[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




 
                        FROM THEORY TO REALITY:
                        THE LIMITLESS POTENTIAL
                            OF FUSION ENERGY

=======================================================================

                                     
                                     

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                         SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE,
                             AND TECHNOLOGY

                                 OF THE

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                             JUNE 13, 2023

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-17

                               __________

 Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
 
 
 
 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

                                     
                                     
                                     
                                     
                                     

       Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov
       
       
                         ______

             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 52-450          WASHINGTON : 2023
     
       
       
       

              COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY

                  HON. FRANK LUCAS, Oklahoma, Chairman
BILL POSEY, Florida                  ZOE LOFGREN, California, Ranking 
RANDY WEBER, Texas                       Member
BRIAN BABIN, Texas                   SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
JIM BAIRD, Indiana                   HALEY STEVENS, Michigan
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida              JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York
MIKE GARCIA, California              DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina
STEPHANIE BICE, Oklahoma             ERIC SORENSEN, Illinois
JAY OBERNOLTE, California            ANDREA SALINAS, Oregon
CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee         VALERIE FOUSHEE, North Carolina
DARRELL ISSA, California             KEVIN MULLIN, California
RICK CRAWFORD, Arkansas              JEFF JACKSON, North Carolina
CLAUDIA TENNEY, New York             EMILIA SYKES, Ohio
RYAN ZINKE, Montana                  MAXWELL FROST, Florida
SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida              YADIRA CARAVEO, Colorado
DALE STRONG, Alabama                 SUMMER LEE, Pennsylvania
MAX MILLER, Ohio                     JENNIFER McCLELLAN, Virginia
RICH McCORMICK, Georgia              TED LIEU, California
MIKE COLLINS, Georgia                SEAN CASTEN, Illinois,
BRANDON WILLIAMS, New York             Vice Ranking Member
TOM KEAN, New Jersey                 PAUL TONKO, New York
VACANCY
                                 ------                                

                         Subcommittee on Energy

               HON. BRANDON WILLIAMS, New York, Chairman
RANDY WEBER, Texas                   JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York 
JIM BAIRD, Indiana                       Ranking Member
STEPHANIE BICE, Oklahoma             SUMMER LEE, Pennsylvania
CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee         DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina
CLAUDIA TENNEY, New York             ERIC SORENSEN, Illinois
MAX MILLER, Ohio                     ANDREA SALINAS, Oregon
TOM KEAN, New Jersey                 VALERIE FOUSHEE, North Carolina
                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                             June 13, 2023

                                                                   Page

Hearing Charter..................................................     2

                           Opening Statements

Statement by Representative Brandon Williams, Chairman, 
  Subcommittee on Energy, Committee on Science, Space, and 
  Technology, U.S. House of Representatives......................     9
    Written Statement............................................    10

Statement by Representative Jamaal Bowman, Ranking Member, 
  Subcommittee on Energy, Committee on Science, Space, and 
  Technology, U.S. House of Representatives......................    11
    Written Statement............................................    12

Statement by Representative Frank Lucas, Chairman, Committee on 
  Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives..    13
    Written Statement............................................    14

Statement by Representative Zoe Lofgren, Ranking Member, 
  Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of 
  Representatives................................................    15
    Written Statement............................................    16

                               Witnesses:

Dr. Kathryn McCarthy, Director, U.S. ITER Project Office
    Oral Statement...............................................    17
    Written Statement............................................    19

Dr. David Kirtley, CEO, Helion Energy
    Oral Statement...............................................    26
    Written Statement............................................    28

Dr. Wayne Solomon, Vice President, Magnetic Fusion Energy, 
  General Atomics
    Oral Statement...............................................    41
    Written Statement............................................    43

Mr. Andrew Holland, CEO, Fusion Industry Association
    Oral Statement...............................................    54
    Written Statement............................................    56

Dr. Scott Hsu, Senior Advisor and Lead Fusion Coordinator, U.S. 
  Department of Energy
    Oral Statement...............................................    63
    Written Statement............................................    65

Discussion.......................................................    74

             Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions

Dr. Kathryn McCarthy, Director, U.S. ITER Project Office.........    90

Dr. David Kirtley, CEO, Helion Energy............................    91

Dr. Wayne Solomon, Vice President, Magnetic Fusion Energy, 
  General Atomics................................................    96

Mr. Andrew Holland, CEO, Fusion Industry Association.............   103

Dr. Scott Hsu, Senior Advisor and Lead Fusion Coordinator, U.S. 
  Department of Energy...........................................   107

            Appendix II: Additional Material for the Record

Letters submitted by Dr. Wayne Solomon, Vice President, Magnetic 
  Fusion Energy, General Atomics

    Distinguished Professor William W. Heidbrink, Department of 
      Physics and Astronomy, UC Irvine...........................   114

    Professor Mark E. Koepke, Department of Physics, West 
      Virginia University........................................   116

    Professors Michael E. Mauel, Gerald A. Navratil, and Carlos 
      Paz-Soldan, Department of Applied Physics and Applied 
      Mathematics, Columbia University...........................   118

    Dr. Miklos Porkolab, Professor Post Tenure, MIT..............   119

    Professor William M. Tang, Plasma Physics Laboratory, 
      Princeton University.......................................   121

    Distinguished Professor George R. Tynan, Department of 
      Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, UC San Diego.........   123

Studies submitted by Mr. Andrew Holland, CEO, Fusion Industry 
  Association

    ``The Global Fusion Industry in 2022,'' Fusion Industry 
      Association................................................   125

    ``The Fusion Industry Supply Chain: Opportunities and 
      Challenges,'' Fusion Industry Association..................   156


                        FROM THEORY TO REALITY:



                        THE LIMITLESS POTENTIAL



                            OF FUSION ENERGY

                              ----------                              


                         TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 2023

                  House of Representatives,
                            Subcommittee on Energy,
               Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
                                                   Washington, D.C.

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:34 p.m., in 
room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Brandon 
Williams [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
    Chairman Williams. All right. The Subcommittee on Energy 
will come to order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized 
to declare recess of the Subcommittee at any time.
    Per agreement between the Chairman and Ranking Member of 
the Full Committee, I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Beyer of 
Virginia be allowed to participate in today's hearing. Without 
objection, welcome, Mr. Beyer.
    Welcome to today's hearing entitled ``From Theory to 
Reality: The Limitless Potential of Fusion Energy.'' Move to 
opening statements, I recognize myself for five minutes.
    Good afternoon. Today, the Energy Subcommittee will be 
examining the development of fusion energy as it progresses 
from scientific experiment to commercial reality. Our 
conversation will cover the Department of Energy's (DOE's) 
Fusion Energy Sciences program, as well as the Federal 
Government's public-private partnerships with the commercial 
fusion industry. Fusion is the energy of our Sun and the energy 
of every star in the universe. It has long been the dream of 
mankind to capture this unlimited clean source of energy to 
power our world. Given its potential, the Department of Energy 
has invested billions of taxpayer dollars in fundamental 
research and development (R&D) through the Fusion Energy 
Sciences Program.
    Today, fusion is more than just a science experiment. 
Commercial fusion is an engineering challenge similar to 
putting a man on the Moon. It's an economic opportunity even 
greater than the California gold rush of 1849. And it's a 
legislative opportunity more consequential to our Nation, as 
was the Louisiana Purchase or the Marshall Plan.
    I would like to introduce the topic and focus of today's 
hearing in a very personal way. I want to tell you of my own 
journey from being a fusion skeptic just a few months ago to a 
fusion optimist today. Many of humankind's greatest inventions 
are inspired by what we observe in creation. The Sun tells us 
that fusion is real, for example. Birds testify to the 
possibility of flight. Lightning reveals the power and 
potential of electricity. But consider this: In none of these 
instances do our modern solutions mimic the exact same 
mechanics of nature. Modern aircraft do not flap their wings. 
Lightning does not power our cities. It was up to the Wright 
brothers, Michael Faraday, Thomas Edison, Marie Curie, and many 
others to bridge the scientific discovery into the 
extraordinary modern world we live in today.
    Fusion research funded by our Federal Government, and much 
of it through this Subcommittee, has focused on understanding 
and recreating the fusion environment of the Sun. What if 
humankind's harnessing of fusion power did not require 
recreating the Sun here on Earth? What if commercial fusion was 
achieved through rapid iterative innovation and the 
entrepreneurial spirit like the Wright brothers in their 
bicycle shop? The large-scale government-funded fusion 
experiments like ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental 
Reactor) or the National Ignition Lab have unlocked invaluable 
secrets about the nature of fusion, plasma physics, 
superconducting materials, and much else. But the 
commercialization of fusion energy into reliable, affordable, 
and responsible electricity on the grid will be an 
entrepreneurial solution, aligning scientific engineering, 
environmental, and economic interests.
    As I have met with and evaluated the technology of private 
fusion companies over the last several months, I have become 
much more hopeful that fusion on the grid may be possible 
before the end of the decade. The incredible American spirit of 
commercial innovation is making progress at far greater speed 
and with far fewer resources than government projects, and I'm 
convinced that this Nation must dramatically increase our 
public investment in these private efforts to ensure that we 
are the first to harness the history-changing energy source.
    Over the last five years, Congress has prioritized funding 
for fusion energy science and has enacted comprehensive 
reauthorizations of DOE's programs, including the 2018 
Department of Energy Research and Innovation Act, the Energy 
Act of 2020, and, most recently, the CHIPS and Science Act. 
These strategic investments, along with the development of new 
public-private partnerships, has helped foster a growing 
commercial fusion industry in the United States. Private 
investment has grown to $2.8 billion last year, with 23 of the 
37 private fusion companies located here in the United States 
according to the Fusion Industry Association (FIA).
    In 2015, ARPA--E (Advanced Research Projects Agency--
Energy) launched the ALPHA (Accelerating Low-Cost Plasma 
Heating and Assembly) program to help find low-cost pathways to 
fusion with alternative approaches and has funded over $120 
million in fusion projects, including partnering with one of 
our witnesses today, Dr. David Kirtley.
    Just last month, the Department of Energy selected eight 
companies to participate in its new $46 million fusion 
Milestone-based development program. This program is modelled 
on the highly successful NASA program Commercial Orbital 
Transportation Services (COTS), which spurred the development 
of our space sector. This program is exactly what Congress can 
do and must do to ensure that the nascent fusion industry 
continues to flourish. It is critical for Congress to continue 
to provide robust funding for fundamental research in fusion 
and to fund essential public-private partnerships.
    As the Energy Subcommittee Chairman, I wanted to share with 
you my own journey from skepticism to optimism, and I will work 
tirelessly with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to 
bring U.S. fusion forward from fundamental research to fusion 
on the grid.
    I want to thank our witnesses for their testimony today, 
and I look forward to our conversation.
    [The prepared statement of Chairman Williams follows:]

    Good afternoon. Today, the Energy Subcommittee will be 
examining the development of fusion energy as it progresses 
from scientific experiment to commercial reality. Our 
conversation will cover the Department of Energy's Fusion 
Energy Sciences program as well as the Federal Government's 
public-private partnerships with the commercial fusion 
industry.
    Fusion is the energy of our sun and the energy of every 
star in the universe. It has long been the dream of mankind to 
capture this unlimited, clean source of energy to power our 
world. Given its potential, the Department of Energy has 
invested billions of taxpayer dollars in fundamental research 
and development through the Fusion Energy Sciences program.
    Today, fusion is more than just a science experiment- 
commercial fusion is an engineering challenge similar to 
putting a man on the moon; it is an economic opportunity even 
greater than the California gold rush of 1849, and it is a 
legislative opportunity more consequential to our nation as was 
the Louisiana Purchase or the Marshall Plan.
    I would like to introduce the topic and focus of today's 
hearing in a very personal way. I want to tell you of my own 
journey from being a fusion-skeptic just a few months ago, to a 
fusion-optimist today.
    Many of humankind's greatest inventions are inspired by 
what we observe in creation-the sun tells us that of fusion is 
real for example. Birds testify to the possibility of flight. 
Lightning reveals the power and potential of electricity. But 
consider this: in none of these instances do our modern 
solutions mimic the exact same mechanics of nature. Modern 
aircraft do not flap their wings. Lightning does not power our 
cities. It was up to the Wright Brothers, Michael Faraday, 
Thomas Edison, Marie Curie, and many others to bridge the 
scientific discovery into the extraordinary modern world we 
live in today.
    Fusion research, funded by our Federal Government and much 
of it through this Subcommittee, has focused on understanding 
and recreating the fusion environment of the sun. What if 
humankind's harnessing of fusion power did not require 
recreating the sun, here on earth? What if commercial fusion 
was achieved through rapid, iterative innovation and the 
entrepreneurial spirit like the Wright Brothers in their 
bicycle shop?
    The large-scale, government-funded fusion experiments, like 
ITER or the National Ignition Lab have unlocked invaluable 
secrets about the nature of fusion, plasma physics, 
superconducting materials, and much else. But the 
commercialization of fusion energy into reliable, affordable, 
and responsible electricity on the grid will be an 
entrepreneurial solution-aligning scientific, engineering, 
environmental, and economic interests. As I have met with and 
evaluated the technology of private fusion companies over the 
last several months, I have become much more hopeful that 
``fusion on the grid'' may be possible before the end of the 
decade. The incredible American spirit of commercial innovation 
is making progress at far greater speed, and with far fewer 
resources, than government projects. And I am convinced that 
this nation must dramatically increase our public investment in 
these private efforts to ensure that we are the first to 
harness this history-changing energy source.
    Over the last five years, Congress has prioritized funding 
for fusion energy sciences and has enacted comprehensive 
reauthorizations of DOE's programs, including the 2018 
Department of Energy Research and Innovation Act, the Energy 
Act of 2020, and the CHIPS and Science Act.
    These strategic investments, along with the development of 
new public-private partnerships, has helped foster a growing 
commercial fusion industry in the United States. Private 
investment has grown to $2.8 billion last year, with 23 of the 
37 private fusion companies located here in the U.S., according 
to the Fusion Industry Association.
    In 2015 ARPA--E launched the ALPHA program to help find 
low-cost pathways to fusion with alternative approaches, and 
has funded over $120 million in fusion projects, including 
partnering with one of our witnesses today, Dr. David Kirtley.
    Just last month, the Department of Energy selected eight 
companies to participate in its new $46 million fusion 
milestone-based development program. This program is modeled on 
the highly successful NASA program, Commercial Orbital 
Transportation Services, which spurred the development of our 
space sector. This program is exactly what Congress can do and 
must do to ensure that the nascent fusion industry continues to 
flourish.
    It is critical for Congress to continue to provide robust 
funding for fundamental fusion research and development, AND to 
fund essential public-private partnerships programs. As the 
Energy Subcommittee Chairman, I wanted to share with you my own 
journey from skepticism to optimism. And I will work tirelessly 
with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to bring U.S. 
fusion forward from fundamental research to ``fusion on the 
grid.''
    I want to thank our witnesses for their testimony, and I 
look forward to our conversation.

    Chairman Williams. I now recognize the Ranking Member, the 
gentleman from New York, for his opening statement, sir.
    Mr. Bowman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for convening this 
hearing here today, and thank you to our panel for--of 
distinguished witnesses for appearing before the Committee to 
talk about a subject that is not only fascinating, but also 
hopefully very significant for our clean energy future.
    Fusion energy is a topic that I personally have loved 
delving into since joining the Science Committee, and I know 
that many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle share my 
enthusiasm. It is no surprise why this clean energy source is 
attractive. The material used as fuel is practically infinitely 
abundant, it is safe, and it is clean. It does not produce 
greenhouse gas emissions or other forms of pollution, so fusion 
energy would be a real gamechanger for humanity.
    While we still have a lot of catching up to do in other 
aspects of climate action, the Federal Government has 
recognized the great potential fusion energy holds. Congress, 
through the acts of this Committee, has authorized sweeping 
Federal policy for fusion energy research and development in 
the handful of historic climate and energy bills passed into 
law over the past few years. And a few of those bills, along 
with annual appropriations, have provided significant funding 
for these activities. I am pleased to see that President 
Biden's budget request for Fiscal Year 2024 asked for funding 
very close to the authorization of appropriations providing in 
one of these bills, the Science Committee's landmark CHIPS and 
Science Act. All of these actions display broad support for 
fusion energy from the Federal Government.
    And we are seeing the fruits of our labor. There have been 
huge developments in the field over the past few years, which 
are bringing us closer to realizing the full potential of 
fusion energy. There have been advances in engineering and 
system performance, as well as the achievement of a burning 
plasma and fusion ignition. There has also been a flurry of 
private investment in fusion energy technology, and I know some 
of our witnesses here today can attest to that.
    But as we all know all too well, the impacts of climate 
change are devastating, and we must continue ramping up our 
ambition levels. Those of us from districts in the Northeast 
such as mine, and even those of us here in D.C. all experienced 
the smoke from the Canadian wildfires just last week. Everyone 
felt the effects from workers who had no choice but to continue 
working outside to commuters to children who could not play 
outside for recess. And this incident is not unique or 
isolated. The climate crisis is far-reaching, and it is an 
existential matter for all of us. So I will continue to 
advocate for robust funding for fusion energy and for the many 
other clean energy solutions that can be deployed today in 
order to protect our health, safety, and future. I urge my 
colleagues to do the same.
    I look forward to this discussion, and I yield back.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Bowman follows:]

    Thank you, Chairman Williams, for convening this hearing 
today, and thank you to our panel of distinguished witnesses 
for appearing before the Committee to talk about a subject that 
is not only fascinating but also, hopefully, very significant 
for our clean energy future. Fusion energy is a topic that I 
personally have loved delving into since joining the Science 
Committee, and I know that many of my colleagues on both sides 
of the aisle share my enthusiasm. It is no surprise why this 
clean energy source is attractive; the material used as fuel is 
practically infinitely abundant, it is safe, and it is clean--
it does not produce greenhouse gas emissions or other forms of 
pollution. So fusion energy would be a real game changer for 
humanity.
    While we still have a lot of catching up to do in other 
aspects of climate action, the federal government has 
recognized the great potential fusion energy holds. Congress, 
through the acts of this Committee, has authorized sweeping 
federal policy for fusion energy research and development in 
the handful of historic climate and energy bills passed into 
law over the past few years. And a few of those bills, along 
with annual appropriations, have provided significant funding 
for these activities. I am pleased to see that President 
Biden's budget request for Fiscal Year 2024 asks for funding 
very close to the authorization of appropriations provided in 
one of these bills--the Science Committee's landmark CHIPS and 
Science Act. All of these actions display broad support for 
fusion energy from the federal government.
    And we are seeing the fruits of our labor. There have been 
huge developments in the field over the past few years which 
are bringing us closer to realizing the full potential of 
fusion energy. There have been advances in engineering and 
system performance as well as the achievement of a burning 
plasma and fusion ignition. There has also been a flurry of 
private investment in fusion energy technology, and I know some 
of our witnesses here today can attest to that.
    But as we all know all too well, the impacts of climate 
change are devastating, and we must continue ramping up our 
ambition levels. Those of us from districts in the Northeast, 
such as mine, and even those of us here in DC all experienced 
the smoke from the Canadian wildfires last week. Everyone felt 
the effects, from workers who had no choice but to continue 
working outside, to commuters, to children who could not play 
outside for recess. And this incident is not unique or 
isolated; the climate crisis is far reaching, and it is an 
existential matter for all of us. So I will continue to 
advocate for robust funding for fusion energy, and for the many 
other clean energy solutions that can be deployed today, in 
order to protect our health, safety, and future. I urge my 
colleagues to do the same.
    I look forward to this discussion, and I yield back.

    Chairman Williams. Thank you, Mr. Bowman.
    We're pleased to be joined by the Chairman of the Full 
Committee, Mr. Lucas. Sir, I now recognize you for your opening 
statement.
    Chairman Lucas. Thank you, Chairman Williams.
    Today, we have an opportunity to explore the current status 
of U.S. research and development in fusion energy sciences, a 
cutting-edge technology that holds great promise for our energy 
independence, global competitiveness, and environmental 
stewardship. As many of today's panelists know, fusion R&D has 
long enjoyed bipartisan support on this Committee, and for good 
reason. It is exactly the type of high-risk, high-reward 
research that expands our fundamental knowledge of science and 
technology and pushes the limits of what's possible. The 
potential benefits of this fundamental research are tremendous, 
which is why it's so critical for DOE to prioritize it.
    That's why Chairman Williams and I, along with majority 
Members of this Subcommittee, sent a letter to the Secretary 
recently to ensure the Office of Science funds programs like 
fusion energy sciences are appropriately supported. Fusion is 
the ultimate clean and abundant energy source. If we are 
serious about our energy future, there is no technology that 
meets our needs better than fusion. Today, I look forward to 
hearing more about how the Science Committee can continue our 
support for these high-priority research activities both 
internationally and here at home.
    Since our last meeting on this subject in 2021, the U.S. 
fusion community has been hard at work. You've been busy. As a 
result of that work, we've seen several landmark 
accomplishments, like the achievement of fusion ignition at the 
Lawrence Livermore National Lab. There has been a surge of 
innovation in the U.S. fusion industry, including a first-of-
its-kind fusion power purchase agreement, and a favorable 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) ruling on the regulation of 
U.S. fusion reactors, just to name a few.
    Last summer, Congress passed the CHIPS and Science Act of 
2022, which, thanks to years of bipartisan Science Committee 
work, provides robust funding, essential policy direction, and 
strategic guidance for the U.S. fusion energy R&D. This 
legislation gives the DOE Office of Science, our national labs, 
and their industry research partners the resources they need to 
continue to excel. This is important because, despite many 
recent advances in the field, fusion energy science remains one 
of the greatest challenges in experimental physics today.
    We know there's much more work to be done to realize the 
promise of this emerging technology, and we cannot afford to 
lose the momentum that has been generated so far. To do this, 
we need to continue to take an all-of-the-above approach to 
advancing our shared fusion energy goals. We must support full 
funding for U.S. participation in ITER, the leading 
international research project for fusion energy. We must make 
major investments in U.S. fusion research programs and 
infrastructure. And we must continue to support productive 
partnerships with a rapidly growing U.S. fusion industry.
    In the immediate future, we'll be continuing our oversight 
of DOE's implementation of Science Committee direction in CHIPS 
and Science and the Energy Act of 2020. While I was pleased to 
see the President's budget request includes funding levels for 
some fusion energy science activities consistent with CHIPS and 
Science authorizations, I look forward to hearing DOE's plans 
to fully implement this legislation.
    And I want to thank our witnesses for their testimony today 
and for outlining their plans to make fusion energy a reality 
for the next generation. I look forward to a productive 
discussion.
    I thank you, Chairman Williams, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
    [The prepared statement of Chairman Lucas follows:]

    Today, we have an opportunity to explore the current status 
of U.S. research and development in fusion energy sciences, a 
cutting-edge technology area that holds great promise for our 
energy independence, global competitiveness, and environmental 
stewardship.
    As many of today's panelists know, Fusion R&D has long 
enjoyed bipartisan support on this committee--and for good 
reason. It is exactly the type of high-risk, high-reward 
research that expands our fundamental knowledge of science and 
technology and pushes the limits of what's possible.
    The potential benefits from this fundamental research are 
tremendous, which is why it's so critical for DOE prioritize 
it. That's why Chairman Williams and I, alongside majority 
members of this subcommittee, sent a letter to the Secretary 
recently to ensure Office of Science programs like Fusion 
Energy Sciences (FES) are appropriately supported.
    Fusion is the ultimate clean and abundant energy source--if 
we are serious about our energy future, there is no technology 
that meets our needs better than fusion.
    Today, I look forward to hearing more about how the Science 
Committee can continue our support for these high-priority 
research activities both internationally and here at home.
    Since our last hearing on this subject in 2021, the U.S. 
fusion community has been hard at work--you've been busy! As a 
result of that work, we've seen several landmark 
accomplishments, like the achievement of fusion ignition at 
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
    There has been a surge of innovation in the U.S. fusion 
industry, including a first-of-its kind fusion power purchase 
agreement, and a favorable Nuclear Regulatory Commission ruling 
on the regulation of U.S. fusion reactors--just to name a few.
    Last summer, Congress passed the CHIPS and Science Act of 
2022, which--thanks to years of bipartisan Science Committee 
work--provides robust funding, essential policy direction, and 
strategic guidance for U.S. fusion energy R&D.
    This legislation gives the DOE Office of Science, our 
National Labs, and their industry research partners the 
resources they need to continue to excel. This is important 
because, despite many recent advances in the field, fusion 
energy science remains one of the greatest challenges in 
experimental physics today.
    We know there is much more work to be done to realize the 
promise of this emerging technology, and we cannot afford to 
lose the momentum that has been generated so far.
    To do this, we need to continue to take an all-of-the-above 
approach to advancing our shared fusion energy goals.
    We must support full funding for U.S. participation in 
ITER--the leading international research project for fusion 
energy. We must make major investments in U.S. fusion research 
programs and infrastructure. And we must continue to support 
productive partnerships with the rapidly growing U.S. fusion 
energy industry.
    In the immediate future, we will be continuing our 
oversight of DOE's implementation of Science Committee 
direction in CHIPS and Science and the Energy Act of 2020.
    While I was pleased to see the President's budget request 
includes funding levels for some Fusion Energy Sciences 
activities consistent with CHIPS and Science authorizations, I 
look forward to hearing DOE's plans to fully implement this 
legislation.
    I want to thank our witnesses for their testimony today, 
and for outlining their plans to make fusion energy a reality 
for the next generation. I look forward to a productive 
discussion. Thank you, Chairman Williams, I yield back the 
balance of my time.

    Chairman Williams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I now recognize Ms. Lofgren, the Ranking Member of the Full 
Committee, for an opening statement.
    Ms. Lofgren. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the 
Ranking Member for this very important hearing and to each of 
the witnesses. This is an impressive panel, and I thank you for 
being here with us today.
    You know, this Committee, as has been mentioned, has played 
a leading role in building support and shaping national policy 
for fusion energy development, especially over the last several 
years. Now, the need to significantly improve support for U.S. 
fusion research is actually one of the reasons why I ran for 
Congress in 1994, and it's one of the major reasons why I 
decided to seek the Ranking Member position on this Committee 
after the retirement of Chairwoman Johnson last year.
    The support for fusion is strongly bipartisan, and it's 
also bicameral. Now, the substantial direction for modern 
fusion energy programs was provided in the bipartisan 
Department of Energy Research and Innovation Act of 2018 and 
expanded upon in the bipartisan Energy Act of 2020, and, as has 
been mentioned, in the CHIPS and Science Act that we were able 
to pass in the last Congress. I'm excited about the 
breakthroughs that we have seen in the last two years, 
including the achievement of ignition at the National Ignition 
Facility right in my backyard in December. And it's worth 
noting that Congress always stood up for the National Ignition 
Facility and saved it from the brink of extinction several 
times, so we were especially pleased to see that achievement.
    I'm glad that President Biden has recognized the progress 
we've made in his budget request for 2024, which includes over 
$1 billion for the Department of Energy's Fusion Energy 
Research Program. That's a 32 percent increase. Now, the 
request isn't perfect. I advocated for more. For example, it 
still does not include any specific funds to establish an 
alternative fusion energy concepts program that was authorized 
in 2018, and no President has asked for the funds yet. But 
taken as a whole, this budget request is a huge improvement 
over previous budget requests made by any President, whatever 
their party.
    We're now seeing in the race to commercial fusion 
mindboggling advances. So, as stated so clearly in the recent 
long-range plan developed by DOE's Fusion Energy Science 
Advisory Committee, now is the time to move aggressively toward 
the deployment of fusion energy, or to put it another way, if 
not now, when?
    So I want to give my apologies in advance because our 
hearing was disrupted by votes. It wasn't our fault. First, 
thank you for your patience in waiting for us to return, not 
only the witnesses but the audience. But I also have a speaking 
engagement a little after 3, so I'm going to have to leave, but 
I read the testimony of each one of you last night, and it's 
excellent. So I look forward to hearing the questions. The 
staff will fill me in. And thank you, thank you for all you've 
done, but even more, what you're going to do with your 
investors, with your scientists, and with the support of this 
Committee.
    And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Lofgren follows:]

    Good afternoon and thank you to the Chairman and Ranking 
Member for holding this very important hearing today. And thank 
you to this quite impressive panel of witnesses for being here. 
The Science, Space, and Technology Committee has played a 
leading role in building support and shaping our national 
policy for fusion energy development, especially over the last 
several years.
    The need to significantly improve support for our U.S. 
fusion research enterprise is actually one of the major reasons 
that I first ran for Congress in 1994, and one of the top 
reasons that I decided to seek the Ranking Member position of 
this Committee after Chairwoman Johnson retired last year. As 
you've all heard in the statements from Chairman Lucas, Ranking 
Member Bowman, and Chairman Williams, this support is now 
strongly bipartisan, and it is also bicameral.
    Substantial direction for the modern fusion energy program 
was provided in the bipartisan Department of Energy Research 
and Innovation Act of 2018, and significantly expanded upon in 
the bipartisan Energy Act of 2020. More recently, additional 
guidance and extensions of current authorizations were provided 
in the landmark CHIPS and Science Act, which the President 
signed into law in August.
    I am excited about the real breakthroughs we've seen in 
fusion over the last 2 years alone, including the monumental 
achievement of ignition at the National Ignition Facility in 
December. I'm also encouraged by the rapid growth we are now 
seeing in the private sector for fusion, and the major 
technical achievements that they are now bringing to our 
overall national effort. And I am especially encouraged that 
President Biden recognized this progress in his Budget Request 
for 2024, which includes over $1 billion for the Department of 
Energy's fusion energy research program, a 32% increase. Now, 
this request is not perfect. For example, it still does not 
include any specific funds to establish an alternative fusion 
energy concepts program as authorized in statute since 2018, 
and I plan to continue to press to address this critical gap. 
But taken as a whole, this proposal for fusion is a vast 
improvement over any previous budget request that I can recall 
in my time in Congress.
    All that said, let us be clear. There is still a lot more 
work to do. This Committee has built a solid legislative 
framework that would ensure that the U.S. is the world leader 
in this potentially transformational emerging industry through 
the bipartisan laws that I mentioned. And this Administration 
is now clearly ready to follow through on this direction. But 
if we don't translate this sizeable leap in support into actual 
appropriated funds this year, then our nation will have missed 
a major opportunity to meet this pivotal moment. And given the 
growing global competition that we're now seeing in the race to 
commercial fusion, I believe that we would all deeply regret 
that.
    As stated so clearly in the most recent Long Range Plan 
developed by DOE's Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee, 
``Now is the time to move aggressively toward the deployment of 
fusion energy.'' Or to put this another way: If not now, then 
when?
    So we should not take anything for granted. I am doing 
everything I can to make sure that going forward, our annual 
federal funding reflects this immense progress and the promise 
of fusion energy, and I invite you all to join me in this 
effort.
    Thank you and I yield back.

    Chairman Williams. Thank you. So let me introduce our 
witnesses. Our first witness today is Dr. Kathryn McCarthy, the 
Director of the U.S. ITER Project Office. Our next witness is 
Dr. David Kirtley, the CEO (Chief Executive Officer) of Helion 
Energy. Third is Dr. Wayne Solomon, Vice President of the 
Magnetic Fusion Energy at General Atomics (GA). Our next 
witness is Mr. Andrew Holland, CEO of the Fusion Industry 
Association. And our last witness is Dr. Scott Hsu, Senior 
Advisor and Lead Fusion Coordinator at the U.S. Department of 
Energy.
    I now recognize Dr. McCarthy for five minutes to present 
her testimony.

               TESTIMONY OF DR. KATHRYN McCARTHY,

               DIRECTOR, U.S. ITER PROJECT OFFICE

    Dr. McCarthy. Thank you very much. Chairman Williams, 
Chairman Lucas, Ranking Member Bowman, and Ranking Member 
Lofgren, and Members of the Committee, I want to thank you for 
this opportunity to discuss fusion and the ITER project. I'm 
Dr. Kathy McCarthy, Director of the U.S. ITER project at Oak 
Ridge National Laboratory. I'm a nuclear engineer and National 
Academy of Engineering member with over 30 years in the fields 
of fusion and fission, nuclear science, and engineering.
    The path to fusion energy has benefited from several recent 
record-breaking achievements, both here in the United States at 
the National Ignition Facility, as well as at the JET (Joint 
European Torus) tokamak in the United Kingdom. However, there 
remain major challenges that must be resolved to develop 
practical fusion energy. ITER is positioned to play a central 
role in addressing these challenges.
    For a practical fusion energy system, we must be able to 
produce and sustain a fusion power source in a safe and 
economical manner. At full power operation, ITER will produce a 
self-sustaining what we call burning plasma and demonstrate 
commercial-scale power over a long pulse lasting several 
minutes. The data, experience, and lessons learned from ITER 
will be valuable to a broad range of fusion approaches.
    As a research facility, ITER will offer tools and expertise 
at the scale of a specialized Department of Energy laboratory 
and will be a valuable test facility. For a path to fusion 
energy, not just fusion science, it will be essential to master 
both the science and technology required. ITER offers that 
opportunity, plus access to ITER intellectual property, and to 
a one-of-a-kind scientific facility for research on high-power 
plasmas.
    ITER's already providing us with practical experience 
designing, fabricating, and assembling a licensed fusion 
facility. ITER's developing fusion supply chains and working 
with industry to deliver to fusion's exacting requirements. 
ITER is building a diverse fusion workforce and is one of the 
largest training grounds for fusion in the world. ITER is 
providing information and experience to member nations. 
Information of particular interest to U.S. fusion industry 
includes plasma heating systems, plasma fueling, vacuum 
systems, superconducting magnet technology, and manufacturing 
qualification approaches. DOE is leading a process to 
facilitate U.S. fusion access to project information and 
intellectual property.
    ITER is a major contributor to U.S. competitiveness in 
fusion now and in the future. The United States has the 
advantage of participation in ITER, plus a strong public 
program in fusion science and engineering and an expanding 
fusion industry.
    The start of ITER tokamak assembly in 2020 and continued 
project progress shows us that it's possible to achieve 
engineering precision at the millimeter scale on large fusion 
components. Today, the international site is more than 85 
percent complete for civil construction, and hardware 
components are being delivered for assembly from all of the 
ITER partners.
    There have been changes and challenges at the international 
ITER project. After the passing of Bernard Bigot, Pietro 
Barabaschi assumed the Director General role in October 2022. 
Barabaschi is now leading organizational adjustments to the 
project to support success with tokamak assembly and to ensure 
appropriate integration with ITER partners.
    There have also been technical challenges. The project 
identified nonconformances in some vacuum vessel sectors that 
will require repair before assembly. The project also 
determined that manufacturing methods resulted in defects on 
thermal shield components. Both of these issues are being 
addressed.
    The ITER organization is working closely with the French 
nuclear regulator to determine an appropriate path for 
regulation. The project is a strong advocate of a stepwise 
approach since while ITER poses fewer hazards than a typical 
fission reactor, it is a new technology.
    Finally, the ITER organization is also engaged in 
preparation of an updated baseline and schedule to address 
delays from COVID and first-of-a-kind manufacturing and 
assembly. U.S. ITER is also engaged in updating its baseline 
and schedule. Recent U.S. ITER achievements include the 
delivery of two central solenoid modules with a third on the 
way for what's called the heart of ITER, a 60-foot-tall 
superconducting magnet at the center of the tokamak.
    Since its original baseline in 2017, U.S. ITER has 
completed over 100 deliveries to the ITER site. Overall, 60 
percent of all U.S. assigned in-kind hardware contributions 
have been credited by ITER. We're at an exciting moment in the 
path to practical fusion energy. The ITER project is 
complementary to other government fusion investments into 
efforts in private industry. We appreciate the support of the 
House and this Committee and all that they've provided to ITER 
and fusion.
    Thank you for this opportunity to share my thoughts with 
the Subcommittee, and I request that my written testimony be 
made part of the public record. And I welcome any questions 
that you may have. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. McCarthy follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
    
    Chairman Williams. Thank you, Dr. McCarthy.
    I now recognize Dr. Kirtley for 5 minutes to present his 
testimony.

