Hearing to Examine Fusion Energy Technology Development (U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources)

Hearing	Hearing to Examine Fusion Energy Technology Development
Committee	U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
Date	September 19, 2024

 

Hearing Takeaways:

• Nuclear Fusion Energy: The hearing focused on the U.S.’s efforts to develop and deploy nuclear fusion energy technology. Nuclear fusion energy involves the combination of atoms to produce energy (as opposed to nuclear fission, which involves the splitting of atoms to produce energy). Committee Members and the hearing’s witnesses expressed excitement over nuclear fusion energy’s potential to provide dispatchable power with no emissions to both consumers and industry. They also stated that the U.S. possesses abundant and accessible fuel for nuclear fusion energy and that nuclear fusion energy generates minimal waste. Ms. Siebens further noted how nuclear fusion energy facilities do not require large amounts of space relative to their output.
  • Public-Private Partnerships: Full Committee Chairman Joe Manchin (I-WV), Dr. Allain, and Dr. White expressed interest in leveraging public-private partnerships to support nuclear fusion energy commercialization. They specifically expressed interest in having the federal government address current gaps in nuclear fusion energy science and technology to accelerate the technology’s commercialization. Dr. Allain noted how the U.S. has invested over $1.4 billion in nuclear fusion energy research and how 120 companies have benefited from these investments. He added that these investments will ensure that the U.S. possesses a sufficient workforce to support nuclear fusion energy innovation. Dr. White further recommended that the U.S. identify cross-cutting issues impacting the public and private sectors. He indicated that these issues could include materials research, the nuclear fusion energy fuel cycle, and tritium handling. He commented that a single company would likely not have the resources and capabilities to address these issues on their own.
  • Safety and Storage Issues: Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) and the hearing’s witnesses noted how nuclear fusion reactions produce radioactive waste and that this waste can create safety and storage challenges. They remarked that the U.S. will need to adopt safety and storage policies to address the unique types of waste produced by nuclear fusion energy reactions. Ms. Siebens stated however that the materials used in nuclear fusion energy reactions have shorter half-lives than the materials used in nuclear fission reactions, which reduces these safety and storage challenges. She further noted how the tritium produced in certain nuclear fusion energy reactions will eventually decay into helium-3, which can be used for fuel in future reactions.
  • Nuclear Fusion Costs: Sen. Angus King (I-ME) mentioned how nuclear fission energy is more expensive than other current energy generation options and raised concerns that nuclear fusion energy would have similarly high costs. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA) and Dr. White noted however that other energy technologies (such as solar and wind energy) often impose costs on the overall energy system due to their interment natures. They stated that policymakers must consider an energy technology’s per unit costs and system costs to achieve holistic goals of reliability and cost containment during periods where energy is not being generated. Ms. Siebens also testified that her company, Helion Energy, plans to provide nuclear fusion energy to Microsoft and Nucor at the market rate or below.
  • Refueling Concerns: Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND) raised concerns that nuclear fusion energy systems need to be refueled more often than nuclear fission energy systems. He commented that these refueling needs make nuclear fusion energy worse suited for powering transportation vehicles. However, Ms. Siebens dismissed these concerns and noted how existing nuclear fission power plants tend to have one and a half year refueling cycles.
  • Nuclear Fusion Energy Supply Chains: Committee Members and the hearing’s witnesses discussed the need for the U.S. to build robust nuclear fusion energy supply chains to support the domestic development and deployment of nuclear fusion technology. They indicated that these supply chains should involve internal components (including semiconductors), advanced materials, and tritium management systems. Committee Democrats, Ms. Siebens, and Dr. White expressed interest in promoting nuclear fusion energy supply chain elements through existing federal loan programs, tax credits, and other government programs (including the U.S. Department of Commerce’s CHIPS Program Office) that are meant to support production and manufacturing in other areas.
  • Regulatory Reforms: Sen. King and Ms. Siebens expressed interest in regulatory reform proposals to establish a design-based permitting system for nuclear fusion energy generators. They lamented how nuclear fusion generators are currently being licensed for each individual site and commented that this system is inefficient. Ms. Siebens also called on the U.S. to consider reforms for its grid interconnection and siting regulations. She commended the U.S.’s regulatory system however for enabling companies to quickly iterate their nuclear fusion energy technology designs. Dr. White further called on the U.S. to adopt and maintain technology-neutral policies to support the deployment of firm clean energy sources. He called it important for these sources to have a clear regulatory pathway so that these sources can be quickly deployed when they become commercially ready.
  • Use of Retired Energy Infrastructure to Support Nuclear Fusion Energy Deployments: Full Committee Chairman Manchin expressed interest in leveraging retired energy infrastructure to support the deployment of nuclear fusion energy. He noted how this retired energy infrastructure is already connected to the energy grid, which can make it attractive for nuclear fusion energy deployments. He also highlighted how his proposed permitting reform legislation includes provisions to reconductor existing transmission lines. Ms. Siebens testified that Helion Energy is looking to co-locate its nuclear fusion power plants at retired energy generation sites and commented that there exists significant customer demand for energy around these sites.
  • Federal Grants to Support Innovative Nuclear Fusion Energy Companies: Dr. White remarked that U.S. policymakers should consider the multiplicative effect of federal investments into private nuclear fusion energy companies. He stated that early-stage grants could support innovative nuclear fusion energy concepts that might otherwise struggle in private markets to achieve demonstration. He commented that this achievement could enable these companies to obtain venture capital funding or develop early-stage technologies that could receive additional grants.
• Current Nuclear Fusion Energy Experiments and Demonstrations: Committee Members and the hearing’s witnesses expressed interest in nuclear fusion energy experiments and demonstrations that are currently underway. While Committee Members noted that the U.S. is making progress on developing and deploying nuclear fusion energy, several Committee Members expressed some concerns that nuclear fusion energy is not close to being deployed at scale.
  • The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) Project: Full Committee Chairman Joe Manchin (I-WV) and Dr. Allain expressed excitement regarding the ITER project, which involves a collaboration between the U.S. and 32 other countries to develop the first commercial nuclear fusion reactor. These other countries include both U.S. allies and countries of concern (such as China and Russia). Dr. Allain also stated that ITER’s industrial scale has supported the development of robust nuclear fusion energy supply chains. He elaborated that ITER is helping to build a market for magnet and tritium-based system suppliers. Full Committee Chairman Manchin raised concerns however over how ITER has experienced repeated delays and stated that the Committee must work to address these delays. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) also expressed interest in ensuring that the U.S. maintains appropriate safeguards to protect itself from China as the U.S. engages in international nuclear fusion energy research and development (R&D) efforts. Dr. Allain testified that the U.S. protects the intellectual property (IP) that supports the ITER project and indicated a legal agreement between ITER partner countries governs how ITER’s work and findings are shared among the partner countries.
  • The National Ignition Facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory: Several Committee Members expressed interest in how scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory had achieved scientific energy breakeven in December 2022. Scientific energy breakeven occurs when a nuclear fusion experiment produces more energy than it uses. These Committee Members noted that the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is the only facility in the world to achieve this milestone. They also highlighted how facility scientists have subsequently been able to repeat this scientific energy breakeven process on four additional occasions.
  • The U.S. Department of Energy’s Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) Program: Dr. Allain discussed how the U.S. Department of Energy’s FES program is working to align its activities with both the Biden administration’s Bold Decadal Vision for Commercial Fusion Energy and the U.S. Department of Energy Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee’s (FESAC) Long-Range Plan’s recommendations. He stated that investing in FES to align with the Biden administration’s Bold Decadal Vision for Commercial Fusion Energy and adopting recommendations from FESAC’s Long-Range Plan will help the U.S. to accelerate its nuclear fusion activities. He further testified that the U.S. Department of Energy’s FES program will soon be releasing the U.S.’s first ever fusion science and technology roadmap. He explained that this roadmap would identify actions for the U.S. Department of Energy to take to accomplish its nuclear fusion objectives. 
  • Other U.S. Government-Funded and Academic Nuclear Fusion Energy Research Efforts: Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO) and Dr. Allain highlighted how the U.S. Department of Energy had recently funded three laser fusion research hubs. They noted how these research hubs seek to convene researchers from academia, U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratories, and industry to address the technical challenges associated with nuclear fusion energy. Sen. Hickenlooper also mentioned how Colorado State University will soon begin constructing a $150 million facility that will house three high-powered lasers.
  • Private Sector Interest and Investments in Nuclear Fusion Energy Technology: Committee Members and the hearing’s witnesses expressed interest regarding the private sector’s activities related to nuclear fusion energy technology. They noted how private nuclear fusion energy companies have attracted over $7 billion of private investment and that many of these companies already have plans to deploy nuclear fusion energy. Ms. Siebens highlighted how her company, Helion Energy, is currently building its seventh nuclear fusion prototype and has power purchase agreements with Microsoft and Nucor. She testified that Helion Energy plans to use nuclear fusion energy to provide Microsoft with electricity by 2028 and to provide Nucor with electricity by 2030.
• International Considerations for Nuclear Fusion Energy: Committee Members and the hearing’s witnesses further expressed interest in addressing international considerations related to nuclear fusion energy. They stated that while the U.S.’s international cooperation on nuclear fusion energy would support innovations, yield environmental benefits, and reduce energy conflicts, they also asserted that the U.S. must remain competitive within the global nuclear fusion energy technology market.
  • Chinese Efforts to Develop Nuclear Fusion Energy: Committee Members, Ms. Siebens, and Dr. White raised concerns over China’s efforts to become the global leader in nuclear fusion energy technology. They expressed concerns that China’s investments in this technology are significantly greater than all other countries (including the U.S.) and how China has significantly more researchers specializing in nuclear fusion energy than the U.S. They further raised concerns that China is seeking to copy and steal U.S. nuclear fusion energy technology designs. Sen. Angus King (I-ME) suggested however that China’s deployment of nuclear fusion energy could have significant environmental benefits because it would reduce the country’s use of coal for energy.
  • Chinese Efforts to Control Nuclear Fusion Energy Supply Chains: Committee Members and Ms. Siebens expressed particular concerns over China’s current efforts to control nuclear fusion energy supply chains through securing the market for critical materials needed to build nuclear fusion power plants. These critical materials include raw materials, magnets, capacitors, and semiconductors. They contended that the U.S. must work with its allies to build competing supply chains to ensure that the U.S. does not become dependent on China for nuclear fusion energy technologies.

