The attitudes of science policy, environmental, and utility leaders on U.S. Energy issues and fusion

This paper examines the awareness, knowledge, attitudes, and policy preferences of a national sampling of leaders from the science policy, environmental, and utility fields, and of congressional science staff members. Several conclusions emerge: First, a substantial segment of those polled already have some familiarity with the full range of issues about current energy policy. More specifically, there is also a substantial portion of the leaders who believe they have an understanding of the fusion process and who hold the expectation that fusion-based energy technology will be the primary source of electrical power fifty years from now. In this regard, then, we may conclude that there already exists a foundation or basis upon which policy leaders may build an expanded and improved understanding of general energy issues, and of the fusion process and related technologies. Second, the policy attitudes and orientations of the leaders appear to be positive. Utility leaders show a great deal of enthusiasm for the future prospects of fusion-based energy technologies, as do most science policy leaders. There is discernibly less enthusiasm among environmental leaders and the congressional science staff about long term prospects for fusion-based systems, but even among these groups there is still substantial support. Among all of the groups, there is a recognition that fossil fuel resources are finite and that it is imperative to plan now for the time when those resources will be gone or severely limited. In broad terms, there is already a forward looking perspective in regard to energy policy. Third, following a pattern similar to that found in regard to biotechnology, science policy and environmental organization leaders appear to rely heavily on printed media and to focus their trust and confidence on a small number of distinguished publications. We observe a two-step information process. In the first step, leaders use science magazines, news magazines, newspapers, and similar print media to become aware of emerging problems and issues. Once an issue has become visible, a second step of in-depth information acquisition relies heavily on colleagues and disciplinary and industrial organizations. Finally, the data suggest that there is broad leadership recognition of the importance of better understanding energy policy, long-term energy options, and associated technologies. There is virtual unanimity among leaders concerning the need to plan for a post-fossil-fuel period, and also a recognition of some of the short-term hazards and drawbacks to current energy technologies. There is a willingness among leaders to consider a wide array of technologies for the production of electricity, and a strong predisposition in favor of fusion-based nuclear technologies. At the same time, there is a recognition that these technologies are unlikely to be available for commercial use in the next 20 years and that the primary window of opportunity will fall somewhere between 20 and 50 years from now. Overall, the level of knowledge about energy related issues is higher than was anticipated at the outset of this project and the attitude patterns are more positive and optimistic than had been expected. However, it is evident that there are gaps in the backgrounds and technical vocabularies of a number of the leaders. While there is strong optimism that future energy technologies will be clean and commercially cost-effective, it is clear that a substantial portion of these leaders do not understand the mechanics of the fusion process or the nature of complex technologies such as lasers. As research in these areas continues over the next decade or two, it is important that industry, environmental, and science policy leaders understand the level of achievement that has been obtained and the remaining questions that need exploration and demonstration. The results of this survey would suggest that those who are involved in research laboratories have not adequately communicated with many of those who will participate in formulating the nation's future energy policies. For example, it would appear from these data that a significant portion of the leaders are at least a little foggy in regard to the differentiation between fission and fusion. It is therefore reasonable to expect that some of these leaders may generalize some of the difficulties experienced with fission-based systems to date when thinking about fusion technologies of the future. It is evident that, in communicating the basic scientific concepts and technologies to the policy leaders, efforts must be made to avoid confusion and to add clarity to subjects that are today not adequately understood.