(This analysis is a preview of the DOE chapter
in the forthcoming AAAS Report XXX: Research and Development FY
2006, a comprehensive look at the President’s budget for R&D in
FY 2006. This analysis contains revised AAAS estimates of DOE R&D,
different from figures presented in the AAAS Preliminary
Analysis of February 10. This analysis was revised again March 18.
More tables and continually updated supplemental materials on R&D
in the FY 2006 budget can be found on the AAAS R&D Web site at http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd.)
Highlights
- The Department of Energy (DOE) would see its R&D funding decline 2.6 percent
or $221 million to $8.4 billion in the FY 2006 budget, after a smaller
cut in 2005 (see Table II-11).
- DOE’s Office of Science (OS) R&D would fall 4.5 percent to $3.2 billion,
down to funding levels not seen since 2000. The cuts would be spread
across a broad portfolio of programs in physics, fusion, biology, and
energy sciences. Operation times at OS scientific user facilities would
be reduced.
- Energy-related R&D would be a winner with a 3.2 percent gain
to $1.2 billion because of proposed increases for hydrogen, nuclear
energy, fuel cells, and coal R&D. DOE would invest $257 million
(up from $224 million) in a Hydrogen Fuel Initiative to develop technologies
for hydrogen-powered cars. But DOE would eliminate R&D on gas and
oil technologies and sharply reduce funding for several renewable energy
technologies.
- DOE’s defense R&D investments would fall 2.6 percent to $4.0 billion,
including cuts to advanced scientific computing and inertial confinement
fusion. Although Congress eliminated the controversial Robust Nuclear
Earth Penetrator program in 2005, DOE would try again FY 2006 with
a request of $4 million.
The FY 2006 budget
request proposes $23.4 billion for DOE’s total
budget, a cut of $475 million or 2.0 percent from this year’s funding
level. More than two-thirds of DOE’s budget
goes to defense programs to maintain the nuclear weapons stockpile and
to clean up past weapons sites. Most DOE program areas would see cuts
in this era of tight budgets, and DOE’s R&D programs would be no exception. DOE’s R&D, split roughly in half between defense and nondefense missions, would total $8.4 billion, $221 million
or 2.6 percent below this year’s budget (see Table
II-11).
R&D in the DOE Office of Science (OS): Cuts for Most Programs
Office of Science (OS) R&D in the FY 2006 budget would fall 4.5 percent
or $150 million to $3.2 billion, potentially undoing the gains of
the past two years (see Table II-11). In
inflation-adjusted terms, the OS R&D portfolio would fall to levels
last seen in 2000. The Bush Administration proposes to cut OS funding
for the fifth year in a row through the proposed elimination of $80
million in earmarks and cuts in core program funding; in past years,
Congress has added to the request for earmarks and other OS programs.
All the major OS accounts would decline in FY 2006, except for Basic Energy
Sciences (BES) and Fusion Energy Sciences (see Table
II-11). But even in these two accounts, increases for two projects
would leave other BES and fusion programs at or below this year’s funding
levels. In BES, funding for the Spallation
Neutron Source (SNS) in Tennessee
would surge $36 million to $149 million as the facility transitions
from construction to operations. The SNS increase would leave other
BES programs flat funded in 2006, although there would be some savings
achieved from the transition of four out of five DOE nanoscale
centers from construction in 2005 to operations in FY 2006. In Fusion,
the request proposes $56 million for the International Thermonuclear
Experimental Reactor (ITER) project, mostly for ITER equipment, up from
just $5 million this year. The $5 billion international project has
been delayed because the international partners have been unable to
agree on a site in either Japan or France; more than a year after a
deadline to pick a site has come and gone, the six partners are still
deadlocked, but the budget request assumes that the project will proceed
in time to require an increased U.S. contribution. But although Congress
provided extra 2005 funds to ensure that ITER would not crowd out domestic
fusion research, the FY 2006 request would cut the rest of the fusion
portfolio.
The cuts to OS accounts would decrease operating time and user support
at DOE scientific user facilities throughout the portfolio in areas
such as nuclear physics, computing, and fusion. The Office of Science
operates unique, large-scale research facilities at DOE’s
national laboratories around the country, which external researchers
can use for their own experiments through a competitive proposal process.
In recent years, tight budgets (see Figure 1) have squeezed operating
time at these facilities, and the FY 2006 budget would squeeze even
tighter, with operating times reduced by as much as 61 percent at some
OS facilities. The cuts would also impact future facilities: a $140
million experiment named BTeV at FermiLab in Illinois
to study particle physics would be canceled at the conclusion of the
engineering design phase in 2005.
In addition to
its support of facilities, DOE’s Office of
Science is also the dominant federal supporter of research in the physical
sciences, particularly high-energy physics and nuclear physics. It is
also a leading supporter of biological sciences, environmental sciences,
computing sciences, and fusion research.
Figure 1. (click
on the image for PDF)
After more than a decade of steep cuts and stagnant budgets, the DOE Office
of Science has less money now for its R&D programs than it did in
the early 1990s (see Figure 1). In
today’s dollars, the Science program has been stuck at roughly $3.1
billion since FY 2001, but the FY 2006 budget would represent a sharp
downturn compared to the modest increases of the most recent years.
