TABLE A.1 Plasma Science Funding (current million dollars)—AFOSR, ONR, DOE

Agency

FY 1989

FY 1990

FY 1991

FY 1992

Change 1989–1992

AFOSRa

6.5

6.27

6.08

6.38

-1.8%

ONRb

~3.0

3.0

3.0

2.8

-7%

DOE-AEPc

3.2

2.2

2.3

1.2

-63%

DOE-ICFd

4.5

3.0

4.2

4.4

-2.2%

Total

~17.2

14.5

15.6

14.8

-12%

a Combines Life and Environmental Sciences with Physics and Electronics.

b Assuming 3.0 for 1989.

c Advanced Energy Projects, in BES.

d Estimate of that portion of the program going to basic plasma science.

TABLE A.2 Plasma Science Funding (current million dollars)—NASA Space Physics

Program

FY 1989

FY 1990

FY 1991

FY 1992

FY 1993

FY 1994

Change 1989–1994

SR&T

18.8

20.3

20.0

19.6

19.5

19.4

+3.2%

Dataa

~ 10

12.7

12.9

25.7

8.0

6.9

approx. -30%

Note: SR&T = Supporting Research and Technology.

a The 1989 number is approximate. The large increase in 1992 combines data analysis with nonplasma instrument costs, cameras, cosmic-ray instruments, and so on, for the Pioneer and Voyager missions.

and basic plasma science with 22%. The reviewer's conclusion was that "support for plasma science and technology at NSF is very thin."1

With the above identified weaknesses, Tables A.1 and A.2 present a picture of the problems of plasma science funding. The programs listed in Table A.1, which fund small efforts in basic science, have not kept up with inflation, which totaled 13% from 1989 to 1992,2 much less expanded to match the potential of

1  

"Plasma Science and Technology at NSF," prepared by Tim Eastman, NSF Atmospheric Sciences Division, May 10, 1993.

2  

Using the consumer price index.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement