program and met with success in industry supporis the existence of a ceriain similarity
between the two enterprises."
Technology Spinoffs from Fusion
Plasma research has produced important near-term applications. The use of plasma
processing in the development of high performance computer chips is playing a major
role in the rapidly growing semiconductor industry. Companies such as those
described by our recent Ph.D. student, and others in California, Texas and Massachu-
setts, are growing at an annual rate of 40-50%, and are creating hundreds of new,
high-paying jobs. A case in point is a young, fast growing, $30-40M/year company in
Massachusetts, started up by former members of the MIT Plasma Fusion Center.
Company "X" has become a leading manufacturer of systems and components used in
the production of advanced semiconductors, and also chemical vapor deposition (CVD)
diamond. Such diamond coatings are used to develop and manufacture tool coatings,
optical coatings, substrates for high performance electronics, and bearing seals. This
company is but one example of those created by ex-fusion researchers that have
become major tool and component suppliers to the largest semiconductor
manufacturers world-wide.
As an additional data-point, recently South-Korea has decided to invest hundreds of
millions of dollars near-term in building a world-class fusion program, so it will have
the trained manpower necessary to equip and operate its planned multi-billion dollar
microdrcuit chip fabrication facilities. According to a recent Wall Street Journal article.
1092
within a decade Korea plans to dominate the world markets by building semi-
conductor facilities, each costing $10 Billion. The useful lifetime of such plants is
expected to be only 3 years! We must conclude that investment now into plasma
sciences and technologies will be key to maintaining our lead in cutting-edge
semiconductor technologies (and hence quality jobs) in the 21st Century.
Another example of a growth industry being aided by plasma technology is the
development of plasma-assisted flat plate display windows for computers, large TV
screens, etc. Just last month a foreign owned manufacturer operating in the New
England area hired away one of our senior physicist in the MIT Plasma Fusion Center
to manage an R&D group working on developing such display windows. The US can
ill-afford losing such experts to our foreign competitors in new technologies; at the
very least, we must maintain a vigorous training program to replenish the inevitable
turnover of critical personnel in such selected areas.
At the MIT Plasma Fusion Center we are also performing research in a new area
which could have major applications in the relatively near term: environmental
technology applications of plasmas. Using plasmas provides substantial advantages
over conventional environmental technologies because they can be easily controlled
and can operate over a wide range of temperatures. One area that we are exploring
is the use of plasmas for treatment of waste. We are investigating special arc plasma
furnace processing technology as a means of vitrifying almost any kind of solid waste
and greatly reducing air pollution relative to incineration. We are also developing new
enviroiunental monitoring techniques and related technolo0es. In another program
we are using "cold plasma" processing to selectively destroy dilute concentrations of
contaminants in gaseous waste streams. Our experimental research has shown
promising prospects for commercialization.
Very recently we have also initiated a program to investigate the use of plasma fuel
converter devices to convert hydro-carbon fuels into hydrogen-rich gas. The
hydrogen-rich gas can be used in fuel cells and in internal combustion engines to
provide power with greatly reduced air pollution. While this work is at a relatively
early stage of development, it may contribute to the goal of reducing pollution from
automobiles. We hope that our research can provide the basis for new areas of
industrial development as well as improving the environment.
Summary
In summary, I would like to urge the distinguished Energy and Water Development
Subcommittee on Appropriations of the United States Congress: Please accept the
recommendations of the FEAC report of January 27, 1996, "A Restructured Fusion
Energy Sciences Program", and provide the recommended funding necessary to carry
out the restructuring of the U.S. fusion program. I sincerely believe that these
recommendations are in the Nation's best long term interests.
1093
Thursday, February 29, 1996.
RENEWABLE AND NUCLEAR ENERGY PROGRAMS
WITNESS
MATTHEW FREEDMAN, ENERGY POLICY ANALYST, PUBLIC CITIZEN
Mr. Myers. Mr. Freedman, we have about four minutes before
we have to go vote. Would you like to do it when we come back
after the vote or would you like to come back at 5 minutes until
2:00?
Mr. Freedman. In 10 minutes would be fine.
[Recess.]
Mr. Myers. We apologize for the delay we forced upon you.
Mr. Freedman. That is okay, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Myers. I am sorry for that, but we have responsibilities over
there, too, of course. We appreciate your understanding and pa-
tience.
Mr. Freedman. No problem.
Mr. Myers. We are pleased to hear from you now.
Mr. Freedman. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity
to testify today for Public Citizen on the fiscal year 1997 Energy
and Water Development Appropriations bill. I ask that my full
written statement be included in the record.
Mr. Myers. Your statement will be in the record, and you may
proceed as you would like.
Mr. Freedman. Government supported research and develop-
ment for renewable energy technologies represents a major success
story and will continue to play an important role through the
1990s. Programs administered by the Department of Energy over
the last several years have led to lower capital and operating costs,
improvements in reliability and the sustained growth of a domestic
renewable energy industry.
Thirty percent reductions in renewable energy research and de-
velopment for fiscal year 1996 made by this committee were exces-
sive and unwarranted. Public Citizen supports restoring funding to
fiscal year 1995 enacted levels of $340 million for solar and renew-
ables and an additional $51 million for electric energy systems,
storage, policy and management.
Solar energy technologies are poised to grow substantially over
the next decade. For photovoltaics. Federal research has brought
down module cost from over $6 a watt in 1991 to under $4.50 a
watt today. Though DOE's programs to improve manufacturing
technologies have yielded impressive results, more needs to be done
on thin film research and development, on working with manufac-
turers through the PV Manufacturing Technology program and by
deploying photovoltaics collaboratively with utilities in the PV-
COMPACT program.
Solar hot water systems today provide enough energy to supply
the water heating needs of about 1,8 million households. The Fed-
eral solar hot water program is directed towards cost-shared initia-
tives with the solar industry and potential end users to help the
industry attract private capital and scale up manufacturing,
achieve economies of scale and lower production costs.
1094
Other important DOE solar research includes the development of
central receiver plants, or "power towers", like the Solar Two
project in the California desert and work on the dish-engine pro-
gram, a highly leveraged private sector effort to develop new modu-
lar, cost-effective systems that can be used to generate solar elec-
tricity.
Since the early 1980s, the cost of wind-generated electricity has
dropped by more than 80 percent and new utility-scale wind
projects are being built for as low as 3.9 cents a kilowatt hour. Ex-
isting wind projects comprise almost 1,750 megawatts and satisfy
electricity needs of almost 300,000 households.
With continued DOE support, costs are projected to drop to as
low as 2.5 cents per kilowatt hour by the year 2000 for sites with
good wind resources. DOE's applied research in aerodynamics,
blade design, fatigue damage prediction and structural reliability
at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Sandia National
Laboratory will help the wind industry to reach this goal.
Another key element of DOE's effort includes the next-generation
wind turbine program to develop and test larger turbines for both
domestic and export markets.
DOE's support of geothermal energy has helped to lower costs
from 12 cents a kilowatt hour to less than 6 cents a kilowatt hour
today with more than 2,100 megawatts of installed capacity in the
United States. Despite growth in the number of geothermal
projects and declining costs, domestic companies need further as-
sistance to move forward and compete with the low prices of fossil
fuels at home and competition from foreign companies in overseas
markets.
DOE needs to do more research and development on new drilling
technologies and on mapping subsurface variations in geology and
geochemistry. Also important is DOE's support for direct use geo-
thermal applications and collaborative deployment efforts for geo-
thermal heat pumps.
Biomass energy technologies are poised to provide major benefits
to the Nation in the coming decade as well. Developments in DOE's
biofuels research will allow the use of cellulostic biomass for etha-
nol production. Research on whole tree burning, advanced gasifiers
and advanced biogas turbines will help bioenergy to successfully
compete in cogeneration markets. Biogas utilization efforts at DOE
are also of critical importance and tie in with programs under the
Climate Change Action Plan to reduce methane emissions. In par-
ticular, Public Citizen urges that priority be given to DOE's re-
gional biomass energy programs. The regional programs work with
industry across the country to deploy cost-effective technologies and
provide a vital link between the research community and users of
these emerging technologies.
Public Citizen also urges this committee not to renew support in
fiscal year 1997 for DOE's Advanced Lightwater Reactor Program,
which funds collaboration with the Advanced Reactor Corporation
to design, engineer and obtain regulatory approval for a new gen-
eration of evolutionary nuclear reactor designs. Between fiscal year
1992 and 1996, DOE has provided over $275 million to this consor-
tium. The ALWR program should be complete at the end of fiscal
year 1996 when DOE's contract with the Advanced Reactor Cor-
1095
poration for first-of-a-kind engineering expires and the two lead de-
signs receive final design certification fi-om the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
Continuing the ALWR program would violate authorization of
the Energy Policy Act which explicitly states that design certifi-
cation support should only be provided for designs that "can be cer-
tified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by no later than the
end of fiscal year 1996."
Chairman Myers, during last year's Floor debate on an amend-
ment to terminate this program, you yourself recognized this issue
and expressed concern that "it would be a terrible mistake today
for our government to renege in the commitment of the fifth year
of a 5-year contract when we already have four years invested."
Based on these comments, I assume that you would not support the
sixth year of a 5-year program.
After almost 5 decades of development and government support
and over $47 billion in real terms spent on the development of nu-
clear fusion technology, we feel that it is time for this industry to
fend for itself in the marketplace.
Additional concerns that we have with the pyroprocessing pro-
grams, fusion and radioactive waste are also included in the writ-
ten testimony.
Mr. Myers. Thank you very much for your testimony. Again, we
apologize for the long delay and are sorry the other Members have
other meetings during the noon hour. Thank you very much for
your testimony.
Mr. Freedman. That is quite all right, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Myers. Thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Freedman follows:]
Mr. Myers. The committee will stand adjourned until 2:00 p.m.
today.
1096
TESTIMONY OF
MATTHEW FREEDMAN
ENERGY POLICY ANALYST
PUBLIC CITIZENS CRITICAL MASS ENERGY PROJECT
TO THE
HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
ENERGY AND WATER SUBCOMMITTEE
FEBRUARY 28, 1996
1097
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I thank you for the opportunity to testify
today for Public Citizen on the fiscal year 1997 Energy and Water Development
Appropriations bill. I ask that my full written statement be included in the record.
Renewable Energy
Government supported research and development for renewable energy technologies
represents a major success story and will continue to play an important role through the
1990s. Programs administered by the Department of Energy over the last several years have
led to lower capital and operating costs, improvements in reliability and the sustained growth
of a domestic renewable energy industry.
Thirty percent reductions in renewable energy research and development for fiscal year 1996
made by this committee were excessive and unwarranted. Public Citizen supports restoring
funding to fiscal year 1995 enacted levels of $340 million for solar and renewables and an
additional $5 1 million for electric energy systems, storage, policy and management.
Solar Technologies
Solar energy technologies are poised to grow substantially in the next decade. For
photovoltaics, federal research has brought module costs from over $6.00/watt in 1991 to
below $4.50/watt today. Though DOE's programs to improve manufacturing technologies
have yielded impressive results, more needs to be done on thin film technology research, on
working with manufacturers through the PV Manufacturing Technology (PVMaT) program
and by deploying photovoltaics collaboratively with utilities in the PV-COMPACT program.
Solar hot water systems today provide enough energy to supply the water heating needs of
almost 1.8 million households. The federal solar hot water program is directed toward cost-
shared initiatives with the solar industry and potential end users to help the industry attract
private capital and scale up manufacturing, achieve economies of scale and lower production
costs.
Other important DOE solar research includes the development of central receiver plants, or
"power towers", like the Solar Two project in the California desert and work on the dish-
engine program, a highly leveraged public-private sector effort to develop new modular, cost-
effective systems that can be used to generate solar electricity.