       TESTIMONY OF DR. DAVID KIRTLEY, CEO, HELION ENERGY

    Dr. Kirtley. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, 
honorable Members of the Committee, my name is Dr. David 
Kirtley. I'm a co-founder and the CEO of Helion Energy. I'm 
honored to be here today to speak on behalf of Helion to 
provide evidence for the accelerating progress of the 
commercial fusion energy sector. Moreover, I'm humbled to be 
here along my esteemed peers for whom I respect and for their 
contributions they have and have continued to bring to the 
fusion community.
    Candidly, 20 years ago, I would not have imagined to be 
here to speak on the viability of commercializing fusion 
technology. I was, like many, a fusion skeptic. In fact, after 
many years of studying fusion I actually left the field for a 
while. I went to work in the aerospace sector building plasma 
thrusters because I did not see a clear path forward for 
commercializing fusion energy technology in my lifetime. The 
last time I was in this building was actually on behalf of 
plasma thruster technologies.
    But I am now here 10 years since Helion's funding with a 
commitment to deploy megawatts of fusion power on the grid by 
the end of this decade. We partnered with industry giants, 
Microsoft in consultation and a now growing team of over 165 
employees who are deeply inspired by our mission to enable a 
future of humanity with clean, widespread electricity.
    It's fair to say that I see the outlook for commercial 
fusion and the entire planet much more optimistically than I 
once did. Now, I believe fusion will be on the grid within a 
decade, and we have the potential to build a fusion power plant 
per day if we plan our policies right. Today, I hope to leave 
you with that same belief.
    In the last two decades, several things have happened to 
change not only my outlook, but the outlook of many in the 
fusion community. Scientists have been studying fusion since 
the 1950's, but it's not until the last two decades that many 
of our theories have been made possible by progress in outside 
industries such as power electronics, fiber optics, and 
computer simulation. This, paired with a growing swell of 
physicists and engineers and companies approaching the fusion 
challenge from varying perspectives, has helped the tens of 
private fusion companies in the United States and even more 
globally achieve remarkable results. In the last five years 
alone, my industry peers have increased the fusion output of 
their machines, demonstrated new magnetic technologies, and 
advanced--developed advanced computational models that bring us 
all closer to realizing the commercial fusion vision.
    I'm extremely proud that Helion has also been a part of 
that progress. Today, we've built six working fusion 
prototypes, each building on the successes and the failures of 
its predecessor. Our earliest prototypes were supported by 
research grants and SBIR (Small Business Innovation Research) 
grants from the Department of Energy Office of Science, setting 
private--setting records for temperature of private fusion 
systems. Also notably, the ARPA--E program, ARPA--E ALPHA 
program specifically, supported our fifth fusion prototype, 
which clearly demonstrated thermonuclear fusion.
    In 2022, our sixth generation fusion prototype--we call 
that one Trenta--was the first private fusion system to reach 
100 million degree fusion plasma temperatures, demonstrating 
there's a path to bring Helion's approach to fusion to the 
grid. Now, we're building our seventh generation system. We 
switched naming topologies and call that one Polaris, which we 
expect to demonstrate the production--the demonstration of 
electricity from fusion for the first time. Following Polaris, 
Helion will then work to build our first fusion power plant. If 
everything is successful, we'll be slated to deliver 
electricity to Microsoft as soon as 2028.
    So while I'm incredibly proud of the progress my team has 
made over the last 10 years, I know we still have a tremendous 
amount of work to do, as I'm sure it's true across the fusion 
industry. I believe in the power of human ingenuity, and I 
believe that we are now at a point where we can meet the 
physics and engineering challenges our field has worked so long 
and so hard to overcome. And I am convinced that this will 
happen this decade.
    But the fusion community cannot do it alone. We need the 
bold leadership and continued support from the U.S. Government 
while evolving our thinking around fusion deployment and 
policy. I call on this Committee to help realize a vision 
beyond the construction of a single power plant but an entire 
American fusion manufacturing industry that can get to 
constructing a power plant per day in the 2030's.
    To do that, we need to begin considering the next step for 
fusion and not just ask how can we further the fusion science 
but also ask how can America accelerate fusion's development 
and lead the world in its mass deployment? A great example of 
this thinking came from the NRC, which recently--with its 
recent determination to find a clear path for fusion regulation 
in the United States. Next, I see an opportunity for Congress 
to implement a three-part policy to support manufacturing, 
licensing, and then deployment of fusion at scale, which I look 
forward to discuss more with you over the course of this 
hearing today.
    In front of us is an enormous opportunity to change the 
world for the better. We are finally at an inflection point 
where the science and engineering can deliver on fusion's long-
held promise before the end of the decade. I hope the 
government will continue to offer its support for the industry 
as we scale up mass manufacturing and deployment.
    I want to thank all of you today for allowing me to be here 
and provide input on how I believe we can do that. Thank you 
very much.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Kirtley follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
    
    Chairman Williams. Thank you, Dr. Kirtley.
    I now recognize Dr. Solomon for five minutes, sir, for your 
opening statement.

        TESTIMONY OF DR. WAYNE SOLOMON, VICE PRESIDENT,

            MAGNETIC FUSION ENERGY, GENERAL ATOMICS

    Dr. Solomon. Thank you, Chairman Williams, Ranking Member 
Bowman, Chairman Lucas, Ranking Member Lofgren, and Members of 
the Subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me here today to speak 
before you. My name is Wayne Solomon, and I'm the Vice 
President of the Magnetic Fusion Energy Division at General 
Atomics, and I'm excited to join you today to share with you my 
optimism and excitement about fusion energy.
    GA, as you may know, has a rich fusion legacy dating back 
to 1955 when we began our pioneering innovations in atomic 
energy research. Now with over 12,500 employees and extensive 
global facilities, we're committed to driving fusion forward. 
Our expertise is evident in several key programs. We proudly 
operate the DIII-D National Fusion Facility, the largest 
tokamak in the United States, on behalf of the Department of 
Energy's Office of Science. This facility is a vital resource 
for the entire fusion community, serving over 650 researchers 
from nearly 100 institutes from the United States and around 
the world. It has been continuously upgraded to stay at the 
forefront of fusion research and provides hands-on experience 
for over 200 students and postdoctoral scholars.
    GA also has a dedicated team exploring fusion theory and 
computational science. They use powerful supercomputers like 
the Frontier system at Oak Ridge National Laboratory to gain 
insights into complex fusion dynamics. GA also plays a major 
role in the U.S. ITER project, responsible for building the 
ITER central solenoid, the world's most powerful pulsed 
superconducting magnet. This magnet can generate enough force 
to lift an aircraft carrier out of the water. As you heard from 
Dr. McCarthy a few moments ago, we have already shipped the 
first three of those completed modules from our facility, with 
the remaining four of them well underway and undergoing final 
fabrication and testing at our San Diego facility.
    GA is also an important contributor of other ITER systems, 
including control systems and measurement systems, that will be 
critical to support ITER's operation.
    In addition, GA supports research in inertial confinement 
fusion (ICF), which, as you heard earlier, achieved the first 
controlled ignition at the National Ignition Facility last year 
funded through the Weapons Stockpile Stewardship Program of the 
NNSA (National Nuclear Security Administration). GA's 
innovative technologies were key in this achievement, including 
the production of the tiny target capsules and the fuel tubes 
used to fill the capsules with fuel.
    Through a 25-year collaboration with the ICF program, GA 
actually supplies more than 12,000 components annually. 
Internally, GA has invested over $100 million in magnetic 
fusion research and development, focusing on advancements in 
magnets, materials, detectors, and control systems and other 
supporting technologies for fusion. We have introduced our 
vision for a pilot plant based on the advanced tokamak concept, 
enabling continuous steady state operation, which we continue 
to pursue.
    Our collaborations with national labs like Oak Ridge, 
Princeton, and Lawrence Livermore have been crucial to our 
progress. From the nanoscale to the macroscale, GA recognizes 
the importance of public-private partnerships and fully 
supports the DOE Milestone program and funding for startup 
companies to pursue commercial fusion.
    We also recognize the crucial role of the public program in 
getting fusion to where it is now and believe it will be even 
more essential to robustly fund public programs and facilities 
into the future.
    I want to express my gratitude to the Committee for its 
leadership in advancing fusion. The President's Fiscal Year 
2024 budget request of over $1 billion reflects your hard work 
and insight. However, achieving the goals of the bold decadal 
vision will require even greater and sustained investments.
    In conclusion, I would like to emphasize three key points. 
First, GA brings a unique combination of public and private 
sector experience in both magnetic fusion energy and inertial 
fusion energy. Second, private sector efforts can significantly 
accelerate progress toward the success of commercial fusion and 
the decadal vision. And third, the public programs supporting 
national labs, academia, and existing established facilities 
like DIII-D are vital for the future success of fusion.
    I thank you for the opportunity to testify. Mr. Chairman, I 
also have six letters from prominent fusion researchers that I 
would appreciate you inserting into the record of this hearing.
    I commend this Committee for its leadership in advancing 
fusion and look forward to your questions. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Solomon follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
    
    Chairman Williams. Thank you. Your letters will be entered 
into the record.
    I now recognize Mr. Holland for five minutes to present his 
testimony.

                TESTIMONY OF MR. ANDREW HOLLAND,

                CEO, FUSION INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION

    Mr. Holland. Thank you, Chairman Williams, Ranking Member 
Bowman, Chairman Lucas, Ranking Member Lofgren, Members of the 
Committee. Thank you all for the invitation to testify on 
fusion energy's limitless potential. I'm Andrew Holland, the 
CEO of the Fusion Industry Association. Our 37 member companies 
are dedicated to building the energy system of tomorrow on a 
timescale that's relevant to today's energy challenges. I'll 
refer you to my full statement in the record for all the 
details, but I'd like to give you an overview on why I'm so 
excited that business is getting serious about fusion.
    Unlike my colleagues on this panel, I'm not a scientist. 
Instead, my background is in public policy. I actually started 
my career answering phones for a Member of Congress about 100 
yards away down that way. I turned my career toward supporting 
fusion energy because it's a clean energy solution that can 
scale. When fusion power plants are widely available, we'll be 
able to bring clean, safe, sustainable energy to areas of the 
country and the world that have been left behind. And the link 
between energy and national security has never been clearer, 
especially after Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. Fusion 
energy will mean that geography no longer matters for energy 
security.
    So it's clear why there's bipartisan interest in fusion 
energy. The Biden Administration's bold decadal vision builds 
on the groundwork laid by the Trump Administration's Department 
of Energy and the bipartisan leadership of this Committee. So 
let me say thank you for working together over many years to 
support fusion research and development.
    The FIA's members include a wide variety of approaches to 
fusion power, magnets, lasers, pistons, or more that could 
drive fusion. That diversity manages risk. Thirty-seven shots 
on goal give us more chances of scoring than concentrated--
concentrating resources on just one approach.
    Our members include Helion Energy, whose CEO is testifying 
here with me, and 22 other American companies of the 37 
companies in total. They range in size from hundreds of 
employees and billions of dollars in capital to startups with a 
few people, seed funding, and a good idea. And I want to give 
you some idea about our affiliate members, our 72 affiliate 
members who include many of the companies who will be involved 
in the broader fusion energy economy. These range from small, 
specialized manufacturers like Keller Technology company in 
upstate New York or MetOx in Houston, to utilities like the 
Tennessee Valley Authority or Southern Company, who will be 
delivering energy from fusion power plants; Google, who needs a 
firm, secure, zero-carbon source of power for their vast energy 
demand; or firms like Westinghouse, Fluor, and Bechtel, who 
want to use their experience from other energy sources to 
support building a fusion-powered future. I could easily list 
other affiliate members ranging from NGOs (non-governmental 
organizations) to law firms to multinational oil companies.
    Because where fusion once was only a matter for publicly 
funded universities or national labs, it is rapidly becoming a 
part of key decisions and businesses around the world. Even in 
the 18 months since this Committee last held a fusion hearing, 
investment has more than doubled to nearly $6 billion.
    So everyone in fusion knows the one question we always get 
next. When? Technological breakthroughs are a function of both 
time and resources. Today, the addition of private funding, 
commercial innovation, and new public-private partnerships put 
fusion on an accelerated pathway. FIA members agree that the 
timeline of a decadal vision can be achieved. And I know this 
is extremely ambitious, but we need ambition. While American 
firms have an early advantage in the private fusion landscape, 
other countries are moving forward their plans for commercial 
fusion with Japan, South Korea, Germany, and especially the 
U.K. putting forward ambitious plans.
    As American allies and partners race toward fusion, China 
is also making key investments and hitting important 
milestones. China could win the race to fusion energy if the 
United States does not invest. So maybe the question is not 
when, but where.
    So what is to be done? A new Milestone-based public-private 
partnership will accelerate fusion by using public dollars to 
drive private investment in a pay-for-performance program, 
leading to fusion pilot plants. The announcement two weeks ago 
of eight new Milestone-based awards to fusion energy companies 
is the latest step in a process this Committee has long led 
toward. And this year, for the first time, the President's 
budget requested over $1 billion for fusion energy research, 
including new R&D centers and funding for the Milestone 
program. This funding is an important start. We urge you to 
support the budget request.
    Let me close by saying that this is exactly how the United 
States works best, public leadership on science and 
infrastructure paired with private capital and business 
innovation. In the decades to come when they write the book on 
how fusion was commercialized, what role will Congress have 
played? The opportunity is there for us to seize it.
    Thank you, and I look forward to your questions. Great to 
be with you all today.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Holland follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
    
    Chairman Williams. Thank you, Mr. Holland.
    I now recognize Dr. Hsu for five minutes to present his 
testimony.

                  TESTIMONY OF DR. SCOTT HSU,

          SENIOR ADVISOR AND LEAD FUSION COORDINATOR,

                   U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

    Dr. Hsu. Thank you, Chairman Williams, Ranking Member 
Bowman, Chairman Lucas, Ranking Member Lofgren, and 
distinguished Members of the Committee. It is an honor to 
appear before you today.
    The Department of Energy is grateful for your unwavering 
bipartisan support of fusion energy sciences R&D. As the DOE's 
Lead Fusion Coordinator, I will speak to DOE's recent efforts 
to advance a bold decadal vision for commercial fusion energy, 
which was first unveiled at a White House summit in March 2022. 
This bold vision leverages both the decades of public 
investments that brought fusion science to breathtaking 
heights, such as the achievement of fusion ignition last 
December, and the significant private capital being invested 
into U.S. fusion companies.
    Our key objective is to partner with the private sector to 
resolve the largest remaining scientific and technological 
challenges this decade with the ambition to realize an 
operating fusion pilot plant early in the next decade. If we 
are successful, fusion could contribute to achieving net zero 
carbon emissions by 2050 while enabling energy security, energy 
abundance, and strengthened U.S. technological leadership.
    Simultaneously, we will prepare the path to fusion 
commercialization by addressing a range of needs, including 
supporting the development of regulatory frameworks, building 
out supply chains, engaging the public to ensure energy and 
environmental justice, development of a skilled and diverse 
workforce, and much more.
    The many recent fusion scientific and technological 
advances suggest that practical fusion energy may now be less a 
matter of time than that of collective societal will. In the 
remainder of my statement, I highlight key DOE efforts over the 
past year to advance the bold decadal vision. First, just two 
weeks ago, DOE announced eight selectees under the Milestone-
Based Fusion Development Program, which was first authorized in 
the Energy Act of 2020 and reauthorized in the CHIPS and 
Science Act of 2022. This program is the primary mechanism by 
which DOE will partner with the private sector to accelerate 
fusion energy R&D.
    Modeled after the NASA program that enabled the commercial 
space launch industry and guided by recommendations from the 
National Academies report, ``Bringing Fusion to the U.S. 
Grid,'' the Milestone program is an innovative public-private 
partnership that allows for industry-friendly terms and 
conditions, while simultaneously reducing risk to the taxpayer 
because companies will provide more than half the total project 
costs via non-Federal sources and will receive Federal payments 
only upon verified milestone completion. The eight recipients 
represent a diversified portfolio of fusion concepts and 
commercialization approaches, building on the full range of 
longstanding investments that the DOE has made, including from 
the Office of Science, the NNSA, and more recently ARPA--E. The 
selectees will work with multiple DOE national labs, 
universities, and other stakeholders on the R&D toward 
realizing a preliminary engineering design for a fusion pilot 
plant.
    Second, the DOE formed a new fusion crosscut team to 
coordinate fusion-relevant equities across DOE program offices. 
Highlights of these activities include: the Office of Science 
Isotope R&D Production Program led an assessment of fusion fuel 
isotope needs for fusion demonstration and deployment. The 
NNSA's Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Office sponsored a 
workshop at Princeton University to start a discussion on how 
best to support fusion commercialization in a manner that 
addresses nuclear proliferation concerns. And the DOE Office of 
Economic Impact and Diversity helped implement the requirement 
of community benefit plans into the Milestone program.
    Third, I'd like to mention elements that directly advanced 
the bold decadal vision in the President's Fiscal Year 2024 
budget request: $130 million to grow the Milestone program, 
$120 million for new fusion R&D centers to support and align 
national lab and university efforts in the development of a 
fusion pilot plant, $15 million for inertial fusion energy, and 
$14.7 million for studies on priority test facilities such as a 
neutron source to advance fusion materials science and testing. 
These efforts are in addition to ongoing R&D activity supported 
by the Office of Science, NNSA, and ARPA--E that provide the 
foundation and innovations for the bold decadal vision.
    Finally, the DOE is engaging with interagency and 
international partners to identify new targeted strategic 
collaborations to compress the timeline to fusion 
commercialization.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. DOE looks 
forward to continued collaborations with all of you to deliver 
timely commercial fusion energy. I'll be happy to take 
questions. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Hsu follows:]
   [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
    
