A 29-page report, "Congress and the Fusion Energy Sciences Program: An Historical Analysis," has been prepared by Dr. Richard E. Rowberg, Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress (CRS Report RL30417). Copies can be requested by writing to your Congressperson and requesting that he/she obtain a copy for you. This is the preferred method of obtaining CRS reports, so that members of Congress are aware of constituency interest in CRS report topics.

An early version of the report was summarized by Dr. Rowberg at Fusion Power Associates annual meeting and symposium, October 19-21, 1999 in Washington, DC. The report reviews and analyzes the 42-year history of congressional deliberations over funding of the magnetic fusion research and development program and "provides the basis for an assessment about how the program might fare in the future as it proceeds in the direction of developing a long-term energy source from fusion." A series of questions are posed "that Congress may wish to address in determining the program's future." The complete budget history of congressional appropriations is provided in an appendix.

The report states, "Currently, there appears to be clear congressional support for the fusion program as it now exists. As long as the fusion program remains primarily focused on fusion science and does not request significant increases in its budget, Congress probably will support the program. The program, however, very likely cannot continue at its current level indefinitely if progress towards a fusion power reactor is to be made. At some point, larger machines are likely to be needed if promising concepts are to be tested and additional funds are likely too be requested. How Congress will react to such a request depends on factors that are uncertain at this time."

Rowberg states that several themes emerge from his analysis:

1. Continuing (congressional) support for the goals of fusion research,
2. Recognition of the long time needed to reach the goal of fusion energy,
3. Uncertainty about the time needed to reach program goals,
4. (The need for) larger and more complex facilities,
5. International fusion research competition and cooperation,
6. Federal budget contraints,
7. Relation to the nation's energy situation,
8. Debate over program focus -- science vs. energy, and
9. The role of alternative concept research.

Each of these is discussed in the report.

The report poses and discusses six questions:

1. Is U.S. fusion research a science or an energy program,
2. If fusion research is a science program, will it be sustained,
3. As an energy program, how long can fusion research be sustained,
4. What will happen when larger facilities are requested,
5. What would be the role of international collaboration, and
6. Under what conditions might U.S. fusion research be expanded?

In discussing the last question, Rowberg suggests that key factors could be "an upsurge of concern about the nation's long-term energy future ... a sharp upturn in concern about global climate change ... (or) the possibility of a substantial advance in achieving fusion power by Europe or Japan." In any of these circumstances, Rowberg opines, "Congress might act to accelerate the U. S. program to try and catch up." He notes that the current fusion program, "with its dual goals of science and energy" reflects "congressional decisions." "Yet, in many ways," he states, "the program is in an unstable state. It cannot remain as is and hope to achieve its goals."

For further information, contact Dick Rowberg (drowberg@crs.loc.gov).