Wind Energy
Since the early 1980s, the cost of wind-generated electricity has dropped by more than 80
percent and new utility-scale wind projects are being built for as low as 3.9 cents/kWh.
Existing wind projects comprise almost 1,750 MW and satisfy the electricity needs of almost
300,000 households.
With continued DOE support, costs are projected to drop to as low as 2.5 cents/kWh by the
year 2000 for sites with good wind resources. DOE's applied research in aerodynamics, blade
design, fatigue damage prediction and structural reliability at the National Renewable Energy
1
1098
Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratory will help the wind industry to reach this goal.
Another key element of DOE's effort includes the next-generation wind turbine program to
develop and test larger turbines for both domestic and export markets.
Geothermal Technologies
DOE's support of geothermal energy has helped to lower costs from 12 cents/kWh in 1980 to
less than 6 cents/kWh today with more than 2,100 megawatts of installed capacity in the
United States. Despite growth in the number of geothermal projects and declining costs,
domestic companies need further assistance to move forward and compete with the low prices
of fossil fuels at home and competition from foreign companies in overseas markets.
DOE needs to do more research and development on new drilling technologies and on
mapping subsurface variations in geology and geochemistry. Also important is DOE's support
of direct use geothermal applications and collaborative deployment efforts for geothermal heat
pumps.
Biomass Technologies
Biomass energy programs are poised to provide major benefits to the nation in the coming
decade. Developments in DOE's biofuels research will allow the use of cellulostic biomass
for ethanol production. Research on whole tree burning, advanced gasifiers and advanced
biogas turbines will help bioenergy to successfully compete in cogeneration markets. Biogas
utilization efforts at DOE are also of critical importance and tie in with efforts under the
Climate Change Action Plan to reduce methane emissions. In particular, Public Citizen urges
that priority be given to DOE's regional biomass energy programs. The regional programs
work with industry across the country to deploy cost-effective biomass energy systems and
provide a vital link between the research community and users of emerging technologies.
Nuclear Energy
Public Citizen urges this Committee not to renew support in FY97 for DOE's Advanced Light
Water Reactor Program, which funds collaboration with the Advanced Reactor Corporation to
design, engineer and obtain regulatory approval for new evolutionary nuclear reactors.
Between FY 1992-96, DOE has provided over $275 million to this consortium. The ALWR
program should be complete at the end of fiscal year 1996 when DOE's contract with the
Advanced Reactor Corporation for First-of-a-kind engineering expires and the two lead
designs receive final design certification from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Continuing the ALWR program would violate authorization from the Energy Policy Act
explicitly stating that design certification support should only be provided for designs that
"can be certified by the [Nuclear Regulatory] Commission by no later than the end of fiscal
year 1996."
Chairman Myers, during last year's floor debate on an amendment to terminate this program,
you recognized this issue and expressed concern that "it would be a terrible mistake today for
our government to renege on the commitment of the fifth year of a five year contract when
1099
we already have four years invested." Based on these comments, I assume that you would
not support the sixth year of a five year program.
Contrary to the intern of the Energy Policy Act, the reactors developed under the Advanced
Light Water Reactor program will not be built in the United States. No new nuclear orders
have been placed since 1978, and this year's survey of utility CEOs performed by the
Washington International Energy Group found that 89% said that their company would never
consider ordering a nuclear power plant and only 8% believed that there would ever be a
resurgence of nuclear power. As of today, not one utility or company participating in this
program has committed to building a new reactor in this country.
Even the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) realizes that there are no domestic markets for new
reactors. In a letter to members of Congress last year, they admitted that "the ALWRs are
prime candidates for orders in Southeast Asia." NEI's newsletter Nuclear Energy Insight
wrote that "all three [ALWR] designers see their most immediate opportunities for selling
their designs in Pacific Rim countries." In fact, the first commercial General Electric
ABWR, a design supported under "first-of-d-kind-engineering", began operation in Japan
earlier this year. Asea Brown Boveri's System 80+, another ALWR design, has already been
offered to the Taiwan Power Company in response to their intemational bid specification.
Perhaps the most egregious aspect of the ALWR program is support for design certification
approval from the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This regulatory subsidy is quite
astonishing - one government agency paying for another agency's licensing fees on behalf of
General Electric, Westinghouse and Asea Brown Boveri. These companies should bring new
products to market and pursue regulatory approval without any additional taxpayer subsidies.
After almost five decades of government support and over $47 billion in real terms spent on
the development of nuclear power technology, it is time for this industry to fend for itself in
the marketplace.
Pyroprocessing
Last year, this committee created a new, unauthorized program and provided $25 million for
Plutonium pyroprocessing at Argonne National Laboratory that exceeded the Administration's
own request for support. I urge the committee to reconsider and terminate efforts to develop
advanced nuclear fuel reprocessing technologies.
The pyroprocessing program is an outgrowth of work on the Advanced Liquid Metal Reactor,
a nuclear breeder technology terminated by Congress in 1994. The pyroprocessing program
has no support from DOE's own office of Environmental Management, the only possible
customer for the technology. In a May 4, 1995 DOE memorandum, Howard Canter,
Technical Director of the Office of Fissile Materials Disposition, wrote that "[the office of
Environmental Management] indicates that its preference is not to use this technology."
Additionally, a 1995 National Academy of Sciences study on plutonium disposition raises
serious questions about the utility of continuing this program and states that "[pyroprocessing]
1100
has several disadvantages that the panel believes effectively rule it out as a serious competitor
for the near-term plutonium disposition mission." Furthermore, the NAS study found that
pyroprocessing technology "could be redirected to produce material with nuclear detonation
capability."
Continuing work on pyroprocessing will only increase waste management problems,
encourage other emerging nuclear nations to reprocess spent nuclear fuel and spur the growth
of international commerce in weapons-grade nuclear materials.
We urge the committee to eliminate funding for all pyroprocessing activities.
Fusion
DOE's fusion energy program consists primarily of three operating tokamak reactors and
plans, at this point, to build the $2.2 billion Tokamak Physics Experiment and participate in
the $13 billion International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor with Russia, Europe, and
Japan. We ask the committee to scale back funding for the fusion energy program to less
than $200 million in fiscal year 1997 and urge DOE to shift existing funds towards alternative
fusion research efforts that do not include the use of tokamaks. These efforts currently
receive less than 3% of the fusion budget.
Current fusion energy research leads to a technology which, even if successfully developed,
will be plagued by problems that make it an unlikely candidate for commercial electricity
production. Studies by the Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos National Laboratories cite
concerns about future tokamaks that range from enormous costs, complexity, unreliability and
radioactive waste production. In fact, the Electric Power Research Institute estimates that
deuterium-tritium tokamak reactors would generate more radioactive waste than the proposed
Advanced Light Water tlssion reactors. Given the current problems with handling and storing
these dangerous wastes, it is inadvisable to pursue a technology that would generate more
when alternatives are readily available.
Radioactive Waste Policy
Last year. Congress drastically cut funding for the Department of Energy's high-level waste
program, which is currently studying Yucca Mountain in Nevada as a potential permanent
repository for the nation's irradiated reactor fuel. For FY 1996. the program received $315
million, with an additional $85 million fenced off for centralized interim storage activities
should authorizing legislation pass. In contrast, the program received $522 million in FY 95.
Because of the manner in which Yucca Mountain was designated as the only candidate for a
permanent repository and specific technical problems with the site itself. Public Citizen has
long opposed the Yucca Mountain program and supports terminating appropriations for the
project. With billions already spent, the final price tag on a Yucca Mountain repository could
exceed $30 billion. For this reason, the Yucca Mountain project was on the list of
economically wasteful and environmentally destructive government programs targeted by the
"Green Scissors" coalition of environmental and taxpayer groups.
1101
Ending the program now is especially sensible if Congress does not intend to fully fund the