    Chairman Williams. Thank you, Dr. Hsu.
    I want to thank all of you for your comments and insight. I 
think there's a lot of diversity and experience and points of 
view, so I think we'll have a good discussion. And I'd like to 
begin. I'm going to reserve my time for questions until later, 
but I'd like to recognize Chairman Lucas for five minutes for 
questions, sir.
    Chairman Lucas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    As I mentioned in my opening statement, I'm a strong 
advocate for an all-of-the-above approach not just in energy in 
general but specifically in fusion energy. It's not the 
government's role to pick winners and losers.
    So, Dr. McCarthy, with all the momentum the commercial 
fusion sector is experiencing right now, what would you say to 
some of ITER's critics that argue it is no longer relevant? 
Let's just cut to the chase.
    Dr. McCarthy. Thank you for that question, Chairman Lucas. 
So let me start out by saying part of the reason why there is 
the large private investment is because of the path that ITER 
has paved in terms of designing, fabricating, delivering, and 
now assembling components. That's an important piece of things.
    At the ITER site, there are--several systems have already 
been commissioned. And, for example, the cryogenic system is 
currently being commissioned. All of those things provide 
important information.
    But let's talk about moving forward because many of the 
private companies have as public goals achieving a burning 
plasma earlier than will be achieved in the ITER experiment. So 
let's make the assumption that they will be successful on the 
schedule that they've laid out. What does that mean for ITER? 
And by the way, I would say that all of us who have been 
involved in fusion for me at--since graduate school are 
cheering on the private companies. this is a great, great thing 
that's happening, and we want them to be successful.
    So let's assume that they're going to be successful. What 
does that mean for ITER? Well, what ITER will give you it is a 
highly diagnosed machine that was designed to provide 
information to a broad variety of fusion concepts, a broad 
variety primarily of magnetic fusion concepts. And so the 
information from ITER and especially when it comes to long 
pulse because part of what you need to be able to handle is the 
particle and heat exhaust. That's an important piece, 
understanding various modes of plasma behavior. That's what 
will get us from the next steps that you're seeing in the 
private industry to a commercial industry.
    And then finally, I would say think of ITER in a similar 
vein as an advanced test reactor, as a high flux isotope 
reactor in the United States. The fission industry still gets 
support from research reactors as they evolve and improve and 
provide more economical energy. So those are some of the 
examples.
    Chairman Lucas. Absolutely. Mr. Holland, what challenges or 
hurdles does the industry still have to overcome for the dream 
of fusion power plant to become a reality?
    Mr. Holland. Well, you know, the thing is is that fusion is 
hard. I don't want anybody to think that just because we say we 
can get there in a decade that fusion is easy. Fusion is hard. 
Fusion is hard. And when I mentioned in my testimony that 
there's 37 different approaches, 37 different ways within our 
member companies, the challenge is is that each of them have a 
different pathway forward. So as the industry association, what 
I'd say that--like Dr. Hsu said, it is about collective will. 
It's about resources. It's about applying resources. That means 
money, yes, but it also means human resources, it means 
capital, it means public interest. So things like this are just 
almost as important as getting over those scientific hurdles 
because we need to--we need everybody to be pulling in the same 
direction on this.
    Chairman Lucas. Dr. Solomon, Dr. Hsu, following up on that, 
how are DOE user facilities like DIII-D supporting the 
expanding fusion industry and helping them overcome the 
hardships they're facing so successfully?
    Dr. Solomon. Well, thank you. Good question, and I'm glad 
you brought it up. DIII-D is an open user facility, so, first 
of all, all of the results which are generated on the DIII-D 
facility are openly published and are available to all. More 
recently, a variety of steps have been taken to actually open 
up DIII-D to be more accessible to private industry 
participants, including the ability to conduct proprietary-
based research as well. And not to mention, as I alluded to in 
my opening remarks, DIII-D is a very flexible facility. It's a 
very well-measured--instrumented, measured, diagnosed facility, 
which makes it very valuable for any private entity who 
encounters a particular challenge in their regime, even if it's 
a different fusion concept, to be able to come and test 
something in a fusion-relevant environment and maybe find a 
pathway forward.
    Chairman Lucas. Dr. Hsu?
    Dr. Hsu. Yes, I'll add two things. One is the science that 
DIII-D produces is absolutely exquisite. It's the best in the 
world, and it develops our workforce, which is the second point 
to be the leading innovators in fusion science.
    Chairman Lucas. It looks like my time has expired, Mr. 
Chairman. Thank you very much.
    Chairman Williams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I now recognize the Ranking Member, Mr. Bowman, for five 
minutes.
    Mr. Bowman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Dr. Hsu, I was very pleased to see a budget request for 
fusion from the President that was largely consistent with 
bipartisan authorizations from this Committee. This is the 
level of ambition we really needed from the Administration, and 
you delivered. That said, I understand that the request still 
does not include any specific funds to establish an alternative 
fusion energy concepts program as authorized in statute since 
2018. This is surprising because, as you know well, in recent 
years, several alternative concepts have begun to show promise 
from commercial--for commercial fusion. Yet there's currently 
no ongoing DOE program to support research and assessment of 
these innovative concepts outside of the public-private 
partnerships funded by the Milestone program.
    So, for example, researchers at the university of--or 
laboratory level do not currently have a program that would 
even consider their application for Federal funding. It's 
exciting to see all the progress and enthusiasm from the 
private sector, but this is still a big concern. I do not 
believe that DOE should be relying almost exclusively on 
venture capital to help identify the next game-changing 
approach in this truly transformative field.
    So, Dr. Hsu, what if any steps is the Department taking to 
address this critical gap?
    Dr. Hsu. Thank you for the question, Ranking Member Bowman. 
So first, let me just say we hear you. And I will be taking 
this very topic back to--for discussion at the DOE. As some of 
you may know, this area of research was my own area of research 
before I came to Washington. And in fact, I testified before 
this Committee on innovative approaches to fusion energy back 
in 2016. And so we recognize that past public investments in 
this area contributed to the vibrant fusion private sector that 
we see today.
    I will point out a few things though. As you noted, the 
public-private partnerships do support alternative concepts. I 
would also mention that INFUSE (Innovation Network for Fusion 
Energy) and the Milestone program specifically have alternative 
concepts as eligible to participate in those programs, and 
attention on alternative concepts may grow--will grow because 
of this.
    I'll also say that the proposed R&D centers in the Fiscal 
Year 2024 President's budget request are intended to be aligned 
with the Milestone program, and thus, alternative concepts will 
be eligible there as well.
    So all this being said, we continue to implement the 
program direction in the CHIPS and Science authorization 
language, you know, balancing priorities and available funds, 
but we look forward to continued discussions with the Committee 
on this important topic. Thank you.
    Mr. Bowman. Thank you, Dr. Hsu.
    Dr. Kirtley and Mr. Holland, is there anything you'd like 
to add on the potential value of such a program to advancing 
our entire U.S. fusion enterprise?
    Dr. Kirtley. Yes, I'll start. I can definitely--I can start 
with how valuable the alternative energy programs in the past 
were for Helion. I would say that our company and our 
technology would not be here without them. Our earliest 
prototypes were supported by DOE Office of Science direct 
grants, as well as SBIRs. Both of those programs enabled us to 
take very high risk technologies that were theorized and on 
paper and not yet ready for deployment, had not yet 
demonstrated fusion, build those machines, prove fusion, get to 
keV 10 million degree temperatures, measure fusion reactions, 
and be able to--that was the stepping stone that enables us to 
go to private venture capital, and then work with them and 
their internal review processes to be able to move forward with 
commercial funding. We would not be where we are without it, 
and so I'm definitely a supporter of this for new technologies.
    Mr. Holland. And I would just add, in my written testimony, 
I include a chart that's kind of a family tree of fusion. And 
like I said, there's 37 member companies of the FIA. I don't 
think we're stopped--we've stopped growing. All of them have 
different technology subsets. So the idea of having just a 
government program that only looks to one or two of those 
approaches, I think it's important to have a full-fledged 
alternatives program as well, given, you know, the nature of--
it shouldn't be a zero sum game. It needs to be as much funding 
as possible for everything.
    Dr. Kirtley. And if I can add one more, after we went out 
to the private venture capital community and showed that we can 
do fusion in our systems and got some early stage funding, 
ARPA--E, the ALPHA program, was also there to meet us as we 
were growing and take this early technology and scale up in 
both fusion output and physical scale and energy scale. And so 
at that point, we had a partnership with matching venture 
capital and public funds to go build machines that did fusion. 
And all of those paved the way to the large scale fusion 
machines that we operate today.
    Mr. Bowman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Chairman Williams. Thank you, Mr. Bowman.
    I now recognize Mr. Fleischmann for five minutes.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to this 
distinguished panel. I've worked with you before. You've been 
at many of our meetings. And of course, Dr. McCarthy, for those 
in the audience, has been kind enough to actually tutor me in 
fusion, so I appreciate that so much. And I know you're 
extremely well-versed in fission as well. So thank you for 
being here.
    I represent the Oak Ridge Reservation. In my other life 
here I am an appropriator. I chair the Energy and Water 
Subcommittee of Appropriations, so we look forward to funding a 
lot of the initiatives and working in a bipartisan manner on 
fusion, so I thank you all.
    The recent technological advancements in the Fusion Energy 
Sciences, particularly the National Ignition Facility 
breakthrough this past December at the Lawrence Livermore 
National Laboratory that we've mentioned earlier, has 
captivated many people around the country as we eagerly 
anticipate the potential for commercial fusion energy. As has 
been discussed, the Office of Science has helped lay the 
foundation for these advancements and has started to take the 
next step toward commercialization through its public-private 
partnerships program and through its work to advance fusion 
pilot concepts.
    My question is one of--more of inquiry. For the entire 
panel, and I'll begin, hopefully, with Dr. McCarthy, why is the 
Office of Science leading this effort and not the Office of 
Nuclear Energy? Public-private partnerships and fusion pilot 
concepts seek to take fusion energy sciences beyond the bench 
scale and into the realm of commercialization. Is that an 
appropriate role for the Office of Science?
    Dr. McCarthy. Thank you very much, Congressman Fleischmann. 
And I'll point out you are a very good student. He did a lot of 
homework before we actually met.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you.
    Dr. McCarthy. So I am going to talk about just for a minute 
and then pass it on to my colleagues. I think typically, a 
reorganization isn't necessarily how you solve some things. I 
think what we need to do, especially in these phases, is look 
at what is making it challenging to do things quickly, and what 
do we need to do to remove those barriers? And I think that's 
an important first step. And so with that, I will pass it to my 
colleague.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you.
    Mr. Holland. Thanks for the question, Congressman. It is--
you know, sometimes the question of which box goes where in the 
organizational chart is academic, but I think in this one, it 
is really interesting and important to think about because if 
fusion gets to be as big as we all say it is, you know, 
building a fusion power plant today, bringing, you know, clean, 
safe, sustainable energy to the whole world, then it's obvious 
there needs to be an applied program. There needs to be a 
fusion energy applied program that stands on its own. The 
things that have to be done and research in fusion are separate 
and independent on its own, whether it's from nuclear energy, 
electrical energy, all of the other applied offices in DOE. 
Fusion should stand on its own. Fusion should be able to have a 
leader within Department of Energy who can advocate on their 
own for fusion.
    So we think that, ultimately, the question of going there 
is important. Whether it gets there next year, five years, 10 
years, open question, and we look forward to working with you 
and the Members of this Committee on determining what that 
looks like. But ultimately, yes, there should be a fusion 
energy applied program.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you.
    Dr. Hsu. Well, I was going to stay silent, but I don't 
think I'd get away with it. So first, let me emphasize that the 
DOE must ensure the success of both the fundamental fusion and 
plasma sciences alongside our new focus on applied R&D efforts 
and public-private partnerships. So without--we need both of 
those for this--the bold decadal vision to ultimately be 
successful.
    And I want to amplify what Dr. McCarthy said. I think our 
immediate need is really to ensure that the priorities of the 
bold decadal vision such as the Milestone program and other 
areas outlined in my written testimony are off to a strong 
start and that we can move quickly, you know, and have the 
agility to move quickly.
    So I'll just say DOE is considering the barriers, the 
factors, and the criteria that impact that success, and we look 
forward to continued discussions with the Committee on this.
    Mr. Fleischmann. I want to again thank each and every one 
of you for coming up today and being with us and testifying.
    And with that, Mr. Chair, I'll yield back.
    Chairman Williams. Thank you.
    I now recognize Ms. Ross for five minutes.
    Ms. Ross. Thank you very much, Chairman Williams, Ranking 
Member Bowman, for holding this hearing today, and thank you so 
much to the witnesses for joining us.
    For decades, scientists and engineers have tested the 
boundaries of experimental physics to duplicate a fusion 
reaction and harness it as an energy source. The potential 
benefits to society from fusion reactors are beyond 
calculation. I represent the Research Triangle area and NC 
State University, so many people interested in this area.
    The fuel is abundant, widely accessible, and the carbon 
footprint is negligible, and its associated nuclear waste and 
nonproliferation concerns are minimal, as you all know. Despite 
these incentives, and despite recent landmark achievements in 
the field, fusion energy science remains one of the most 
challenging areas of experimental physics today. However, it's 
crucially important to putting the world on a path of reduced 
greenhouse gas emissions, and with the advantages of fusion, it 
