1987 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AUTHORIZATION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1986 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m., in room 2318, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Marilyn Lloyd (chairwoman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mrs. LLOYD. The Subcommittee on Energy Research and Production will come to order. Before we begin, I do ask unanimous consent that the subcommittee permit today's proceedings to be recorded and covered by the media, as well as other persons. [No response.] Mrs. LLOYD. Without objection, so ordered. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. The Energy Research and Production Subcommittee will receive testimony today from the Department of Energy on the fiscal 1987 budget request for the Magnetic Fusion Energy Program. In my opinion, there are three major interrelated issues confronting the U.S. Magnetic Fusion Program. The first concerns the ability of the Department of Energy to maintain a strong fusion effort in the face of the budget reduction proposed for fiscal year 1987. The second concerns the impact of the budget reduction on the emerging plans for an ignition experiment, and the third concerns the role of international cooperative efforts in developing fusion technology. With regard to the overall MFE budget issue, we are about to enter the third year of budget reductions for this program. There was, I believe, a consensus that the funding for fiscal year 1986 was inadequate to support the broad-based program which the DOE was attempting to maintain, and that a continuation of budget pressure would force a drastic reorientation of the program approach. Unhappily, the budget reduction of approximately 10 percent proposed for fiscal 1987 makes this course unavoidable. We realize that this situation has forced the Department of Energy to make some very difficult choices among scientifically excellent projects, and we must understand the nature of these decisions and their long-term impacts on the implementation of the MFE program plan. We must be concerned with the price that this continued withdrawal of support is exacting on our ability to maintain the out (1) standing team of scientific and engineering talent which has characterized the U.S. fusion community. While this talent is now looking toward other areas of national importance, such as the Strategic Defense Initiative which I support, ill-considered dislocations in this very real resource cannot but harm our national technological posture. With regard to the second issue, we are extremely interested in the results of the Department's efforts to assess the costs and the benefits of what I shall call a modest ignition experiment. In particular, we are anxious to know about the probable scope and the timing for such a device. I believe that the early demonstration of ignited fusion plasma will be the critical factor in providing the focus and the impetus necessary for the timely development of fusion energy. We simply cannot allow a complacency over our short-term energy outlook to weaken the pace of our efforts to provide longer term energy security. Finally, the MFE budget submission indicates an enhanced role for international cooperation in the development of fusion energy. We are all aware of the President's statement concerning cooperation with the Soviets in this field. It is important that we understand the proposed scope and the timing for these activities and the potential role of our close allies in such a joint effort. In this manner we can accurately assess both the potential benefits and the costs of proceeding with more ambitious international cooperation. It is certainly good to welcome you here today, Dr. Trivelpiece, and it's also good to see our good friend, Dr. John Clarke. Your written statements will be included in the hearing record but, before that, we do want to hear from my very distinguished colleague, the Honorable Sid Morrison, the ranking minority member on this subcommittee. Mr. Morrison. Mr. MORRISON. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, and let me add my voice in welcome to both of you. I look forward to your comments. I suppose we could say, "Ho, hum. This is just another authorization hearing on a subject we have heard before," and yet, if we just step back a ways and look at the potential for fusion, for harnessing the energy of the Sun, I can get my dander up again and I intend to. Unfortunately, while we can all dream about the limitless possibilities that fusion energy promises, we seem to be a long way away from the actual, practical fusion engineering technology. We are in sort of the same position we were a number of decades ago, during the dawn of controlled nuclear fission development. Since we are on the cutting edge of fusion development, it behooves us to discern the proper focus of a long-term R&D program. It is critical that we fashion a well-defined and focused mission for fusion energy development. The 1987 budget request appears to take a step in that direction by focusing on a toroidal confinement system. We must recognize the fiscal constraints, as our chairman has indicated, but we cannot afford to be shortsighted in our energy research. Fusion meets a long-term energy goal, and the budget request must be ex amined closely to ensure that reductions do not inappropriately restrict this research effort. Madam Chairman, I have respected your leadership in fusion energy and I am sure that we can, through all of this, fashion a prudent program that allows us to intelligently pursue development of this essentially limitless source of energy, even within the climate of fiscal restraint. I thank you for your courtesy. Mrs. LLOYD. Thank you very much, Mr. Morrison. STATEMENT OF DR. ALVIN W. TRIVELPIECE, DIRECTOR OF Dr. TRIVELPIECE. Thank you, Madam Chairman, members of the subcommittee. It seems I have been here quite a few times before, so there are some things I think we can avoid discussing, but I want to point out that Secretary Herrington appeared before the full committee last week, and he discussed the general budgetary circumstances in which we are working. I don't think it is necessary to repeat those arguments here. You know them only too well. Mrs. LLOYD. Well, your entire statement will be a part of the record. Dr. TRIVELPIECE. Yes, and rather than discussing those things, what I wanted to do was to make some general remarks and then turn to questions. I find it fascinating that we now stand on the threshold of realizing a goal that was established something like 25 years ago. In this year, 1986, we should see the creation, confinement, and heating of an ionized gas to the temperatures and densities that are required to demonstrate the scientific feasibility of controlled thermonuclear fusion. I am frequently asked the question, "When will we have fusion energy?" The answer always seems to be, "In about 20 years." Now it is sometimes joked about that this is almost a fundamental constant of the program, with the implication that no progress is being made, and I wanted to take this opportunity and occasion to comment on this question a little bit. What question really was being asked 25 years ago? It really wasn't when would we have a fusion-driven electric powerplant. Rather it was, could we create, confine, and heat a plasma to the right conditions for fusion to occur? The answer to that question is yes, we can. We can design, construct, and operate a magnetic confinement system that will create the conditions necessary for sustained fusion reactions. So the original question of 25 years ago has really been answered in the affirmative, but notice that in the meantime the implications of that question have shifted from scientific feasibility to technological feasibility. That is, now that we can produce the right kind of plasma, how long will it take to develop a practical device to generate energy? That indeed could take another 20 years. This of course depends on what priority the United States and other countries give to the development of fusion. In that regard, we have been discussing the next steps required to make progress, with other members of the Economic Summit. There is general agreement among this group that an ignition experiment followed by an engineering test reactor are the central next steps required to make progress in realizing the next goal of technological feasibility of fusion. The interest, as you noted, in possible international collaboration to do this has recently been stimulated by the Geneva Summit statement of President Reagan and General Secretary Gorbachev. The two leaders emphasized, and I quote, "the potential importance of work aimed at utilizing controlled thermonuclear fusion for peaceful purposes," and in this connection advocated "the widest practicable development of international cooperation in obtaining this source of energy, which is essentially inexhaustible, for the benefit of all mankind.' The irony in all this is that after all the hard work by scientists and engineers here in the United States and elsewhere around the world to get to this point, we find ourselves in the midst of an energy supply surplus that has reduced the determination to pursue alternate energy options with the same vigor as we did in the mid-1970's. This situation, combined with budget deficit pressures, has resulted in an administration request for 1987 that is about $50 million below the fiscal year 1986 conference level. This reduction, as you noted, follows the preceding 2 years of reductions and could not be digested and still have a program that addressed all the confinement approaches that might be desirable. As a result, we have had to eliminate the magnetic mirror program activities. This is not because there are any particular technical problems with that approach, or that the scientists and engineers working on the mirror effort have not performed in a satisfactory manner. It's quite the contrary. I believe that a superb job has been done in the design and construction of the mirror fusion test facility at Livermore, and it is indeed unfortunate that the budgetary pressures dictate that we not operate this splendid facility which has just been completed. To commemorate the completion of the construction of MFTF-B, a small dedication ceremony was held at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory recently. At that ceremony, a letter from Secretary Herrington was presented to Dr. Fowler who, as you know, is the Associate Director for Fusion at that laboratory. This letter really summarizes the situation really well, and I would like to read it and then turn to questions. The letter reads: Dear Dr. Fowler: First I want to extend my congratulations to you and your staff for a job well done in the design and construction of the mirror fusion test facility. The hard work, dedication, and hopes that go into this kind of effort are among the characteristics that make this country great. Second, I want all of you to know how much I regret the fact that, just as you complete this remarkable new facility, the budget pressures dictate that we must put it into standby and not operate it as you might have hoped. This is frustrating, and perhaps not the best use of our national talent and resources, but we must bring the deficit under control. |