Hearing Witnesses:

1. Dr. Jean Paul Allain, Associate Director, Office of Fusion Energy Sciences, U.S. Department of Energy
2. Ms. Jackie Siebens, Director, Public Affairs at Helion Energy; Non-resident Senior Fellow. Atlantic Council Global Energy Center
3. Dr. Patrick White, Research Director, Nuclear Innovation Alliance

Member Opening Statements:

Full Committee Chairman Joe Manchin (I-WV):

• He remarked that nuclear fusion energy is a critical and emerging technology that the U.S. is in a global race to develop.
• He highlighted how nuclear fusion provides dispatchable power with no emissions and stated that the U.S. possesses abundant and accessible fuel for nuclear fusion that generates minimal waste.
  • He commented that nuclear fusion does not have the fuel supply and waste problems that accompany conventional nuclear fission.
• He discussed how energy has played a major role in spurring wars during the previous century and asserted that widely available nuclear fusion power could end international conflicts over energy.
• He recounted how he had visited the ITER site in France where the U.S. and 32 other countries are working together to develop and deploy the first commercial nuclear fusion reactor.
  • He indicated that these other countries include both U.S. allies and countries of concern (such as China and Russia).
• He remarked that the U.S. is cooperating with both allies and adversaries on ITER based on a shared view regarding the merit and promise of nuclear fusion energy.
  • He commented that his 2022 visit to the ITER site had provided him with hope regarding nuclear fusion technology and its potential to drive unity.
  • He encouraged Committee Members to visit the ITER site in France if they have not already done so.
• He noted how nuclear fusion requires the creation of temperatures ten times greater than the sun in laboratories and indicated that this is currently possible.
  • He commented however that there remain challenges that prevent the creation of operational nuclear fusion power plants.
• He discussed how there are currently over 40 nuclear fusion companies globally that have raised a collective $7.1 billion in investment over the previous five years.
  • He highlighted how over 85 percent of this investment amount involves private capital.
• He stated that there have occurred “significant” advances in nuclear fusion technology in recent years, including the National Ignition Facility at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
  • He noted how the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is the only facility in the world to have produced more energy from nuclear fusion than had been used to drive the reaction.
• He also discussed how smaller nuclear fusion reactors are being developed and compared this innovation to the innovation occurring within the nuclear fission space.
• He remarked however that no one has been able to produce nuclear fusion energy at the grid level and at a commercial scale, despite decades of research and increasing investments in nuclear fusion energy technologies.
  • He expressed interest in using the hearing to identify impediments to nuclear fusion production and commented that the Energy Act of 2020 and the CHIPS and Science Act are seeking to address scientific questions surrounding nuclear fusion.
• He raised concerns that ITER is continuing to face delays and noted how ITER’s new startup date is in 2029 (which is four years later than expected).
  • He asserted that the Committee must investigate the reasons for these delays and work to bring ITER back on schedule.
• He then discussed how the private sector is actively pursuing nuclear fusion technology and mentioned how Helion Energy is working on a potential project with Nucor to co-locate a steel production plant and nuclear fusion energy plant in West Virginia.
  • He also noted how Helion Energy is looking to launch their first grid-scale commercial nuclear fusion power plant in 2028.
• He acknowledged that while ITER and Helion Energy have nuclear fusion power plants that are designed for different purposes, he stated that there remains significant uncertainty surrounding the potential deployment date for the first nuclear fusion power plant.
• He then raised concerns over how China has mimicked the U.S.’s strategic plan for developing nuclear fusion energy and stated that China is “rapidly” building out nuclear fusion research programs and laboratories modeled on the U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratories.
  • He noted that while the U.S. remains the global leader in nuclear fusion energy investments, he highlighted how China is increasing its investments in nuclear fusion energy.
  • He specifically highlighted how China’s investments in nuclear fusion energy in 2023 were greater than all other countries (including the U.S.) combined.
• He also raised concerns over how China is seeking to control nuclear fusion energy supply chains through securing the market for critical materials needed to build nuclear fusion power plants.
  • He asserted that the U.S. cannot afford to lose its global leadership within the nuclear fusion energy technology space.

Full Committee Ranking Member John Barrasso (R-WY):

• He discussed how nuclear fusion is the process of combining two elements (such as hydrogen) to create a heavier element and generate energy.
  • He noted how nuclear fusion is the atomic reaction that powers the sun and can offer unlimited emissions free energy.
• He mentioned how the Committee had last held a hearing on nuclear fusion energy technology in 2022 and stated that the technology has experienced “noteworthy” progress since the last hearing.
• He highlighted how the U.S. Department of Energy had announced in December 2022 that scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory had achieved scientific energy breakeven.
  • He explained that scientific energy breakeven occurs when a nuclear fusion experiment produces more energy than it uses.
  • He added that the scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory have subsequently been able to repeat this scientific energy breakeven process on four additional occasions.
• He also discussed how the nuclear fusion energy industry has grown over the previous two years and noted how the number of private sector companies working on nuclear fusion energy technology had grown from 33 in 2022 to 45 today.
  • He added that the Fusion Industry Association indicates that these companies have attracted over $7 billion in private investment with over $900 million in new funding over the previous year.
• He stated that while the achievement of scientific energy breakeven was significant, he indicated that scientists have not yet been able to reliably and consistently reproduce the scientific energy breakeven reaction.
  • He commented that mastering the scientific energy breakeven reaction is necessary before nuclear fusion energy can be made commercially available.
• He also discussed the challenges associated with converting nuclear fusion energy into electricity and noted how no fusion reactor to date has achieved such conversion.
• He highlighted however that several nuclear fusion companies expect to put electrons on the energy grid within the next decade.
  • He mentioned how Helion Energy has signed a power purchase agreement to provide Microsoft with electricity by 2028 and to provide Nucor with electricity by 2030.
• He remarked that advances in nuclear fusion energy technology come at a time when the U.S.’s demand for electricity is expected to grow rapidly.
  • He commented that data centers powering artificial intelligence (AI) applications, Bitcoin mining, cloud computing, and data storage centers will drive much of this new electricity demand.
• He then discussed how China is “aggressively” competing with the U.S. to become the global leader in nuclear fusion energy technology to support its leadership in other areas (such as AI technology).
  • He commented that China is copying the U.S.’s strategy for commercializing nuclear fusion energy technologies.
• He remarked that the Committee must work to protect U.S. interests within the nuclear fusion space and regain the U.S.’s competitive advantage in this space.
  • He also expressed interest in exploring how the U.S. Department of Energy can better steward U.S. taxpayer dollars in its nuclear fusion research efforts.

Witness Opening Statements:

Dr. Jean Paul Allain (Fusion Energy Sciences Program, U.S. Department of Energy):

• He testified that the U.S. Department of Energy’s FES program is working to align its activities with both the Biden administration’s Bold Decadal Vision for Commercial Fusion Energy and the recommendations of the U.S. Department of Energy FESAC’s Long-Range Plan.
• He thanked the Committee for its strong support of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science and its specific fusion science activities.
  • He commented that this support is reflected within the CHIPS and Science Act.
• He testified that the U.S. Department of Energy has begun to realign its FES program to meet the “rapidly changing” nuclear fusion landscape, has introduced new and innovative funding mechanisms, and has deepened international partnerships with like-minded countries.
• He also stated that the U.S. Department of Energy has maintained its focus on important and enabling science.
  • He commented that this science could support nuclear fusion energy and deliver new plasma technologies that can improve human health and revolutionize microelectronics and manufacturing.
• He remarked that harnessing energy from nuclear fusion reactions can unlock a resilient baseload and carbon-free energy source, which he described as “essential” for combating climate change.
  • He also asserted that nuclear fusion energy should be treated as a national security imperative and commented that the U.S. cannot allow other countries to surpass its technological leadership on nuclear fusion energy.
• He remarked that the U.S. must take “bold action” to realize nuclear fusion energy within a decadal timeframe and testified that the U.S. Department of Energy’s FES program’s approach to achieving these objectives is built on three key actions.
• He first stated that the U.S. must drive innovation through closing “critical” science and technology gaps.
  • He commented that investing in FES to align with the Biden administration’s Bold Decadal Vision for Commercial Fusion Energy and adopting recommendations from FESAC’s Long-Range Plan will help the U.S. to accelerate its nuclear fusion activities at the necessary speed and scale.
• He secondly stated that the U.S. must establish and leverage nuclear fusion energy public-private partnerships.
  • He commented that proposed public-private consortium frameworks would enable diverse participants to support the development of nuclear fusion science and technology to realize commercial nuclear fusion energy.
  • He indicated that participants in these partnerships might include academia, government laboratories, private equity firms, loan programs, state and regional governments, philanthropic investors, and large-scale industries and corporations.
• He thirdly stated that the U.S. must build a “robust” nuclear fusion energy technology manufacturing network alongside partners.
  • He commented that this investment will produce innovations and scale essential nuclear fusion technologies (including internal components, advanced materials, and tritium management systems).
• He testified that the U.S. Department of Energy’s FES program will soon be releasing the U.S.’s first ever fusion science and technology roadmap.
  • He explained that this roadmap would identify actions for the U.S. Department of Energy to take to accomplish its nuclear fusion energy objectives.
  • He added that this roadmap would include clear metrics for measuring the U.S. Department of Energy’s progress on developing and deploying nuclear fusion energy and indicated that industry input would inform these metrics.
• He concluded that the U.S. would require foresight and will to innovate if it seeks to become the global leader on commercial nuclear fusion energy technology.