makes it worth pursuing and pursuing robustly.
    My first question is for Dr. Hsu. You highlight in your 
testimony just a few weeks ago that DOE announced a set of 
eight selectees for its new Milestone-based public-private 
partnership program for fusion. It's exciting and encouraging 
to see such a range of companies and approaches to fusion 
supported by DOE now. Can you provide us with any insight on 
the number of high quality applications to this program that 
DOE is currently unable to support due to limited funds and the 
level of funding to support the current selectees and whether 
that's sufficient to do what we need to do?
    Dr. Hsu. Yes, so I'm afraid I'm a bit limited in what I can 
reveal, but what I will say is, in my written testimony, I 
noted that we made the conscious decision to select a higher 
number of worthy selections at lower levels of funding to each, 
so that would tell you that we were oversubscribed. I believe 
the Fusion Industry Association has some data on that, which 
may not be complete but gives you an idea. And so certainly 
there are more worthy applicants that we had that we could 
possibly support.
    Ms. Ross. OK. This next question is to all the witnesses 
with the two minutes I've got left. The clean energy transition 
to net zero--a net zero global economy by 2050 represents one 
of the greatest challenges and opportunities for the United 
States and the world. From a climate change perspective, we 
know we have to achieve net zero emissions in order to avoid 
the most catastrophic consequences of climate change. The 
science demands it, and we've passed laws recently to help the 
United States stay on track.
    Yet this transition also serves as an important opportunity 
for the United States to win the race among our global 
competitors in a clean energy economy. And some discussion was 
had about that, not when, but whom. By some estimates, the 
transition will require almost $5 trillion per year to achieve 
net zero. We're seeing increased competition with China across 
a range of clean energy technologies, and my fear is that we 
could repeat mistakes of the past where the United States 
invests in technology only to watch China and other nations 
come to dominate the market.
    I know, Mr. Holland, you raised this. Could you speak to 
that first and then anybody else who wants to pipe in with the 
time we have left?
    Mr. Holland. Yes, absolutely. And thank you for the 
question. I want to be clear on this, that the Chinese are 
making very significant and serious investments both in their 
public sector government-run fusion program and increasingly in 
private companies. Now, what makes for a private company in 
China is an open question, but they they've announced very 
significant capital raises of, you know, something like $700 
million for a recent one that are moving quickly and getting 
ready to build things. So we expect to see that--the Chinese 
trying to take a larger leadership role.
    That said, the United States and our allies have some 
really important inherent advantages. The combination of the 
private sector scientists willing to take risks and a 
government fusion program that has been a world leader for a 
long time, if we make the investments, if we do the things to 
move at speed, there's no reason the United States can't win 
this and then also can't have a manufacturing industry that's 
more like--it's not like a commodity manufacturing industry 
like a solar industry or something. It's more like a really 
complicated manufacturing industry, like an aerospace industry. 
And the United States is really good at that. So this is 
something--fusion is something the United States can lead on 
and should be able to lead on.
    Ms. Ross. I see my time has expired, but if anybody wants--
well, it's up to the Chairman.
    Chairman Williams. Please go ahead, Dr. Kirtley.
    Dr. Kirtley. I can make a brief statement, and we can 
follow up as we wish. I would say two quick things. One, we 
know that in China on the R&D efforts there is--for instance, 
Helion released results from our latest machine and then very 
quickly saw a copycat machine identical to some published 
results we had published a decade earlier show up in China, so 
we know that that is happening on the R&D side.
    And then I'll say, as a private business, we see this on 
the manufacturing side, too, throughout the world. We have 
interests coming to us all over the world in bringing 
manufacturing for our systems outside of the United States, and 
so this is something that's very high up on our list to make 
sure that America invests in the manufacturing of the future so 
that we can build fusion generators here in the United States.
    Ms. Ross. Thank you for your indulgence, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Williams. Yes, thank you for your insightful 
question.
    I now recognize Mr. Miller for five minutes.
    Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Ranking 
Member, for today's hearing. And to the witnesses for joining 
us today, thank you.
    Over the past few years, we have seen incredible interest 
in fusion technology, and, according to the Fusion Industry 
Association, over $2 billion of private funding was injected 
into fusion technologies just last year. This private capital 
is pouring into fusion companies that are looking to build 
prototypes and commercialize their technologies in the coming 
decade.
    Dr. Kirtley, congratulations on your company's own success 
raising capital. Now, you could--now, excuse me, could you 
explain a little bit more about how you plan to spend these 
resources and how they will help your company meet its goal of 
bringing its fusion energy plan online in 2028?
    Dr. Kirtley. Congressman, thank you very much for the 
question. So Helion has announced that we have previously 
raised a total of around $577 million in private capital to 
date. We have used these systems to complete the operations of 
our sixth generation machine, beginning now the construction--
this should fund the completion of our seventh generation 
machine--we call this one Polaris--that will be completed, our 
goal is, by January of next year and then come online through 
2024, demonstrating electricity extraction or production for 
the first time from fusion and then begin to pave the way with 
these funds for this power plant, so this means the design 
efforts, the early siting.
    And then in parallel, to answer some of the questions 
previously, is to begin manufacturing. So we announced earlier 
this year that we are manufacturing capacitors, energy storage 
systems here in the United States, the first capacitor 
manufacturing line I'm aware of in probably decades, and 
immediately got interest from both overseas as well as our 
existing other private industries in fusion and national 
laboratories to buy capacitors from us. And so we're also doing 
parallel efforts in a number of other manufacturing areas and 
would call on this Committee to talk about how we can begin 
broad scaling this mass manufacturing beyond just Helion's 
needs but the fusion industry in total.
    Mr. Miller. Thank you for that detailed answer, much 
appreciated.
    To all the witnesses, and anyone can jump in if they'd 
like, could you please shed some light on why there is suddenly 
all this private capital pouring into fusion companies?
    Mr. Holland. Maybe I can because I've talked to a lot--to 
all of them. The--it's a combination of supply and demand. And 
by supply, I mean, the science is ready. The--all of the work 
that's been done in national science programs around the world 
for 50 years has come together with the fact also that you have 
all of these other enabling technologies. David mentioned, you 
know, capacitors and power management. There's also high 
temperature superconducting wires allow the most powerful 
magnets to ever be built, laser optics and, you know, all of 
the other enabling technologies there, as well as computer 
technologies. Artificial intelligence and high speed computing 
have really allowed us to model what we can do there, so that's 
the supply side.
    And then the demand side is that it's a huge business 
opportunity, and there's a huge, huge need to meet the climate 
and energy challenges. And so that's why--you know, that's why 
the investment is coming in because they see that, look, 
there's only so many pathways to getting to a full net zero 
economy, and fusion provides a new tool in that toolkit. And, 
you know, some of the estimates for the size of the business 
are huge. I think it was Bloomberg said the value of the fusion 
industry could be $44 trillion by the time we're fully there, 
so it's an exciting time.
    Mr. Miller. And what do you think is the--is really the 
best course of action to familiarize the American people with 
so that they're comfortable with this type of technology? 
Because we hear this a lot, that sometimes the American people 
aren't ready or they may have somewhat of a distorted view on 
nuclear fusion when, I agree with you, that is probably the 
most clean--cleanest form of energy that we have known to man 
and certainly the most powerful that I believe powers already 
1/3 of our electricity grid. It's just, you know, getting it 
put out there even more so to inform people.
    So in terms of the messaging aspect of this, what do you 
think is the most palatable way to help the--you know, the 
American electorate and the constituents that we have across 
the country be comfortable with this technology?
    Mr. Holland. So fusion--just very quickly, fusion is--it's 
unknown at this point. It--as opposed to nuclear fission, which 
has its own challenges. Fusion is a new energy source, so we'll 
have to make sure that people are aware of the opportunities 
here and show them why it matters to them. And it's just going 
out there, being open about it. We're trying to get it started 
and getting people to know about it. David knows more.
    Dr. Kirtley. Yes----
    Dr. McCarthy. If I can just add a little bit. First of all, 
I think people misunderstand where the public is with respect 
to fission. It was true in the old days that there was a lot of 
negativity toward fission, but the polls have showed that 
people are actually far more accepting. They understand the 
important part that it plays in a clean--in getting to a net 
zero economy. The same is true for fusion. And I think one of 
the things that we need to do is to not just talk amongst 
ourselves. And so one of the things I try and do is to get out 
and talk to groups that aren't traditional groups for fusion or 
for fission just to help people understand. And I found a very 
welcome reception. I think, generally speaking, people 
understand the need for clean technology, and they will be--and 
I've seen that they're supportive. I think that'll continue.
    Mr. Miller. OK. Awesome. Sorry, Chairman, it's up to you at 
this point.
    Chairman Williams. Please, Dr. Kirtley.
    Dr. Kirtley. I can try to be brief again. I think for our 
perspective community engagement and making sure that people 
know what's happening in fusion is critically important for 
adoption of this technology. And so for us, it's show hardware. 
That's our policy. And so it's as much as we can show the 
things we're building, talk about how they work, show people 
talking about how they work, and then try to honestly address 
some of the challenges that maybe future as--in the future as 
fusion scales to large scale and make sure you're having that 
honest discussion.
    Mr. Miller. Thank you all very much. This has been 
incredibly insightful, and I appreciate your time. Thank you, 
Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Williams. Thank you. I now recognize myself for 
five minutes. I believe this is the last set of questions.
    I want to compliment the Committee staff because not only 
did they put together a great panel, but they seated you 
public, private, public, private, public, which is entirely 
appropriate for--you know, for this conversation.
    The--one of the reasons that I'm excited about fusion is 
that I've gone and had conversations with many of the private 
companies and delved as deeply into their technology as they 
were willing and perhaps limited by my ability to understand. 
But what it relates to in my mind is that we see miracles 
happening all around us today, and we take them for granted. 
You know, we have near ubiquitous and low cost, instantaneous 
global communications. Do you ever think about that? That's--
that is absolutely astonishing. Started as a DARPA (Defense 
Advanced Research Projects Agency) program, as I understand, 
and as a tool of the government and yet grew through public-
private partnership, and then through--entirely through the 
public. It's extraordinary.
    I'm also reminded that there was a certain individual who 
wanted to reduce the launch of putting things into orbit 
because he had an idea that he wanted to go to Mars, I guess. 
And we now live in a world where launch costs have been reduced 
by 2/3 because we can land a 20 story building coming in at 
Mach 7 in a space smaller than this room every time. That's 
extraordinary. There are things that we're seeing that, quite 
honestly, I can't believe. Another would be robotic surgery, 
although I'm not ready to try that myself.
    But I put that context into this because I really was a 
fusion skeptic four or five months ago, and I've followed the 
literature relatively closely for the last 15 years or so and--
as well as for advanced nuclear. It's just an area of interest 
and in perhaps a little bit of expertise. And when I started 
diving in, it occurred to me that there is a path forward, and 
much of what we've heard today is talking around that.
    But just in these last few minutes, can each of you tell me 
one thing, just one thing that you're optimistic about or a 
reason for why you're optimistic about fusion? And I know 
there's many, but if you don't mind just going down the line, 
Dr. McCarthy.
    Dr. McCarthy. Thank you. I'd say the main reason I'm 
optimistic is we now have this strong industry presence. It's 
an important leg in the stool. And so in the United States, 
we've got this ecosystem that can get together and move this 
forward, national laboratories, industry, universities.
    Chairman Williams. Thank you. Ecosystem. Dr. Kirtley?
    Dr. Kirtley. I have a similar answer where it's around the 
diversity of different ideas that are coming forward for 
fusion. I obviously have a perspective from Helion, but I--as a 
human, I'm very excited about what I'm seeing of all of these 
different approaches from fusion, all of which are building 
machines to prove out their ideas and get commercial energy on 
the grid as soon as possible.
    Chairman Williams. It sounds like a good time to fund some 
of these different approaches.
    Dr. Solomon, please?
    Dr. Solomon. I would add to that that the fact that we've 
been exploring fusion for decades and it's still the case that 
there are basic fundamental advances being made that lead to 
record production of fusion in magnetic fusion energy, inertial 
fusion energy, and creative new ideas deployed given by our 
scientists all the time that really change the way that you can 
operate a device is just amazing.
    Chairman Williams. It sounds like this has inspired people 
to really start thinking differently like landing first stage 
rockets.
    Dr. Solomon. Absolutely.
    Chairman Williams. Mr. Holland?
    Mr. Holland. Maybe I'll change from the why to be excited 
about what we're doing but more toward what it means when we 
get there because fundamentally changing our relationship to 
energy from something you pull out of the ground or something 
you rely on the weather for, to something that is manufactured, 
fusion as a manufactured good means that energy is a 
manufactured good. So that means that no dictator can control 
access to energy. That means that energy is available for 
anyone, anywhere in the world. And that just fundamentally 
changes humankind's relationship to energy and allows us to do 
a lot of really cool things.
    Chairman Williams. Interesting, sort of a democratization 
of energy, end of scarcity.
    Mr. Holland. Yes.
    Chairman Williams. Dr. Hsu?
    Dr. Hsu. I want to give two quick answers. One is more 
pragmatic and the other one may be philosophical. So the 
pragmatic one is that not all of the science is under our belt, 