DOE Energy and Defense R&D Programs: Hydrogen and Nuclear Up, Other
Areas Down
DOE would boost funding for its energy R&D programs overall but would
shuffle funding to boost Administration priorities. The overall
DOE energy R&D portfolio would climb 3.2 percent to $1.2 billion
(see Table II-11).
The top priority in the energy request is $257 million
in R&D for a newly organized Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, up from $224 million this year. The nascent
multi-agency initiative builds on existing DOE programs, but also enlists
the Department of Transportation (DOT) for $2 million to make it a $260
million initiative, up 16 percent from 2005. The initiative would tie
together DOE efforts in hydrogen production, fuel cells, nuclear hydrogen,
hydrogen from coal, and basic science to develop practical technologies
for hydrogen-powered cars of the future. Funding would come from the
Energy Conservation, Fossil Energy, Nuclear Energy, and Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy programs, and the Office of Science.
But in order to provide large increases for hydrogen, nuclear energy,
and coal R&D, there would be steep cuts and even program eliminations
to other energy R&D programs. Fossil Energy R&D funding
would fall 15 percent to $382 million after a similar cut in 2005. But
within the total, coal-related R&D would gain 4.9 percent to $286
million. Having been rebuffed by Congress in last year’s proposals to
boost funding for the FutureGen program to $237 million, the FY 2006 request would
keep funding for this initiative to build a near-emission-free, coal-fired
electricity and hydrogen production plant at $18 million, but would
boost sequestration research to manage coal-burning carbon emissions
to $67 million, up from $45 million this year. But the budget would
eliminate DOE funding for oil and gas R&D, slash funding for cooperative
R&D projects, and cut fuel cells R&D. Energy conservation R&D
would also decline, by 3 percent down to $356 million after a similar
cut in 2005. Fuel cells R&D in this account would increase by 12
percent to $84 million and biomass R&D would triple to $22 million,
but there would be steep cuts to R&D on conservation in buildings
and industry.
In Energy Supply,
Administration priorities for hydrogen and nuclear energy would reshape
the portfolio. Nuclear energy R&D would increase 12 percent to $95
million, with half of the increase going to a nuclear hydrogen initiative
to develop nuclear-based hydrogen production technologies. Overall Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy R&D funding would fall 7.0 percent
to $230 million, with increases for hydrogen R&D offset by cuts
in solar, geothermal, hydropower, and biomass R&D.
DOE has responsibility
for managing and disposing of the nation’s spent nuclear fuel and high-level
radioactive waste, both civilian and military. Last year, DOE requested
a dramatic increase up to $275 million for Waste Management R&D
as the Yucca Mountain
long-term, high-level nuclear waste repository appeared posed to move
forward after receiving congressional and White House approvals two
years ago. But Congress and the President deadlocked last year on how
to fund Yucca Mountain
operations and there have been setbacks on other fronts, resulting in
a cut for its R&D. DOE is now preparing to submit a license application
for the repository to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in FY 2006.
During the delay, DOE’s request for waste
management R&D would decline further to $44 million in FY 2006.
On the defense
side, most of DOE’s R&D is funded by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which funds maintenance
of the nation’s nuclear weapons stockpile through science-based research,
mostly in its core Weapons Activities account. R&D in Weapons Activities
grew substantially in recent years in lockstep with rapid growth in
overall defense spending, from $2.4 billion in FY 2001 to $3.2 billion
in 2003 and 2004, but now these investments are in decline with a cut
in 2005 and a proposed 4.7 percent reduction to $2.9 billion in FY 2006.
Within the overall portfolio, Inertial Confinement Fusion R&D funding
falls 14 percent to $460 million in a retrenchment of the program. DOE’s
considerable investments in research computing on the defense side of
the budget continue at $661 million, down 5.2 percent from this year
but still triple the computing investment on the nondefense
side.
Although Congress
eliminated the controversial Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator
program in 2005, DOE would try again FY 2006 with a request of $4 million.
This Administration proposal to
initiate research on a new generation of nuclear weapons, including
the RNEP and other tactical or ‘low-yield’ nuclear weapons, has been
opposed by Congress so far. Congress has repeatedly criticized DOE for
continuing to claim that the RNEP is only a research program, while
at the same time projecting $485 million in last year’s budget over
the next five years, an investment more than sufficient to move the
program well into design and development toward eventual production.
Such a step would require repealing a U.S. ban on developing new nuclear
weapons. Chastened by congressional rejection, the FY 2006 request plans
for RNEP research only in 2006 and 2007, no funding for ‘advanced concepts’
R&D on similar weapons, and no current plans for development funding.
But the FY 2006 budget does contain $9 million for R&D on the Reliable
Replacement Warhead, a 5-year, $98 million project that would explore
the possibility of new warhead designs to use with the existing nuclear
stockpile.
Elsewhere in DOE, the Nonproliferation and Verification R&D program
would receive a 21 percent increase to $272 million. This program
funds R&D, mostly at the DOE national labs, on technologies for
proliferation detection and nuclear explosion monitoring. Both parts
of the program would receive large increases in 2006.
- March 1, 2005 (REVISED March 18)
(More materials on R&D in the FY 2006 budget, historical data and
charts, and more information on AAAS Report XXX: R&D FY 2006,
can be found on the AAAS R&D web site at http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd.)
AAS R&D Budget and Policy Program
1200 New York Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 326-6607; -6600
www.aaas.org/spp/rd