Ms. Jackie Siebens (Helion Energy; Atlantic Council Global Energy Center):

• She remarked that the U.S. is at an inflection point regarding nuclear fusion energy technology given how China is attempting to capitalize on the U.S.’s success in this space.
• She discussed how her company, Helion Energy, seeks to provide clean, reliable, and abundant energy through commercial nuclear fusion energy technology.
  • She noted that the company has developed six nuclear fusion prototypes over the previous decade and commented that each of these prototypes are bringing the company closer to its goal of achieving commercial deployment.
• She mentioned how Helion Energy is currently building Polaris, which is its seventh nuclear fusion prototype.
  • She expressed hope that Polaris would be the first machine to demonstrate electricity production.
• She testified that Helion Energy plans to construct the world’s first commercial nuclear fusion power plant and indicated that this power plant is backed by a power purchase agreement with Microsoft.
  • She also mentioned how Helion Energy has a customer agreement with Nucor to develop a 500 MW plant to power one of Nucor’s steel mills.
• She remarked that the U.S. will need to deploy nuclear fusion energy technology at scale to meet projected energy demand growth and secure U.S. leadership in the technology.
  • She commented that this will entail the deployment of multiple nuclear fusion power plants both domestically and globally.
• She stated that this effort will require a strategic two-pronged approach: building resilient supply chains and establishing new regulatory pathways.
• She asserted that the U.S. must take several actions to bolster its supply chains, including adapting existing government programs to nuclear fusion.
  • She indicated that these programs include the U.S. Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office, the Section 45X Advanced Manufacturing Production Credit, and the CHIPS and Science Act.
• She also stated that the U.S. must eventually develop a new bold program for nuclear fusion energy technology that resembles the CHIPS and Science Act.
  • She commented that this program should include strategic manufacturing support to fund the buildout of necessary manufacturing capacity for large scale nuclear fusion deployment and move the U.S. toward applied materials R&D.
• She then remarked that while the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and Congress have made “incredible strides” regarding nuclear fusion regulation, she asserted that there remain significant opportunities for regulatory improvement as the U.S. moves to commercialize nuclear fusion energy technology.
• She noted that while nuclear fusion generators are capable of being mass produced, she indicated that these generators are currently being licensed for each individual site.
  • She mentioned how Helion Energy has proposed design specific licensing, which would entail licensing the design of a nuclear fusion generator with the ability to site and operate the generate at any location nationwide.
  • She also stated that the U.S. must develop a tailored environmental regulatory approach for nuclear fusion generator designs.
  • She further asserted that the U.S. must look into grid interconnection and siting regulations and commented that these current regulations are not designed for scale.
• She remarked that federal and state regulators must work together to streamline interconnection processes to integrate nuclear fusion generators into the energy grid as soon as the generators are ready for integration.
  • She also stated that the U.S. must consider co-located nuclear fusion generation where power can be directly supplied to large energy consumers (like data centers) without the need for extensive grid infrastructure.
• She asserted that the U.S. must ensure that nuclear fusion companies can immediately deploy their generators as soon as the companies achieve electricity production.
• She remarked that immediate deployment of U.S. nuclear fusion energy technology will ensure that nuclear fusion energy production can sufficiently scale so that the U.S. can remain competitive with China.
  • She discussed how China has made nuclear fusion a “cornerstone” of its national innovation strategy and how China is “aggressively” investing in nuclear fusion research, development, and manufacturing capabilities for both civilian and military applications.
  • She noted how China spends an estimated $1.5 billion annually on nuclear fusion energy and has ten times as many nuclear fusion-focused PhDs as compared to the U.S.
• She further stated that China has a history of replicating U.S. company designs to develop their own systems and commented that this trend is occurring within the nuclear fusion energy space.
  • She mentioned how one Chinese company had launched a program to directly copy Helion Energy’s design and how another Chinese company has publicly stated its intent to copy Helion Energy’s approach to nuclear fusion energy technology.
• She warned that the U.S.’s lack of a comprehensive approach to nuclear fusion energy technology jeopardizes the U.S.’s competitiveness in this space vis-a-vis China.
  • She called it imperative for the U.S. to support its domestic nuclear fusion energy technology industry through establishing resilient supply chains and adopting proper regulatory frameworks.

Dr. Patrick White (Nuclear Innovation Alliance):

• He mentioned how he is testifying on behalf of the Nuclear Innovation Alliance (NIA), which is currently engaged in a partnership with the Clean Air Task Force (CATF) on their Global Programme on Fusion Energy.
  • He indicated that both the NIA and the CATF are 501(c)(3) organizations that provide independent technical research, analysis, and advocacy to help advance policies and technologies supporting clean energy solutions.
• He remarked that an affordable, reliable, secure, and clean energy future requires the U.S. to deploy a mix of variable clean energy generation, energy storage, and firm clean energy generation.
  • He commented that commercial nuclear fusion energy can play a “significant” role as a source of firm clean energy generation and would complement other existing firm clean energy sources (such as hydroelectric energy, nuclear fission energy, geothermal energy, and natural gas with carbon capture).
• He stated that the U.S.’s successful development, commercialization, deployment, and export of commercial nuclear fusion energy technology will have climate, societal, economic, and geopolitical benefits.
  • He indicated that these benefits include affordable clean energy, technology innovations, onshored supply chains and manufacturing, and increased energy security for both the U.S. and U.S. allies.
• He discussed how there have been “incredible achievements” in nuclear fusion experiments (both domestically and internationally) and record investments in private companies pursuing commercial nuclear fusion energy technology over the previous five years.
• He remarked that the commercialization and deployment of nuclear fusion energy can be divided into four general phases.
  • He indicated that the first phase involves the development and operation of scientific demonstration fusion machines that show that fusion energy can be controlled and that net energy gains can be achieved from fusion reactions.
  • He indicated that the second phase involves the design and testing of engineering demonstration fusion machines that show that fusion energy can be harnessed and that fusion reactions can consistently produce large amounts of power.
  • He indicated that the third phase involves the construction and operation of commercial demonstration machines that show that commercially relevant energy products can be produced from fusion energy and that key commercial systems necessary for widescale deployment can be integrated.
  • He indicated that the fourth phase involves the widescale commercial deployment of fusion energy technology, which would mark the technology as a viable clean energy source.
• He stated that nuclear fusion commercialization will require private companies to complete all four of the aforementioned phases and that company-specific pathways may differ.
  • He commented that some nuclear fusion concepts may be completed under a single demonstration phase with one machine serving as a scientific, engineering, and commercial machine.
  • He commented that other companies may take a more iterative approach and use many smaller machines to show how their technology can develop and evolve towards a commercial product.
• He remarked that understanding the aforementioned phases would enable policymakers to more effectively discuss and compare the progress that is currently being made by private nuclear fusion companies.
  • He also commented that understanding these phases would enable policymakers to assess how the federal government can most effectively support and accelerate the commercialization of nuclear fusion energy technology.
• He stated that while nuclear fusion technology innovation by U.S. companies is “unmatched,” he asserted that the U.S. must ensure that these companies have the support and policy clarity to compete internationally against state-owned or state-supported nuclear fusion programs.
  • He mentioned how the United Kingdom (UK), the European Union (EU), China, Canada, Japan, and other countries have begun making investments in commercial nuclear fusion energy.
  • He also commented that the U.S.’s research partnerships with the UK and Japan on nuclear fusion energy highlight the opportunities for international collaboration between the U.S. and its allies on nuclear fusion energy.
• He contended that supporting the domestic development of a U.S. nuclear fusion energy industry is critical.
• He discussed how China has a plan for domestic nuclear fusion energy and a domestic nuclear fusion industry and commented that China is executing on this plan.
  • He noted how China has started construction on scientific and engineering demonstration fusion machines and has a detailed plan on a commercial demonstration fusion machine.
  • He also noted how China is completing a facility that will lead cross-cutting fusion R&D for key materials, fuel cycle technologies, and commercial systems.
• He stated that China’s nuclear fusion energy plan shows both an understanding and a commitment to the scientific, engineering, and commercial steps necessary to bring nuclear fusion energy onto the grid.
• He remarked that accelerating nuclear fusion development and deployment in the U.S. will require private sector investment and continued federal government coordination and support.
• He stated that the U.S. should prioritize two major factors as it works toward the commercialization of nuclear fusion energy.
  • He first called on the U.S. to ensure that its clean energy policies are technology-inclusive to create a clear market demand for nuclear fusion energy as a firm clean energy source.
  • He secondly called on private companies, academic researchers, the U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratories, and the U.S. government to work together on an integrated nuclear fusion energy program that prioritizes efforts to accelerate nuclear fusion commercialization through all four phases of development, demonstration, and deployment.

Congressional Question Period:

Full Committee Chairman Joe Manchin (I-WV):