but a lot of it is, and so what we need now is more engineering 
development. And I think that's where the excitement that we 
can speed things up if we have the level of investment needed.
    The philosophical one is about getting to the next stage of 
civilization. If--many of you may or may not have heard of 
something called the Kardashev scale, not the Kardashian scale, 
but the Kardashev scale, where it's about the amount of energy 
a civilization can harness, and fusion will take us to that 
next stage.
    Chairman Williams. I think I saw a TikTok video about that. 
Thank you.
    I am going to indulge myself just for another minute. Mr. 
Bowman, I hope that's OK. I'll ask your permission, sir.
    These Milestone programs--and, Dr. Hsu, start with you, and 
anyone can please--how do they work? Why do they work? We've 
talked about it in the context of funding, perhaps a fusion 
energy applied program or funding these alternative strategies. 
Milestone programs, how do they work and why do they work? If 
you don't mind being brief.
    Dr. Hsu. Yes. So we took a lot of inspiration exactly from 
NASA COTS. I think the guiding principles are that we really 
want to invite strong industry participation. That was a big 
component. So they have to want to work with the government. 
And we all know that contracting things can be a bit of a 
burden and reporting burden, so that was the main thing. The 
use of other transactions authorities and agreements can get 
around a lot of that, but in exchange, the private sector is 
taking on a lot more risk. And we're protecting the taxpayer 
because the government does not spend the money until they've 
delivered on a valuable milestone.
    Chairman Williams. That's very insightful. Thank you. 
Anyone else? Milestone programs, why do you they work, how do 
they work?
    Mr. Holland. I would just really, you know, underline what 
Scott said there at the end, that the nature of a Milestone 
program--and it was used for SpaceX and the other private space 
industries to work with NASA and to get those started up and 
going. The nature of it is that it takes what is inherently a 
high risk, high reward thing, fusion energy research, and puts 
all of the risk on the private sector. There's no risk to the 
taxpayer here because if the milestone is not hit, the money 
doesn't go out.
    Chairman Williams. Anyone else? Yes, ma'am.
    Dr. McCarthy. If I can just add one thing, Chairman 
Williams, and that is, the important part here in my opinion is 
that partnership between private industry and the national 
laboratories and universities because the national laboratories 
have expertise and facilities that don't exist and can't be 
replicated outside of there. So bringing that practical aspect, 
that industry focus of getting to a certain point in a certain 
schedule, meeting that together with the science and 
engineering capabilities is a key part.
    Chairman Williams. Very interesting. Dr. Kirtley?
    Dr. Kirtley. And I just want to add one on the theory of 
this, which is I think everybody here is in agreement that our 
goal is to get fusion energy out as electricity on the grid as 
soon as possible, so everything we can do to develop programs 
and policies that have that in mind of how do we get 
electricity on the grid as soon as possible is really valuable. 
So in this case, the first of the Milestone program was 
designing engineering power plants and that was the focus of 
that, and so that's a really excellent tool to take these early 
stage companies develop a power plant and have that to go 
toward the next stage of how are you going to actually get that 
on the grid?
    Chairman Williams. Great. I've taken more than my time, but 
I was just stalling so that Mr. Sorensen could join us, sir. 
Please, I yield for five minutes.
    Mr. Sorensen. Thank you, Chairman Williams and Ranking 
Member Bowman, for convening this hearing and for our witnesses 
to be with us.
    I'm a strong believer that talent comes from all corners of 
our Nation. I'm proud to represent northwestern and central 
Illinois in Congress. And today, I'd like to focus my questions 
on the workforce space.
    But first, as the first meteorologist in Congress in nearly 
50 years, I've been connecting my folks back home with the 
science of climate for nearly 20 years. And as a scientist, I 
have long said that we don't have a silver bullet to solve 
climate change. Instead, we have silver buckshot. And it's up 
to us to analyze this dartboard, if you will, to find the 
pieces that work today, analyze them, and then work toward 
those solutions.
    But from left to right, I'd like to know your percentage 
chance--let's just go with the meteorologists, OK? What is the 
percentage chance that what we're talking about today is the 
silver bullet? And I'll begin with you, Dr. McCarthy.
    Dr. McCarthy. I believe with the correct investment it can 
be. I think our biggest challenge will--I believe will overcome 
the science. Can we produce competitive fusion energy? That is 
a key question. So investment in materials and fuel cycle is 
essential to realizing that.
    Dr. Kirtley. I've never heard silver buckshot before. I 
think I love it. And that part of that can be fusion. 
Obviously, I believe everywhere the Sun shines, we should be 
harnessing solar energy, and the wind blows, you should be 
harnessing that energy. But for everywhere else, we need 
reliable baseload power, and so I think that fusion can be that 
answer. In terms of percentage, we now have, to Mr. Holland's 
point, 37 shots on goal, 23 here in the United States, and I 
think that gives us a very high confidence that we'll get 
there.
    Dr. Solomon. As others have said, I'm also extremely 
optimistic. Part of the reason for this and maybe also brought 
up as well is that we need fusion. We need everything to make 
sure that we can make this energy transition. Fusion is a 
critical part of that. And what I see is that--the recognition 
of that fact has driven so much innovation and creative ideas, 
and despite the fact that there are science challenges, 
technology challenges, just look around and you'll see a great 
amount of optimism in our young, early career scientists and 
the like, engineers who see they want to work on fusion, they 
can make a difference.
    Mr. Holland. So yes, we're going to get there, 100 percent, 
not 100 percent for all 37. Unfortunately, I can't speak for 
all of them, but 100 percent we're going to get there. The 
challenge is, especially in the United States--the United 
States is an extraordinarily competitive energy market. And 
ultimately, we're providing electrons. And providing electrons 
means you have to get the cost way down. And so our companies 
are laser focused on that, and I think that's really important 
to have that commercial focus working with the scientists.
    Dr. Hsu. Yes, I would just say, you know, the energy 
problem both in the short term and the long term are so 
important that we can't count on any silver bullet, even if 
fusion in the very long term may be that silver bullet.
    Mr. Sorensen. Our next generation is incredibly worried 
about the climate that we are going to give them, that they are 
going to inherit from us. Dr. Hsu, what investment should we be 
making? You know, the DOE announced $46 million for commercial 
fusion just a couple of weeks ago. What would be the rate of 
return instead of if that was $46 million or if it was $460 
million?
    Dr. Hsu. Well, that's above my paygrade. And I would say we 
would do great things with the President's request, and we know 
what we would like to do next.
    Mr. Sorensen. Let me switch back over to the workforce. 
Considering that private fusion companies are rapidly 
recruiting early and mid-career researchers, I think that 
there's a worry out there that the supply chain of good quality 
teachers, instructors won't be met. What steps can be taken by 
Congress and the fusion industry leaders to ensure that the 
quality of education in plasma and fusion will be maintained at 
our educational institutions? Yes?
    Dr. McCarthy. Congressman Sorensen, I think that's a really 
important question. And if you look, for example, at what the 
Office of Nuclear Energy did, they made a concerted effort. 
There was an investment in scholarships and fellowships in 
funding for infrastructure to help the universities build those 
programs. And so I think between the excitement of what's going 
on and those sorts of investments, we can get there. And in 
talking with professors, what they tell me is they're already 
seeing that rush of young people wanting to study fusion.
    Dr. Kirtley. I think this is a critical question for us. I 
mean, as Helion as a company, we spent a lot of work hiring, a 
lot of work developing new talent and early stage--career 
technicians, engineers, and scientists that aren't even ready 
for--to be part of fusion yet but soon will be. And if we have 
this vision that we are going to be building an American fusion 
manufacturing industry, this means massive amounts of jobs, of 
technicians and assemblers and electricians and electrical 
engineers and scientists and nuclear engineers. And so building 
this and making sure that we're at the forefront of this so 
that America doesn't get left behind is going to be really 
critical. And so just think about the scale of what this means 
to be able to build, in Helion's vision, a power plant today. 
And that's massive gigafactories and high paid workers for it.
    Mr. Sorensen. There are STEM (science, technology, 
engineering, and mathematics) students in my district and in 
all of our districts that are ready to make the discoveries for 
the next generation. Thank you for sharing your insights and 
your talent with us today. And I yield back.
    Chairman Williams. I recognize Ms. Lee for five minutes.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to our 
witnesses for your time and presentation of your expertise 
before the Committee today.
    Pennsylvania has long been a State known, some say maybe 
notoriously, for fossil energy production and supply. But as an 
elected environmental justice advocate from western 
Pennsylvania, I signal what opportunities lay ahead for the 
future of energy in my district, the Commonwealth of 
Pennsylvania, and our country. In recent years, the global 
community has become increasingly aware of the urgent need to 
address climate change and to transition to cleaner, more 
sustainable forms of energy. Fusion energy has presented an 
opportunity to change our entire energy landscape. So as 
Members of Congress and particularly this Committee, it falls 
on us to create and implement solutions to abate the climate 
crisis that are threatening the future of humanity.
    As a Member of this Committee, I'm proud to be a part of 
these changes by supporting innovation through research and 
development that have the potential to revolutionize our energy 
supply and the future of our planet. I represent a district 
that for far too long has been plagued by poor air quality, 
leaving my constituents with myriad respiratory problems like 
asthma, emphysema, or bronchitis for instance. For a few days 
last week here in D.C. we experienced air quality that reaches 
hazardous levels. This scary experience for some is an insight 
into the daily lives of my constituents in places like the Mon 
Valley where I'm from, as well as other communities across the 
country. My constituency has for years ranked among the worst 
in cities and regions with the most polluted air.
    So as we're here today, fusion energy is not an end-all, 
be-all in addressing our climate-related health concerns, but 
scientific avenues like this create a window through which we 
can view an American future where toxic emissions poisoning our 
neighbors and loved ones are not normalized or accepted.
    Dr. McCarthy, what resources and infrastructure do our 
institutions of higher learning need to support R&D endeavor to 
make fusion energy a reality?
    Dr. McCarthy. So there are some specific experimental 
capabilities that could be built, test stands for testing 
blanket concepts. I mentioned that while we've done quite a bit 
on the science piece, we need to do a bit more on materials and 
fuel cycle. And so there is--there are some opportunities that 
are there, also opportunities for students to do internships at 
national laboratories with these private companies. That's all 
part of getting to where we need to get in terms of the 
workforce and creating opportunities.
    Ms. Lee. How much international collaboration will be 
required if necessary to bolster our domestic fusion energy 
program? And, Dr. McCarthy or Dr. Hsu?
    Dr. McCarthy. I'll just say very quickly that international 
collaboration has always been part of the fusion program. And 
when I was in graduate school, it's one of the reasons why I 
was attracted into it because working with the best and the 
brightest from all over the world was just a very exciting 
thing, and that continues today. So the fusion program works 
with experiments all over the world. I had talked earlier--and 
in my testimony I talk about the ITER project specifically, 
which is being built as an international team. That's going to 
continue. But where the United States really has the 
advantage--and this was touched a bit earlier--is our ability--
we've got this private program, we have the national 
laboratories, which really are the crown jewels I think in the 
world, and universities and innovation. Americans are good at 
innovation. That's what's going to give us that competitive 
edge. But international is an important part.
    Dr. Hsu. Yes, if I may, I'll just add international 
collaborations are very central to our strategy, especially in 
the acceleration of fusion commercialization. There are many 
examples in our international and interagency conversations. 
These are focused on, say, a few things, access or shared 
development of very high cost test facilities, ensuring and 
securing long-term supply chains with our allies. These could 
include fuel supplies such as the startup tritium and lithium-
6. These are the input fuels for deuterium-tritium fusion, and 
also harmonization of regulatory frameworks because we want to 
deploy fusion globally if we're going to realize its benefits. 
And also, as you mentioned, developing a diverse workforce to 
support a future global industry. So these are areas--you know, 
we--certainly, the DOE and even the country may not be able to 
do these things on its own--on our own, and we're going to want 
partnerships with our allies.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you. While I would like to shoot off another 
one, I'll be respectful of our--my time, and I'll yield back.
    Chairman Williams. Thank you, Ms. Lee.
    I want to thank the witnesses for your valuable testimony 
and for sacrificing and gifting us the value of your time, 
which I also know comes at a dear cost. And I also want to 
thank my fellow Members for their questions and engaging in 
this dialog.
    It's clear to me it's time to greatly redirect resources 
toward fusion, public and private, and doing it together. I 
hope that we can work together to make this happen.
    The record for this hearing will remain open for 10 days 
for additional comments and written questions from Members. But 
for now, this hearing is adjourned. Thank you.
    [Whereupon, at 4:08 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

                               Appendix I

                              ----------                              


                   Answers to Post-Hearing Questions




                   Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Responses by Dr. Kathryn McCarthy
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 

Responses by Dr. Wayne Solomon
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
Responses by Mr. Andrew Holland
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 

Responses by Dr. Scott Hsu
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 


                              Appendix II

                              ----------                              


                   Additional Material for the Record



                 Letters submitted by Dr. Wayne Solomon


[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
                Studies submitted by Mr. Andrew Holland


[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]