs and financial limitations. Involvement in ITER construction would also allow U.S. industry to participate in the development of key fusion technologies at minimal cost. With these considerations in mind, the Department is beginning an interagency process that would lead to our participation in non-committal and informal discussions with our partners about ITER construction. As part of this approach, given the financial limitations, the Department will not seek to be the host of the ITER facility. In any event, international collaboration will continue to be integral to a restructured fusion energy sciences program.”
“Changed program governance. The Office of Fusion Energy Sciences will be reduced in size and reorganized. The FEAC will be renamed the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC), and its membership changed to reflect the scientific nature of the program.”
“Management of the transition of this program to a world-class fusion energy sciences program will be one of the Department’s greatest priorities in the coming year.”