• Chairman Manchin asked the witnesses to project when the first nuclear fusion power plant can be brought online. He raised concerns over how ITER has experienced repeated delays. He asked the witnesses to address how smaller nuclear fusion energy projects could be deployed much sooner than ITER when ITER is facing repeated delays.
  • Dr. Allain called the realization of nuclear fusion energy “one of the most significant challenges to mankind.” He remarked that the U.S. must focus on closing its science and technology gaps with China. He stated that decades of investments in public sector nuclear fusion energy programs have enabled the private sector to increase its investments in nuclear fusion energy technology. He described this development as positive.
• Chairman Manchin interjected to ask Dr. Allain to indicate whether the private sector would deploy nuclear fusion energy before the public sector deploys nuclear fusion energy. He commented that federally-funded investments and research into nuclear fusion energy is enabling the private sector to more quickly deploy nuclear fusion energy.
  • Dr. Allain expressed agreement with Chairman Manchin’s comment that federally-funded investments and research into nuclear fusion energy is enabling the private sector to more quickly deploy nuclear fusion energy. He also called it important for the U.S. to increase the relationships between the public and private sectors on nuclear fusion energy issues. He asserted that the private sector is not solely responsible for developments in nuclear fusion energy technology.
• Chairman Manchin interjected to ask Ms. Siebens and Mr. White to project when the first nuclear fusion power plant can be brought online. 
  • Ms. Siebens remarked that “21st century technology” advancements in nuclear fusion energy technology are currently enabling “20th century concepts” in this technology. She noted how Helion Energy is pursuing a pulsed approach to nuclear fusion while ITER and other companies are pursuing a tokamak design for nuclear fusion. She indicated that the tokamak design has been the predominant design pursued over previous decades. She remarked that there now exist technologies that accelerate the commercialization of both pulsed approaches and tokamak designs for nuclear fusion energy. She also discussed how the U.S.’s regulatory framework for nuclear fusion energy allows for companies to quickly iterate their designs and called this feature important for the swift deployment of nuclear fusion energy technologies. She mentioned how Helion Energy has built six working nuclear fusion energy machines since its founding 11 years prior. She commented that this ability to quickly iterate designs is unique in nuclear fusion energy and noted how it takes very long for nuclear fission designs to obtain regulatory approval. She remarked that the combination of technological advancements (particularly regarding power electronics) and a supportive regulatory framework has helped Helion Energy make significant progress in developing and deploying nuclear fusion energy technologies.
  • Mr. White remarked that technology innovation will enable the private sector to more quickly deploy nuclear fusion energy technology. He discussed how private nuclear fusion energy companies are all leveraging innovations, including high temperature superconducting magnets, new power electronics, and new laser technologies. He commented that the use of these innovations enables these companies to move faster and achieve greater performance from machines developed by the U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratories. He remarked however that the timeline for innovations can be uncertain. He stated that while there exist many promising concepts within the nuclear fusion energy technology space, he commented that the private sector must determine whether enabling technologies can accelerate the deployment of nuclear fusion energy.
• Chairman Manchin asked the witnesses to indicate whether the U.S.’s energy grid system’s current constraints could impede the deployment of nuclear fusion power plants. He mentioned how his state of West Virginia has retired coal power plant sites that are already connected to the energy grid. He noted how small modular reactors (SMRs) are looking to use these retired coal power plant sites because of the existing infrastructure at the sites. He asked the witnesses to indicate whether these retired power sites would be attractive locations for nuclear fusion energy facilities. He further asked the witnesses to address the importance of federal permitting reforms for supporting nuclear fusion energy projects.
  • Ms. Siebens testified that Helion Energy is looking to co-locate its nuclear fusion power plants at retired energy generation sites. She highlighted how there exists significant customer demand for energy around these sites. She stated that while Helion Energy feels confident regarding its first commercial nuclear fusion power plant deployment, she raised concerns over the U.S.’s ability to deploy these commercial nuclear fusion power plants at scale. She testified that Helion Energy has concerns regarding its ability to deploy its machines at its rate of construction and to meet market demands for energy. She remarked that federal permitting reform legislative proposals would help support nuclear fusion energy companies (such as Helion Energy) to connect to the energy grid and address transmission issues. She stated however that there currently does not exist a pathway in regulated energy markets for nuclear fusion energy companies to directly serve corporate customers. She commented that the U.S. must better address co-location issues regarding nuclear fusion energy.
  • Dr. Allain noted that while ITER is not intended to be a commercial machine, he highlighted how ITER serves as an industrial-scale platform. He remarked that ITER’s industrial scale has supported the development of robust nuclear fusion energy supply chains. He elaborated that ITER is helping to build a market for magnet and tritium-based system suppliers. He commented that the benefits of these improved supply chains are currently being realized.
• Chairman Manchin interjected to highlight how 33 different countries have scientists working at the ITER facility. He recommended that all Committee Members visit the ITER facility. He also highlighted how many adversarial countries (such as China and Russia) are supporting this initiative in a collaborative manner.
  • Dr. Allain noted how the U.S. has invested over $1.4 billion in nuclear fusion energy research and how 120 companies have benefited from this investment. He stated that the U.S. is working to leverage ITER’s work.
  • Dr. White called on the U.S. to maintain technology-neutral policies to support the deployment of firm clean energy sources. He expressed hope that the U.S. would deploy many of these firm clean energy sources over the next decade. He called it important for these sources to have a clear regulatory pathway so that these sources can be quickly deployed when they become commercially ready.

Full Committee Ranking Member John Barrasso (R-WY):

• Ranking Member Barrasso mentioned how Helion Energy is very confident that it will be able to generate electricity using nuclear fusion and noted how more companies are pursuing nuclear fusion energy. He mentioned how Helion Energy had entered into a power purchase agreement with Microsoft and how Helion Energy is seeking to provide electricity to Microsoft beginning around 2028. He highlighted how no companies have been able to generate electricity from nuclear fusion generation to date. He noted however that Helion Energy had previously stated that it expects to demonstrate the ability to generate electricity from nuclear fusion in 2024. He asked Ms. Siebens to indicate whether Helion Energy still expects to demonstrate the ability to generate electricity from nuclear fusion this year.
  • Ms. Siebens mentioned how Helion Energy is currently constructing its seventh nuclear fusion prototype (which is their Polaris prototype). She stated that Helion Energy expects that the Polaris machine will demonstrate the ability to generate electricity. She testified that Helion Energy is currently on schedule to complete production of its Polaris machine in 2024. She indicated that Helion Energy plans to begin testing the Polaris machine in 2024 and continue this testing into 2025. She stated that the Polaris machine will be key to meeting the requirements of the power purchase agreement between Helion Energy and Microsoft.
• Ranking Member Barrasso asked Dr. White to indicate whether the U.S. could bring nuclear fusion energy onto its energy grid within a short number of years.
  • Dr. White discussed how nuclear fusion energy companies (such as Helion Energy) are using innovative technology approaches to generate nuclear fusion energy. He stated that these innovative technology approaches would be discovered through the development, demonstration, and testing process. He expressed interest in continuing to observe Helion Energy’s progress on their efforts to generate electricity via nuclear fusion. He remarked that the U.S. should consider ways that innovative technologies can accelerate the private sector’s deployment of nuclear fusion energy projects.
• Ranking Member Barrasso expressed interest in learning about the specific details regarding the power purchase agreements currently being pursued between nuclear fusion energy companies and other companies. He asked Ms. Siebens to indicate whether Helion Energy’s power purchase agreement with Microsoft includes a firm deadline date by which Helion Energy must provide electricity to Microsoft. He also asked Ms. Siebens to indicate whether Helion Energy’s power purchase agreement with Microsoft includes any penalties for Helion Energy if it fails to meet deadlines to provide Microsoft with electricity.
  • Ms. Siebens indicated that while she could not discuss all of the details of the power purchase agreement between Helion Energy and Microsoft, she testified that the power purchase agreement includes “firm penalties.” She stated that the power purchase agreement has penalties that evolve and change as Helion Energy gets closer to producing commercial power for Microsoft. She also testified that the power purchase agreement does have deadlines. She indicated that Helion Energy must have its nuclear fusion power plant constructed and begin operations by 2028. She also indicated that Helion Energy must achieve full commercial operations and provide electricity to Microsoft by 2029.
• Ranking Member Barrasso then noted how Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) (who co-chairs the Congressional Fusion Energy Caucus) had stated that much of the U.S.’s spending on nuclear fusion energy goes towards legacy programs (rather than “cutting edge” technologies). He asked Dr. White to opine on whether Congress should adjust federal research priorities regarding nuclear fusion energy.
  • Dr. White remarked that the U.S. should work to refocus nuclear fusion energy program activities toward commercialization. He stated that many of the U.S.’s existing nuclear fusion energy machines and international nuclear fusion energy programs (in which the U.S. participates) can provide important scientific and engineering information to help accelerate the private nuclear fusion energy industry. He commented that ITER’s work on nuclear fusion energy designs, manufacturing, and construction can be helpful for U.S. private nuclear fusion energy companies. He remarked that the U.S. must work to ensure that U.S. private nuclear fusion energy companies can access these learned lessons. He also stated that the U.S. should ensure that its nuclear fusion energy experiments are tailored and focused on either training scientists, producing research, or testing the systems, structures, and components that will be needed for nuclear fusion energy. He remarked that the U.S. will need to consider how to best leverage legacy experiments and its existing international collaborations.
• Ranking Member Barrasso then remarked that China is seeking to take advantage of the U.S.’s nuclear fusion energy R&D efforts through copying and stealing the U.S.’s work in this area. He also asserted that China is working to control supply chains for nuclear fusion energy raw materials, magnets, capacitors, and semiconductors. He asked Dr. Allain to discuss how the U.S. Department of Energy plans to protect the U.S. nuclear fusion energy industry.
  • Dr. Allain remarked that the U.S. Department of Energy must ensure that it closes its science and technology gaps in nuclear fusion energy. He mentioned how the U.S. has a “roadmap” that details its timeline and priorities for nuclear fusion energy. He asserted that the U.S.’s legacy nuclear fusion assets encompass more than just facilities and also include ecosystems. He stated that these ecosystems are not solely focused on nuclear fusion energy science and are working to develop tools that private sector companies can leverage. He remarked that these ecosystems tie the U.S. to international partners and make the U.S. a global destination for nuclear fusion energy projects. He stated that the U.S. Department of Energy must identify opportunities to support the private sector, identify existing gaps in the U.S.’s nuclear fusion energy capabilities, and leverage existing resources and assets.
• Ranking Member Barrasso then noted how nuclear fusion energy companies have raised over $7 billion from the private sector. He asked Ms. Siebens to discuss metrics that investors use when trying to assess the performances of different nuclear fusion energy companies.
  • Ms. Siebens recounted how Helion Energy had begun conversations with Nucor in 2021 and had undergone an “in depth” process with Nucor to reach an energy development agreement. She testified that Helion Energy had engaged in a similar process to reach an agreement with Microsoft. She described both Nucor and Microsoft as very conservative companies that are serious about pursuing novel energy agreements.
• Ranking Member Barrasso lastly asked Dr. White to discuss the safety benefits and potential hazards associated with nuclear fusion energy technology.
  • Dr. White discussed how some nuclear fusion reactions produce neutrons and noted how these neutrons can become radioactive. He stated that the U.S. must control and confine this produced radiation and have pathways for the long-term disposal of this radiation. He asserted that the U.S. must protect workers, the public, and the environment from any materials that are produced as byproducts during nuclear fusion reactions and from nuclear fusion energy machines. He also remarked that the U.S. will need to consider the tritium that is used in some nuclear fusion fuel cycles is a radioactive form of hydrogen. He stated that while the U.S. has experience handling tritium safely, he asserted that the U.S. must continue these safety processes as it moves toward industrial-scale nuclear fusion energy. He remarked that the U.S. will need to remain focused on safety as it moves towards nuclear fusion energy commercialization. He highlighted how the U.S. has organizations (including the NRC) that are focused on safety issues and are developing nuclear fusion energy safety regulations and guidance. He also mentioned how the NRC’s Agreement States will take a leading role in the licensing of nuclear fusion energy technologies within the near term.

Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM):

• Sen. Heinrich first thanked Full Committee Chairman Joe Manchin (I-WV) for recently joining the Senate Fusion Caucus and encouraged more Committee Members to join this caucus. He then remarked that the U.S. has been the global leader on nuclear fusion energy technology for 70 years and commented that these efforts have largely been physics-based. He stated that the U.S. is now shifting its nuclear fusion energy efforts to engineering and material science. He raised concerns that China is seeking to overtake the U.S.’s global leadership on nuclear fusion energy. He asked the witnesses to discuss how the U.S. Department of Energy and the broader U.S. government could develop technology agnostic support structures for the U.S. nuclear fusion energy industry.
  • Mr. Allain discussed how the U.S.’s physics research regarding nuclear fusion energy had identified important technological questions. He mentioned how physics research had enabled the U.S. to recognize that stainless steel walls and graphite systems could not sustain nuclear fusion reactions. He remarked that the U.S. is currently in a unique position to approach nuclear fusion energy because of the technological advancements outside of the nuclear fusion space. He specifically identified Artificial Intelligence Markup Language (AIML) as key to supporting the development and deployment of nuclear fusion energy. He then remarked that the U.S. government could address many current gaps within the nuclear fusion energy space. He stated that the U.S. government could support the tritium fuel cycle, blanket technology, and the development of advanced materials that can survive extreme conditions. He commented that the U.S.’s public programs have previously not focused on these areas. He concluded that the U.S. must move to address these gaps within the nuclear fusion energy space.
• Sen. Heinrich asked Ms. Siebens and Dr. White to indicate whether the U.S. should pursue a “gaps-based approach” for supporting nuclear fusion energy technology.
  • Ms. Siebens expressed Helion Energy’s interest in increasing applied materials R&D efforts. She remarked that the U.S. Department of Energy should focus more on pursuing commercially relevant work. She specifically expressed interest in having the U.S. pursue a large multi-technology project that focuses on building and commercializing new reliable materials. She indicated that these new reliable materials could support new types of first walls. She commented that this project could support the scaled deployment of nuclear fusion energy projects. She noted how many materials will work for nuclear fusion energy demonstration machines and will not work for more commercial applications.
  • Dr. White recommended that the U.S. government increase its focus on developing nuclear fusion materials. He then stated that the U.S. faces challenges designing nuclear fusion energy machines without having operational experience. He called it critical to create large national test facilities to perform materials research, perform neutron irradiation of materials, and develop and optimize new alloys. He elaborated that these R&D efforts will result in materials that can facilitate the safe and economic production of nuclear fusion power. He stated that while a single company may lack sufficient resources to address these needs on its own, he asserted that a federal government program could support these critical R&D activities.
  • Dr. Allain remarked that the U.S. Department of Energy’s efforts to support nuclear fusion energy technology extend beyond investments. He stated that the U.S. Department of Energy is working to fundamentally change its approach to supporting this technology through public-private consortium frameworks. He commented that these partnerships between the public and private sectors will ensure that the U.S. possesses a sufficient workforce to support nuclear fusion energy innovation.
  • Dr. White noted that while certain materials may not be needed to develop the initial generations of nuclear fusion energy machines, he stated that such materials could become “incredibly valuable” as the U.S. pursues nuclear fusion energy commercialization. He cautioned that the creation of materials testing facilities and materials testing itself would take time to complete. He remarked that immediately pursuing these materials would enable the U.S. to deploy and commercialize nuclear fusion energy sooner.

Sen. Angus King (I-ME):

• Sen. King remarked that the wide scale commercial availability of nuclear fusion energy technology would be “world changing.” He stated that the single best action that could be taken to improve the environment would be to have China stop using coal for energy. He asked the witnesses to explain why the U.S. must compete with China to develop and deploy nuclear fusion energy technologies. He commented that nuclear fusion energy technology is civilian in nature. He also asked the witnesses to explain why the U.S. cannot collaborate with China on developing and deploying nuclear fusion energy technologies. He commented that such collaboration could enable the faster development and deployment of nuclear fusion energy technologies.
  • Dr. White called it important for there to exist clean energy options globally and stated that nuclear fusion energy should serve as one such clear energy option. He remarked that more competition for developing clean energy sources will improve the likelihood of these sources being deployed. He elaborated that competition would support innovation within the clean energy space.
• Sen. King commented that it would be beneficial for nuclear fusion energy researchers to pursue international collaborations regarding their efforts.
  • Dr. White remarked that the scientific community frequently collaborates on nuclear fusion energy research on an international basis. He indicated that this collaboration often occurs at International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and at international nuclear fusion energy conferences. He commented that these conferences could help identify further opportunities for international cooperation and partnership on nuclear fusion energy research.
  • Ms. Siebens remarked that while international collaboration on nuclear fusion energy technology development and deployment would be beneficial, she warned that China is aggressively working to control nuclear fusion energy supply chains. She contended that the U.S. must work with its allies to secure its own nuclear fusion energy supply chains so that the U.S. can dominate the nuclear fusion energy marketplace. She warned that China is seeking to control the global nuclear fusion energy supply chains to boost their geopolitical influence.
• Sen. King interjected to comment that China has worked to dominate global electronic vehicle (EV) battery supply chains.
  • Ms. Siebens expressed agreement with Sen. King’s comment. She remarked that the U.S. has a “once in a generation” opportunity to prevent Chinese dominance of global nuclear fusion energy supply chains.
• Sen. King then mentioned how nuclear fission energy is “far more” expensive than other current energy generation options. He asked the witnesses to project whether nuclear fusion energy will be cheaper than nuclear fission energy.
  • Dr. White called it important for the U.S. to consider the cost of different energy generating technologies. He stated that the U.S. should consider overall system costs when assessing energy generating technologies.
• Sen. King interjected to remark that consumers are most focused on the cost per kilowatt-hour (kWh) of a given energy generating option. He commented that nuclear fission energy is currently the most expensive energy generating option on a cost per kWh basis.
  • Dr. White remarked that the integration of nuclear fission energy into clean energy systems helps to reduce system costs. He elaborated that this integration of nuclear fission energy reduces the need to buildout of renewable energy sources and energy storage capabilities. He predicted that nuclear fusion energy will become more economically competitive as nuclear fusion energy companies develop and demonstrate their technologies.
• Sen. King then asked Ms. Siebens to indicate whether Microsoft believes that it can purchase energy from Helion Energy at a price that is competitive.
  • Ms. Siebens answered affirmatively. She testified that Helion Energy plans to provide energy to Microsoft and Nucor at the market rate or below. She expressed optimism that these agreements would enable Helion Energy to drive down the cost of nuclear fusion energy. She stated that Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy machines are suited for mass manufacturing and are built using factory components. She commented that this differs from traditional nuclear fission energy machines.
• Sen. King interjected to ask Ms. Siebens to indicate whether Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy generation offerings should be less expensive than current energy generation offerings.
  • Ms. Siebens interjected to answer affirmatively. She remarked that Helion Energy envisions the ability to produce one generator per day. She indicated that this production scale could reduce energy costs down to $0.01 per kWh, which she described as “truly world changing.”
• Sen. King expressed reservations regarding overly optimistic estimates for the potential for nuclear fusion energy. He commented that similarly overly optimistic estimates about nuclear fission energy had been made during the 1950s. He then asked Ms. Siebens to indicate whether nuclear fusion energy technology has advantages over SMR technology.
  • Ms. Siebens highlighted how the regulatory framework for nuclear fusion energy facilities is “fundamentally different” than the regulatory framework for SMRs.
• Sen. King interjected to express support for Ms. Siebens’s recommendation to focus on permitting designs (rather than individual facilities). He stated that while localized impact assessments must be performed for all newly proposed energy generation facilities, he asserted that the U.S. should not create unique permitting review processes for every new facility.
  • Ms. Siebens expressed agreement with Sen. King’s assertion. She remarked that the ability to mass manufacture nuclear fusion energy machines using small factory components leads to a “significant” cost reduction relative to traditional nuclear fission power plants. She also stated that the U.S. should pursue all carbon-free and low-carbon emissions technologies. She asserted that deploying nuclear fusion energy at scale would enable the U.S. to achieve significant cost savings.
• Sen. King lastly asked the witnesses to indicate whether nuclear fusion energy technology is inherently safer than nuclear fission energy technology.
  • Ms. Siebens indicated that she has extensive professional experience in the nuclear fission energy space and expressed support for nuclear fission energy technology and SMRs. She noted however that nuclear fission energy uses special nuclear material that has associated long-lived radioactive waste. She also noted that a nuclear fission reactor is more likely to experience a runaway reaction as compared to a nuclear fusion reactor. She emphasized however that this risk of a runaway reaction at a nuclear fission reactor remains very low. She discussed how nuclear fusion energy does not use special nuclear material and mentioned how Helion Energy’s machines use deuterium and helium-3. She stated that these materials are much safer than special nuclear material.
  • Dr. White remarked that the safety of nuclear fusion energy technologies will depend on their machines, fuel cycles, and designs. He asserted that the U.S. will need to address certain hazards related to nuclear fusion energy technology. He stated that the U.S. will need to manage the tritium fuels used in nuclear fusion energy machines. He also stated that nuclear fusion energy facilities can be designed to handle different levels of risk. He remarked that the nuclear fusion energy industry must prioritize design and optimization when building its technologies and that the U.S. must provide a robust regulatory framework for nuclear fusion energy technologies.

Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA):

• Sen. Padilla first expressed interest in addressing the difference between the per unit costs of energy technologies and the system costs of energy technologies. He noted that many energy technologies (such as solar and wind energy) have intermittency issues. He stated that other energy technologies (such as storage technologies and peaker plants) are meant to ensure that the energy system remains resilient and reliable when intermittent energy sources are not generating energy. He asserted that policymakers must consider an energy technology’s per unit costs and system costs to achieve holistic goals of reliability and cost containment during periods where energy is not being generated. He then remarked that his state of California is the “undisputed leader” on nuclear fusion energy science and noted that the state has a large ecosystem of private startup companies. He highlighted how the National Ignition Facility at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and the DIII-D National Fusion Facility are both located in the state. He described the National Ignition Facility at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory as a “tremendous success” and mentioned how this facility had achieved nuclear fusion ignition five times within the previous two years. He stated that the National Ignition Facility at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s experiments had “uniquely informed” the foundational science of burning and ignited plasmas that are needed for nuclear fusion energy. He also mentioned how the DIII-D National Fusion Facility will soon celebrate its 200,000th experiment and commented that this facility has been “instrumental” in nuclear fusion energy R&D. He stated that sustained funding for operations, refurbishment, and upgrades will enable these nuclear fusion energy facilities to support the U.S. in advancing nuclear fusion energy technology. He asked Dr. Allain to discuss how the U.S. can capitalize on this progress to develop a timeline for achieving commercial nuclear fusion energy deployment.
  • Dr. Allain discussed how the U.S. has benchmarked advanced modeling tools to support the design of future private sector nuclear fusion energy systems. He remarked that the U.S. will need to transition from focusing on science-related questions toward technology-related questions. He stated that this transition will necessitate alignment between the public and private sectors on nuclear fusion energy R&D efforts. He recommended that the U.S. pursue a public-private consortium framework that would involve U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratories, universities, local governments, state governments, and private sector investors. He commented that this approach would identify near-term infrastructure investment opportunities. He testified that he engages in daily conservations with the private sector on partnership opportunities. He remarked that the U.S. must work to ensure that the U.S. Department of Energy is working to align public sector and private sector interests and priorities regarding nuclear fusion energy R&D. He stated that the U.S. Department of Energy’s FES Program’s upcoming fusion science and technology roadmap seeks to assess the U.S.’s progress on developing and deploying nuclear fusion energy. He indicated that this roadmap would involve industry input.
• Sen. Padilla then asked Ms. Siebens to discuss how the public and private sectors should coordinate and collaborate on nuclear fusion energy supply chain issues.
  • Ms. Siebens first applauded Dr. Allain and the U.S. Department of Energy’s work to support the commercialization of nuclear fusion energy. She then remarked that the U.S. government should work to quickly and thoughtfully address the nuclear fusion energy supply chain. She stated that the U.S. government should leverage its existing programs and funding to support the development of the nuclear fusion energy supply chain. She specifically suggested using the U.S. Department of Commerce’s CHIPS Program Office to support the development of domestic supply chains of semiconductor chips specifically tailored for nuclear fusion energy applications. She commented that these semiconductor chips would be helpful for Helion Energy given how the company will use “thousands” of semiconductor chips for a single nuclear fusion energy machine. She also testified that Helion Energy has constructed in-house capacitor manufacturing capabilities. She noted how Helion Energy must build 15 percent of its capacitors in-house to meet its needs. She commented that the absence of this in-house capacitor manufacturing capability would force her company to become more dependent on China. She reiterated her assertion that the U.S. government must promptly address its current nuclear fusion energy supply chain challenges so that the U.S. can quickly commercialize nuclear fusion energy once electricity production is achieved.
• Sen. Padilla indicated that his question period time had expired. He expressed interest in further exploring the capabilities of U.S. colleges and universities to educate and train the future nuclear fusion energy workforce.

Full Committee Chairman Joe Manchin (I-WV):

• Chairman Manchin highlighted how his proposed permitting reform legislation includes provisions to reconductor existing transmission lines. He commented that this reconductoring would double the number of electrons that can be carried on existing transmission lines. He stated however that utility companies are concerned about this provision because it could preclude their ability to charge higher rates through limiting their capital expenditures. He contended however that reconductoring existing transmission lines would enable the U.S. to improve its electricity transmission capacity.

Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV):

• Sen. Cortez Masto called it “crucial” for the U.S. to build out its nuclear fusion energy supply chains. She stated that high performance magnets are “crucial” for nuclear fusion energy and noted how China controls around 90 percent of global rare earth mineral processing and rare earth magnet manufacturing. She mentioned how China had announced an export ban for rare earth extraction and separation technologies in 2023. She also mentioned how China had recently banned the exports of certain rare earth minerals, including graphite, gallium, and germanium. She stated that China is threatening to weaponize its control of rare earth minerals. She asked the witnesses to identify actions that Congress can take to secure nuclear fusion energy supply chains. She mentioned how she had introduced the Rare Earth Magnet Manufacturing Production Tax Credit Act of 2023 with Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK). She commented that this legislation seeks to incentivize domestic rare earth magnet manufacturing. She asked the witnesses to indicate whether this legislation and similar policies are sensible for promoting the development of domestic nuclear fusion energy supply chains.
  • Ms. Siebens testified that Helion Energy’s greatest challenges involve the production of high voltage capacitors and semiconductors for their machines. She recommended that Congress amend the Section 45X Advanced Manufacturing Production Credit to ensure that nuclear fusion energy supply chain elements can qualify for the tax credit.
  • Dr. White called on the U.S. to pursue technology-inclusive policies that incorporate nuclear fusion energy supply chains into broader energy supply chains. He discussed how there are a “wide variety” of different engineering concepts currently underway for nuclear fusion energy. He noted how these concepts may require high-performance capacitors on other electronics, high-temperature superconducting magnets, and laser technology. He asserted that solely focusing on a single technology may make it challenging to develop an entire nuclear fusion energy industry. He stated that the U.S. should ensure that its policies (including tax credits and production incentives) would enable the entire nuclear fusion energy space to flourish and support companies in exploring other novel innovative technologies.
  • Dr. Allain remarked that the U.S. should support nuclear fusion energy supply chain innovation and called on the U.S. to build a “robust” nuclear fusion energy technology manufacturing network.  He stated that the U.S. must ensure that relationships between the public and private sectors are both developing nuclear fusion energy systems and supporting the growth of nuclear fusion energy supply chains. He asserted that international partnerships with “like-minded nations” will be important for supporting these efforts. He noted how both foreign and domestic nuclear fusion energy companies are making use of the U.S.’s manufacturing sector and regional hubs. He remarked that the U.S. Department of Energy’s FES Program must support these efforts through prioritizing the availability of advanced materials. He contended that the U.S. Department of Energy’s FES Program must address these needs immediately rather than wait until nuclear fusion energy developers are ready to deploy their energy to the grid.
• Sen. Cortez Masto expressed agreement with Dr. Allain’s statements. She asserted that the U.S. must work to immediately pursue the development of domestic nuclear fusion energy supply chains. She then expressed interest in discussing the issue of nuclear waste. She mentioned how the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository is located within her state of Nevada and expressed her opposition to this facility. She stated however that she is not opposed to nuclear fusion energy. She asked Dr. Allain to discuss the waste material differences between nuclear fission energy and nuclear fusion energy. She also asked Dr. Allain to address how Congress should consider the societal impacts of these energy sources.
  • Dr. Allain remarked that the waste streams of nuclear fusion energy technologies and nuclear fission energy technologies will need to be managed differently. He stated that nuclear fusion energy materials will require innovations to better manage their waste streams. He noted how the U.S. has over four decades of leadership in nuclear fusion energy materials and commented that the U.S. can leverage this expertise.
• Sen. Cortez Masto expressed hope that Congress and researchers can collaborate on managing nuclear waste. She stated that Congress has thus far been unsuccessful in addressing the U.S.’s nuclear waste challenges.
  • Ms. Siebens mentioned how Helion Energy uses deuterium and helium-3 for fuel. She noted how the half-life of tritium is only 12.3 years while the half-life of nuclear fission waste is about 24,000 years. She stated that the consideration of the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository is based on the significant length of time required to manage nuclear fission waste. She also remarked that the tritium that would be a byproduct of Helion Energy’s process would be a commodity because the tritium eventually decays into helium-3 (which the company could use for fuel). She concluded that Helion Energy has one of the most sustainable fuel cycles to date.
  • Dr. White remarked that the top characteristic of nuclear fusion energy is its lack of spent nuclear fuel. He stated however that nuclear fusion energy technologies will produce other types of waste. He remarked that the private nuclear fusion energy industry and other countries should consider the disposal pathways for nuclear fusion energy-related waste. He also stated that the U.S. should consider material recycling to reduce or reuse some of the materials that are coming from nuclear fusion energy machines for future machines. He further stated that the U.S. should consider ways to package this waste for disposal. He noted how the U.S. already has many facilities that can handle nuclear waste that is not spent nuclear fuel. He remarked that the nuclear fusion energy industry will need to ensure that nuclear fusion energy-related waste does not constitute a burden and barrier for future nuclear fusion energy deployment. He indicated that this work would involve making choices on advanced materials, machine operations, machine maintenance, and machine decommissioning. He stated that these considerations will influence efforts to commercialize nuclear fusion energy.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA):

