Washington D.C.
IN TEXAS there lies an epitaph to big physics鈥攕everal miles of
underground tunnels that were once to be the home of protons colliding at
monumental energies. Now the tunnels are home to nothing more exotic than
mushrooms.
The Superconducting Supercollider was junked after years of work and
$2 billion of spending. Cost overruns and doubts among the physicists and
members of Congress who fund them brought the project to a grinding halt in
1993. Mutter the acronym 鈥淪SC鈥� at the Department of Energy now and you鈥檙e likely
to draw a glance as icy as, well, cold fusion.
Advertisement
But physicists must have big machines to plumb the Universe, about that
there鈥檚 little debate. And sure enough, another big thing is about to be
unveiled at the DOE. It鈥檚 called the National Ignition Facility, NIF for short.
It鈥檚 to be the largest assemblage of lasers in the world, creating a beam ten
times as powerful as the country鈥檚 largest existing laser.
NIF鈥檚 purpose is threefold. First, it will test the readiness of the
country鈥檚 nuclear arsenal now that we can鈥檛 occasionally set off a bomb
underground to see if it still works. Secondly, it鈥檚 supposed to achieve fusion
ignition and get more energy out of nuclear fusion than it puts in鈥攕o
crossing the Rubicon of controlled fusion. And finally, it鈥檚 a jobs programme
for the restive weapons scientists at government labs who cannot make new bombs
because of arms treaties.
NIF will cost more than $1 billion to build and is the linchpin of the
15-year, $40-billion nuclear weapons 鈥渟tewardship鈥� programme鈥攖he
full gamut of equipment needed to replace underground tests. It has enthusiastic
support from the majority of scientists in the fusion and weapons business.
But there are people who see Texas tunnels here. Some fusion scientists are
questioning whether NIF can achieve ignition. There are former weapons
scientists who say the laser is not needed to test the readiness of our
stockpiled bombs. And there are plenty of scientists who say there are better
ways to employ out-of-work bomb builders. All, however, have kept pretty quiet
about their doubts.
The solidarity may have something to do with, you guessed it, money. After
all, $40 billion is a big piece of change for the weapons labs and fusion
scientists, who live in a more uncertain world nowadays. And there鈥檚 this:
critics of the plan suspect a deal was cut between the White House and the
weapons labs. If the labs supported the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and agreed
to end bomb tests, then they would be rewarded. The treaty has been signed by
the US, but awaits Congressional ratification.
But some critics鈥攁 collection of antinuke and pro-environmental
groups鈥攁re trying to stop NIF. They鈥檝e gained one small victory: they got
a court to temporarily throw out a study commissioned by the prestigious
National Academy of Sciences on NIF鈥檚 importance to fusion energy research. The
DOE was looking for an approving nod from the panel to justify NIF. A federal
judge agreed with the critics that the academy鈥檚 panel had not conducted its
business as openly as it should have.
Still to be weighed in court is the charge that the panel is stacked with NIF
advocates. Next, the critics are suing on the grounds that the DOE hasn鈥檛
weighed cheaper, better alternatives. And on their lips can be heard the chant
of sibilant consonants鈥斺�漇SC, SSC, SSC鈥�.
THERE鈥檚 a saying in the US that you get along by going along. No one knows
that better than Harold Varmus. Varmus is the Nobel prizewinning biologist who
left the laboratory bench four years ago to become director of the National
Institutes of Health. Needless to say, when news of the Scottish sheep cloning
success hit the American media, everyone turned to Varmus for a response.
Varmus moved cautiously. In the US, largely because of the anti-abortion
movement, merely whispering the words 鈥渆mbryo鈥� and 鈥渞esearch鈥� in the same
sentence sets off a storm of protest. But Varmus is also a biologist. And
biologists believe they have as firm a grasp on ethics as the next person
(especially when the next person is an elected official). So when within days of
the first cloning headline Congress tried to ban all human cloning research,
Varmus urged legislators not to move precipitously. A ban could stop some
interesting, important and ethically justifiable research.
But a week after offering this opinion to Congress, Varmus found himself
standing next to President Clinton as the President announced that he was moving
rapidly (but presumably not precipitously) to ban the use of federal funds for
human cloning.
Afterwards, Varmus explained his apparent about-face by saying that he
opposed a 鈥渓egislated鈥� ban, adding that he was happy with the President鈥檚 ban
because it was not intended to be permanent (although temporary bans have a
funny way of becoming permanent at the White House).
You could argue the fine points of Varmus鈥檚 logic鈥攂ut it appears to be
a fairly clear example of getting along by going along.