Administration Perspective on ITER and Fusion Energy

1. Administration Perspective on ITER and Fusion Energy Patrick Looney Assistant Director Physical Science and Engineering Office of Science and Technology Policy Executive Office of the President May 5, 2003

2. Statement by the President I am pleased to announce that the United States will join ITER, an ambitious international research project to harness the promise of fusion energy. The results of ITER will advance the effort to produce clean, safe, renewable, and commercially-available fusion energy by the middle of this century. Commercialization of fusion has the potential to dramatically improve America's energy security while significantly reducing air pollution and emissions of greenhouse gases. The United States will be working with the United Kingdom, other European Union nations, Russia, China, Japan and Canada on the creation of ITER. Today, I am directing the Secretary of Energy to represent the United States at the upcoming ITER meetings in St. Petersburg, Russia. We welcome the opportunity to work with our partners to make fusion energy a reality. January 30, 2003

3. Remarks by the President on Energy Independence And as we -- and I believe we can lead the world for creating a market for hydrogen. We're also going to work to produce electricity and hydrogen through a process called fusion. Fusion is the same kind of nuclear reaction that produces -- that powers the sun. The energy produced will be safe and clean and abundant. We've spent quite a bit of money, as the senators here will tell you, on whether or not fusion works. And we're not sure if it will be able to produce affordable energy for everyday use. But it's worth a try. It's worth a look. Because the promise is so great. So the United States will work with Great Britain and several European nations, as well as Canada, Japan, Russia and China, to build a fusion test facility and create the largest and most advanced fusion experiment in the world. I look forward to working with Congress to get it funded. I know you all have considered this in the past. It's an incredibly important project to be a part of. February 6, 2003

4. Elements of the ITER Decision • This is energy science not an energy technology. • The US is one player in fusion energy science. • A burning plasma experiment is “the crucial element missing from the world fusion energy science program” • ITER provides US scientists access to world’s most sophisticated burning plasma experiment.

5. Elements of the ITER Decision • If the US joins ITER it would not be as a lead player. • The US is absolutely neutral on the issue of site. • The US has no interest in hosting ITER. • As construction does not begin until FY06, the decision will be overall budget neutral until FY06.

6. Elements of the ITER Decision • There is not broader fusion energy initiative. • There is no agreed upon fusion energy development timeline. • The ITER decision will not imply endorsement of other fusion-related initiatives.

7. Next Steps • Working on C-175; permission to negotiate. Needs to be completed now. • Continue to maintain US neutrality on site. • Look for definition on how the Fusion Energy Sciences program will evolve as we move toward the ITER-era.

8. Questions • Do we know what scientific questions need to be addressed for fusion to be viewed as a viable (practical) energy source? How will we know we are there? • Do we have a definition of the most critical scientific questions that need to be addressed over the coming decade? (is there a relative priority?) • How does ‘time-to-market’ development plan map onto a risk-weighted portfolio? Can we see a risk-weighted portfolio with stage-gates (milestones, deliverables, check points) within the ‘time-to-market’ plan? • Example: Do we understand how the existing and planned (e.g. ITER) suite of facilities help to address critical scientific questions? Are there obvious gaps?

9. END