• Sen. Cassidy mentioned how his state of Louisiana has many petrochemical refineries and noted how these refineries are very interested in decarbonization efforts. He highlighted how several of these refineries (including Dow and Air Liquide) are considering nuclear fusion energy solutions to decarbonize their operations. He asked the witnesses to comment on the potential for nuclear fusion energy to support such decarbonization efforts.
  • Dr. Allain discussed how there are numerous private sector entities that are pursuing different approaches to nuclear fusion energy. He remarked that the public and private sectors are beginning to converge on nuclear fusion energy development and deployment efforts. He stated that the U.S. will need to address remaining science and technology gaps regarding nuclear fusion energy to achieve nuclear fusion energy deployment within a decadal timeframe. He mentioned how the private sector is “aggressively” pursuing certain nuclear fusion energy technologies. He highlighted how the private sector is constructing certain designs and prototypes within a timeframe of between 1.5 years and 2 years, which he described as an “incredible pace.” He remarked that fostering cooperation between the public and private sectors will enable the U.S. to address the remaining science and technology gaps regarding nuclear fusion energy and meet its decadal timeframe for nuclear fusion energy deployment.
• Sen. Cassidy interjected to ask the witnesses to address the extent to which private investments in nuclear fusion energy technologies could replace public investments in the technologies.
  • Dr. Allain remarked that the U.S. should be thoughtful, methodical, and strategic in making its investments in nuclear fusion energy technologies. He stated that the U.S. government is currently working to identify gaps present within nuclear fusion energy science and technologies and to target its investments to address these gaps.
• Sen. Cassidy noted how there exist concerns that China is spending more on nuclear fusion energy development and deployment efforts. He commented that there is no distinction between the public and private sectors in China. He also noted how the U.S. government is making its own investments in nuclear fusion energy development and deployment and is also involved in ITER. He asked Dr. Allain to indicate whether China’s spending on nuclear fusion energy development and deployment efforts is greater than the U.S.’s combined spending on these efforts.
  • Dr. Allain remarked that the U.S. must ensure that it is maximizing the partnerships between the public and private sectors to deploy nuclear fusion energy technology.
• Sen. Cassidy interjected to comment that Congress is interested in prioritizing its spending on nuclear fusion energy development and deployment efforts. He expressed interest in assessing the adequacy of the U.S.’s current public sector, private sector, and international spending on these efforts.
  • Ms. Siebens remarked that U.S. policymakers should focus most on the amount of money that China is spending on commercially relevant nuclear fusion energy programs. She stated that Helion Energy is focused on the race to deploy nuclear fusion energy technologies after the technologies have been demonstrated. She asserted that the U.S. would need to build out nuclear fusion energy supply chains both domestically and with allied countries. She commented that this supply chain buildout would ensure that the U.S. could deploy nuclear fusion energy technologies at scale and become the global leader in this space. She also stated that the U.S. should work to leverage existing U.S. Department of Energy funding to support the deployment of nuclear fusion energy machines through applied materials R&D efforts. She mentioned how the Fusion Industry Association has produced spending analyses for these efforts.
• Sen. Cassidy interjected to ask Ms. Siebens to indicate whether Congress should engage in oversight of existing federal nuclear fusion energy programs to ensure that current federal funds are being spent wisely.
  • Ms. Siebens answered affirmatively. She stated that while additional federal funding for nuclear fusion energy programs would be beneficial, she asserted that the U.S. could improve its use of existing resources.
  • Dr. White remarked that U.S. policymakers should consider the multiplicative effect of federal investments into private nuclear fusion energy companies. He stated that early-stage grants could support innovative nuclear fusion energy concepts that might otherwise struggle in private markets to achieve the level of demonstration. He commented that this achievement could enable these companies to obtain venture capital funding or develop early-stage technologies that could receive additional grants. He also stated that the ability of private nuclear fusion energy companies to receive U.S. Department of Energy grants could provide private investors with the necessary confidence to invest in nuclear fusion energy technologies. He commented that this confidence would result in more private capital being invested into the nuclear fusion energy space.
• Sen. Cassidy noted how Dr. Allain had called for the public and private sectors to address common gaps within nuclear fusion energy science and technology, how Ms. Siebens had called for the commercialization of nuclear fusion energy technology, and how Dr. White had made specific recommendations for promoting nuclear fusion energy commercialization.
  • Dr. White further recommended that the U.S. identify cross-cutting issues impacting the public and private sectors. He indicated that these issues could include materials research, the nuclear fusion energy fuel cycle, and tritium handling. He commented that a single company would likely not have the resources and capabilities to address these issues on their own.
• Sen. Cassidy interjected to mention how the U.S. is involved in an international consortium that is engaged in nuclear fusion energy R&D efforts. He asked Dr. White to indicate whether the U.S. must independently pursue such R&D efforts.
  • Dr. White noted how ITER is focused on the scientific demonstration of a net nuclear fusion energy machine. He commented that ITER will likely not robustly consider advanced materials research and other commercially relevant technologies for nuclear fusion energy deployment.
  • Dr. Allain remarked that the realization of nuclear fusion energy will require the pursuit of multiple parallel actions. He mentioned how the U.S.’s international partnership plan and strategy involves engaging like-minded countries on various nuclear fusion energy topics. He stated that the U.S. is seeking to coordinate its investments on these topics with these international partners to maximize returns.

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO):

• Sen. Hickenlooper mentioned how the U.S. Department of Energy had recently funded three laser fusion research hubs. He indicated that this funding would amount to $42 million over four years. He stated that these research hubs seek to convene researchers from academia, U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratories, and industry to address the technical challenges associated with nuclear fusion energy. He commented that one goal of this cooperation is to support the commercialization of nuclear fusion energy technology. He also mentioned how Colorado State University will soon begin constructing a $150 million facility that will house three high-powered lasers. He asked Dr. Allain to discuss how the U.S. Department of Energy plans to work with Colorado State University on nuclear fusion energy commercialization efforts.
  • Dr. Allain mentioned how he had personally traveled to Colorado to celebrate the U.S. Department of Energy’s Inertial Fusion Energy (IEF) Hubs. He remarked that cooperation between the public and private sectors will be key to advancing the commercialization of nuclear fusion energy. He stated that IEF is one area that the U.S. Department of Energy is seeking to advance. He discussed how the U.S. Department of Energy is using its hubs to identify common gaps in nuclear fusion energy science and technology, including gaps related to materials and fuel cycles. He remarked that Colorado State University’s work on nuclear fusion energy R&D is an example of how numerous stakeholders across governments, academia, and industry are working to move nuclear fusion energy from the scientific stage to the technology development stage. He called this work “very exciting.”
• Sen. Hickenlooper remarked that the cooperation between the public and private sectors on nuclear fusion energy R&D within the U.S. is likely very different from the cooperation between the public and private sectors on nuclear fusion energy R&D within China.
  • Dr. Allain highlighted how the nuclear fusion energy R&D efforts occurring in Colorado involve collaboration with Germany. He mentioned how the U.S. Department of Energy had just sent a delegation of ten nuclear fusion energy scientists and engineers to Germany. He remarked that the U.S. Department of Energy is focused on identifying the ecosystems that will support nuclear fusion energy science and technology development. He noted how the central focus of the U.S.’s discussions and partnership with Germany involves the supply chains related to laser systems.
• Sen. Hickenlooper then discussed how the U.S. is engaged in a race with China to transition to cleaner energy sources. He stated that nuclear fusion energy could revolutionize the energy sector and could provide environmental and security benefits. He noted however that the U.S. is lagging China in certain aspects of its nuclear fusion energy development and deployment efforts. He asked Ms. Siebens to elaborate on some of the investments that China is making in nuclear fusion energy. He also asked Ms. Siebens to provide recommendations for how Congress and the Biden administration could support the U.S. in regaining its advantage within the global nuclear fusion energy space.
  • Ms. Siebens mentioned how the ENN Energy Research Institute’s HeLong Experiment had announced a program immediately following Helion Energy’s announcement that the company’s nuclear fusion energy machine had achieved 100-million-degree temperatures. She noted how the ENN Energy Research Institute’s HeLong Experiment had published a schematic that was identical to Helion Energy’s concept. She stated that ENN Energy Research Institute is brazenly copying Helion Energy’s work. She also mentioned how Chinese company HHMAX had recently acknowledged that Helion Energy’s approach to nuclear fusion energy is the fastest approach for achieving commercial nuclear fusion power. She indicated that HHMAX had publicly stated its intent to replicate Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy machine design. She then remarked that China has a successful track record of gaining control over supply chains for U.S.-developed innovations. She asserted that the U.S. must proactively consider nuclear fusion energy supply chain issues and develop a policy framework for securing nuclear fusion energy supply chains once nuclear fusion energy technology has been successfully demonstrated. She commented that this proactive work would ensure that the U.S. does not become dependent on China for nuclear fusion energy once the technology is scaled up.
  • Dr. White discussed how nuclear fusion energy technology development will entail a scientific demonstration, an engineering demonstration, and a commercial demonstration. He stated that China has a plan for each of these demonstration phases. He noted how China is currently constructing the Burning Plasma Experimental Tokamak (BEST) and indicated that this tokamak will serve as both a scientific and engineering demonstration for Chinese nuclear fusion energy technology. He also mentioned how China has already announced plans for its China Fusion Engineering Test Reactor (CFETR), which he described as a demonstration nuclear fusion energy machine. He further noted how China maintains its Comprehensive Research Facility for Fusion Technology (CRAFT) facility. He explained that this facility is a “cross-cutting” technology R&D facility that will address many issues related to materials science, enabling technologies, and nuclear fusion energy fuel cycles. He reiterated that China has a plan for scientific demonstration, engineering demonstration, and commercial demonstration of nuclear fusion energy. He stated that the U.S. will need a matching plan to compete with China on achieving nuclear fusion energy commercialization.
• Sen. Hickenlooper expressed agreement with Dr. White’s response. He commented that the U.S.’s current collaboration with China on nuclear fusion energy issues can undermine the U.S.’s competitiveness on these issues with China. He also mentioned how China is pursuing similar actions within the global critical minerals space and stated that China is building more cohesive critical minerals supply chains. He commented that China’s critical minerals supply chains make it more difficult for the U.S. to build competing supply chains.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK):

