Hazeltine said "The mission of the Fusion Energy Sciences program is to Advance plasma science, fusion science and fusion technology -- the knowledge base needed for an economically and environmentally attractive fusion energy source." He said, "Fusion researchers view their product as part of the mix of improved energy sources that will begin to dominate the global economy during the 21st century." He noted, "fusion offers a safe, long-term energy option with important environmental advantages."

Hazeltine said, "Fusion scientists need to understand plasma behavior, because any gas that is heated sufficiently to fuse is necessarily in the plasma state. Plasma physics is famous for its demanding complexity -- this is the primary fusion challenge. However, because plasma is so pervasive in the universe, understanding its rich and varied dynamics would be an enormous boon to several areas of science and technology. Thus the fusion quest is linked to numerous deep questions about the natural world."

Hazeltine testified, "Fusion progress over the past decade has been enormous, and exemplified by the production of megawatts of fusion power at laboratories in Oxford in the United Kingdom, and at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory in New Jersey. These advances (along with others that missed the headlines) have brought fusion research to a watershed: its central challenge is no longer to demonstrate that fusion reactors are feasible, but rather to show that they can be practical. The present focus of fusion research is to establish the scientific and technological reality of a fusion power source with operational features (including competitive cost and size) that would attract commercial investment."

Hazeltine said, "A class of experiments that is certain to advance scientific understanding, while bringing fusion closer to the power grid, comprises the so-called "burning plasma" experiments, in which fusion reactions are sustained at a relatively high level and for long periods of time. A burning plasma experiment can be said to create a star in the laboratory, allowing analysis of its behavior. Because of the scientific progress described previously, a burning plasma experiment is within our reach, and it could be constructed at lower cost and higher confidence than would have been possible a decade or so ago. The European community, Russia and Japan are expected to begin joint work on such experiments very soon, and they would welcome our participation. However, an effective US role in an international burning plasma experiment would require us to enter negotiations with the other participants very soon. It is another exciting opportunity that is threatened by limited program resources."

Hazeltine noted, "The fusion program has been examined in recent years by several independent agencies, including the President's Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), the Secretary of Energy's Advisory Board (SEAB) and the National Research Council (NRC), the research arm of the National Academy of Science. Although each panel had a somewhat different scope and purview, all came to similar conclusions about the value of fusion research. Thus SEAB remarks that "In light of the promise of fusion and the risks arising from increasing worldwide energy demand and from eventually declining fossil energy supply, it is our view that we should pursue fusion energy aggressively." PCAST describes fusion as "an attractive and possibly essential new energy source for this country and world" while the NRC states that "the quality of the science funded by the US fusion research program in pursuit of a practical fusion power source (the fusion energy goal) is easily on a par with other leading areas of contemporary physical science." Thus there is every reason for fusion scientists to feel very good about the importance and quality of their work."

Hazeltine noted that the US fusion program is "now funded at less than half its peak a few decades ago, US fusion research is increasingly constrained and threadbare." He said, "Compelling initiatives can be funded only by removing support from existing efforts, with the result of under-utilized experimental facilities and over-committed scientists." He said, "This issue also is recognized in the recent examinations of the program. The SEAB report states that "in light of the promise of fusion, the Task Force concludes that the funding is now subcritical," while PCAST remarks "there is a strong case for the funding levels for fusion...increasing from $366 million in FY1996 to about $860 million in FY2002." In fact fusion funding was severely cut in FY1996 and remains today at approximately $250 million." Hazeltine commented, "If a program is starved to the point at which it cannot attack its central challenges, it risks losing its driving force and its talent base. Because of the rapid scientific progress seen in the last decade, fusion research is not yet at that point. But the fear, expressed by outsiders and insiders alike, that fusion is heading in that direction is real and growing."

For a copy of his complete testimony, contact Richard Hazeltine (rdh@physics.utexas.edu).