• Sen. Murkowski expressed interest in ensuring that the U.S. maintains appropriate safeguards to protect itself from China as the U.S. engages in international nuclear fusion energy R&D efforts. She highlighted how ITER receives support from many countries, including China. She asked Dr. Allain to discuss how U.S. nuclear fusion energy technologies and resources are being safeguarded from adversarial countries participating in ITER.
  • Dr. Allain called it important for the U.S. to safeguard its nuclear fusion energy innovation and expertise. He discussed how ITER involves seven countries and indicated that the U.S. provides in-kind hardware and contributions to the ITER project. He testified that the U.S. protects the IP that supports the ITER project. He stated however that the ITER project has aspects that remain open to sharing. He indicated that a legal agreement between ITER partner countries governs how ITER’s work and findings are shared among the partner countries. He emphasized that this legal agreement provides protections for U.S. IP and a prescribed process for sharing information between ITER member countries.
• Sen. Murkowski noted how Ms. Siebens’s testimony had highlighted China’s efforts to replicate some of Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy prototypes. He asked Ms. Siebens to indicate whether China has been successful in engineering their own versions of Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy technologies.
  • Ms. Siebens testified that she does not believe that China has been successful in engineering their own versions of Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy technologies. She stated however that China is working diligently to replicate Helion Energy’s technologies. She remarked that Helion Energy works to protect its IP through focusing on building and demonstrating a nuclear fusion energy machine and through limiting its public sharing of plans. She discussed how nuclear fusion energy research had predominantly occurred within academic settings where there exists a strong culture of information sharing. She stated that the impending demonstration of nuclear fusion energy technologies has made companies less willing to share their proprietary information.
• Sen. Murkowski then discussed how nuclear fusion energy could help to satisfy increased demands for energy and provide clean power for industrial users. She asked the witnesses to discuss how nuclear fusion energy could address energy availability and reliability challenges in remote and rural regions. She highlighted how her state of Alaska faces challenges providing energy to remote regions.
  • Dr. White remarked that policymakers must begin to consider how to establish clean energy grids. He stated that this effort will entail balancing intermittent renewable energy sources with firm clean energy sources. He asserted that nuclear fusion energy could serve as a firm clean energy source to support remote communities. He stated that the private sector will need to develop nuclear fusion energy machines of different sizes and capabilities to address a diverse set of energy consumption needs. He commented that there will exist differences in terms of providing heat and electricity to smaller communities versus providing electricity to larger industrial users. He remarked that the private sector has an opportunity to work with different stakeholders and potential customers to identify commercially viable energy products and services. He stated that customers will differ in terms of their nuclear fusion energy machine demands. He commented that the private nuclear fusion energy industry is working to respond to these diverse demands.
• Sen. Murkowski asked Ms. Siebens to indicate whether Helion Energy would consider opportunities to demonstrate nuclear fusion energy technologies within remote areas of Alaska. She also asked Ms. Siebens to discuss the factors that Helion Energy would need to consider related to siting such a demonstration.
  • Ms. Siebens remarked that Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy machines and systems are “very well suited” for siting in remote communities. She discussed how Helion Energy’s machines have a very small external power demand. She noted how these machines use a pulsed system and only rely upon external power to create the initial pulse. She commented that the amount of external power required to create the initial pulse is very small and that solar panels or small generators could support this initial pulse. She also discussed how Helion Energy’s facilities have a small footprint and indicated that a 50 MW facility would require a facility that is less than 30,000 square feet. She then emphasized that Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy facilities provide 24/7 power and require limited space for onsite fuel storage. She concluded that Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy technologies are well-suited for remote areas in Alaska and expressed the company’s interest in pursuing this market.

Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND):

• Sen. Hoeven noted how the promise of nuclear fusion energy technology has existed for decades and commented that the deployment of nuclear fusion energy has not yet been achieved. He asked the witnesses to indicate whether nuclear fusion energy would eventually be deployed commercially and to project when such a deployment would occur. He further asked the witnesses to indicate whether nuclear fusion energy would be deployed through smaller applications or larger applications.
  • Dr. Allain first noted that many currently available novel technologies have taken a long time to develop. He remarked that the private sector has made significant progress over the previous ten years in terms of building prototypes to demonstrate nuclear fusion energy technologies. He stated that the U.S. Department of Energy’s FES Program is rethinking how it approaches nuclear fusion energy technology. He then discussed how there have been numerous technology developments outside of the nuclear fusion energy space that are supporting the development of nuclear fusion energy technologies. He specifically highlighted how developments in AI technology, machine learning (ML) technology, and high temperature materials are supporting nuclear fusion energy technology developments.
• Sen. Hoeven asked Dr. Allain to indicate when nuclear fusion energy would become commercially available within the U.S.
  • Dr. Allain remarked that the U.S. Department of Energy is focused on immediately addressing current science and technology gaps within the nuclear fusion energy space. He testified that the U.S. Department of Energy is aiming to have nuclear fusion energy pilot plants be deployed during the 2030s. He also stated that there exist approaches to nuclear fusion energy that could result in quicker deployment of the technology.
• Sen. Hoeven commented that Dr. Allain’s prediction that the U.S. would begin to deploy nuclear fusion energy during the 2030s suggests that this deployment is not imminent.
  • Dr. Allain remarked that it would take time to develop and translate nuclear fusion energy technology.
• Sen. Hoeven interjected to ask Dr. Allain to indicate when the U.S. would deploy nuclear fusion energy.
  • Dr. Allain remarked that the U.S. has made “significant strides” over the previous decade to close many science and technology gaps within the nuclear fusion energy space.
• Sen. Hoeven interjected to assert that Dr. Allain is failing to provide a timeline for nuclear fusion energy commercialization. He commented that Dr. Allain’s previous responses to his questions could have been provided ten years ago.
  • Dr. Allain reiterated his assertion that the U.S. has made “strides” in addressing the science and technology gaps within the nuclear fusion energy space. He predicted that these gaps would be addressed within the next five to ten years.
  • Ms. Siebens testified that Helion Energy is on schedule to have the first ever commercially operating nuclear fusion power plant in 2028. She indicated that this nuclear fusion power plant will provide power to Microsoft and that Helion Energy has a firm power purchase agreement with Microsoft.
• Sen. Hoeven interjected to ask Ms. Siebens to provide more details on Helion Energy’s planned nuclear fusion power plant.
  • Ms. Siebens noted how Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy machine uses a pulsed system.

Full Committee Chairman Joe Manchin (I-WV):

• Chairman Manchin interjected to ask Ms. Siebens to explain the how ITER and Helion Energy are using different technologies to achieve nuclear fusion energy.
  • Ms. Siebens discussed how ITER uses a steady state design (which seeks to contain long-lived plasma) while Helion Energy uses a pulsed system (which would perform small amounts of nuclear fusion energy reactions in very quick increments repeatedly). She commented that Helion Energy’s pulsed system helps to reduce the sizes of its nuclear fusion energy machines.
• Chairman Manchin asked Ms. Siebens to indicate whether pulsed nuclear fusion energy systems can increase and decrease their levels of energy production.
  • Ms. Siebens answered affirmatively. She testified that Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy machines can pulse anywhere between once per minute and ten times per second.
• Chairman Manchin interjected to ask Ms. Siebens to confirm that Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy machines can adjust their operations in response to shifting demands.
  • Ms. Siebens testified that Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy machines can adjust their operations in real time. She mentioned how Helion Energy’s most recent nuclear fusion energy machine had over 10,000 fusion pulses. She stated this experience has given Helion Energy the confidence to project that its seventh nuclear fusion energy machine will be able to demonstrate electricity production. She testified that Helion Energy’s seventh nuclear fusion energy machine is on schedule to be completed in 2024.

Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND):

• Sen. Hoeven asked Ms. Siebens to confirm that Helion Energy’s planned 2028 nuclear fusion power plant will involve a pulsed system.
  • Ms. Siebens indicated that Helion Energy’s planned 2028 nuclear fusion power plant will involve a pulsed system.
• Sen. Hoeven commended Ms. Siebens for sharing an estimated date for nuclear fusion energy deployment. He asked Ms. Siebens to elaborate on how Helion Energy’s planned nuclear fusion power plant would function.
  • Ms. Siebens remarked that Helion Energy’s planned nuclear fusion power plant would support Microsoft’s data center energy needs. She indicated that this nuclear fusion power plant for Microsoft would be 50 MW and less than 30,000 square feet. She further stated that this nuclear fusion power plant will be able to adjust its energy production in response to customer demand. She also mentioned how Helion Energy has an agreement with Nucor to deploy a 500 MW nuclear fusion energy facility.
• Sen. Hoeven asked Ms. Siebens to indicate whether Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy facilities will have low fuel costs once constructed. He also asked Ms. Siebens to indicate how long Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy facilities will operate for.
  • Ms. Siebens noted how Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy machines will require new fuel to be added to its systems at a later date.
• Sen. Hoeven interjected to ask Ms. Siebens to indicate the type of fuel that would need to be added to Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy systems.
  • Ms. Siebens indicated that Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy systems use deuterium (which she described as very cheap) and helium-3. She noted that helium-3 is not widely available naturally on earth and that helium-3 can be created.
• Sen. Hoeven interjected to comment that the need to refuel nuclear fusion energy systems can diminish potential applications of this technology.
  • Ms. Siebens dismissed concerns that the need to refuel nuclear fusion energy systems would pose a challenge. She stated that the fuel that Helion Energy uses is widely abundant and very cheap.
• Sen. Hoeven asked Ms. Siebens to indicate whether deuterium has similar availability to traditional water.
  • Ms. Siebens answered affirmatively. She also noted how Helion Energy produces helium-3 as a byproduct of its nuclear fusion energy systems. She commented that Helion Energy thus produces much of its required fuel by simply running its nuclear fusion energy machines. She further noted that separate deuterium and deuterium fusing machines can create helium-3 as a byproduct. She concluded that Helion Energy’s required fuel for its nuclear fusion energy systems is very cheap and sustainable.
• Sen. Hoeven discussed how nuclear fission energy creates radioactive material as a byproduct and noted how this material can be difficult to store. He stated however that nuclear fission technology does not have the same refueling challenges as nuclear fusion technology. He commented that this feature of nuclear fission energy makes it better suited for powering transportation vehicles. He expressed interest in assessing the wisdom of the U.S.’s spending on nuclear fusion energy technology, when the U.S. will realize benefits from these investments, and how nuclear fusion energy would compare to other energy sources.
  • Ms. Siebens stated that the fuels required to support Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy systems are much cheaper than the fuels required to support nuclear fission energy systems. She emphasized that both nuclear fusion energy systems and nuclear fission energy systems require refueling. She noted how existing nuclear fission power plants tend to have one and a half year refueling cycles. She further testified that the amount of nuclear fuel that one of Helion Energy’s nuclear fusion energy systems uses in a month could be held inside a bowling ball-sized canister.

Full Committee Chairman Joe Manchin (I-WV):

• Chairman Manchin interjected to note how Ms. Siebens had previously indicated that Helion Energy’s planned 50MW nuclear fusion power plant for Microsoft would be around 30,000 square feet. He asked Ms. Siebens to indicate the size of Helion Energy’s planned 500 MW nuclear fusion power plant for Nucor.
  • Ms. Siebens testified that Helion Energy is currently working on the design for its 500 MW nuclear fusion power plant for Nucor. She stated that this 500 MW nuclear fusion power plant would not be significantly larger than Helion Energy’s 50 MW nuclear fusion power plant. She indicated that the actual nuclear fusion power machine inside the 500 MW facility will not be much larger than the nuclear fusion power machine inside the 50 MW facility. She noted however that the footprint of the power electronics for the 500 MW facility would be greater than the footprint of the power electronics for the 50 MW facility.
• Chairman Manchin highlighted how Helion Energy’s planned 500 MW facility for Nucor will be in his state of West Virginia.

Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND):

• Sen. Hoeven stated that the proposals to develop nuclear fusion energy facilities necessitates concrete timelines for nuclear fusion energy technology’s deployment.