Plasma Science: From Fundamental Research to Technological Applications

In the mid-1980s, the plasma physics volume of the series Physics Through the 1990s (National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1986) signaled problems for plasma science in the United States, particularly with regard to the basic aspects of the science. In the years that followed, there developed a widespread feeling in the plasma science community that something systematic needed to be done to address these issues. Out of this concern, the Plasma Science Committee of the Board on Physics and Astronomy was created in 1988. Following its establishment, plans were begun to undertake this study. With funding from the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, and the Office of Naval Research, the Panel on Opportunities in Plasma Science and Technology was appointed in May 1992 and the study began.

Approximately half of the 13-member panel consisted of experts in the many facets of plasma science considered in this report and half of scientists outside the field, with one of the co-chairs selected as a person with experience in science policy. Three of the members are from industry; one is from a government laboratory and one from an independent research society; and the remaining eight are from academe.

The task statement to the panel requested that this study examine virtually all aspects of plasma science and technology in the United States, assess the health of basic plasma science as a research enterprise, and identify and address key issues in the field. Specifically, the panel was charged with the task of conducting an assessment of plasma science that included beams, accelerators, and coherent radiation sources; single-species plasmas and atomic traps; basic plasma science in magnetic confinement and inertial fusion devices; space plasma physics; astrophysics; low-temperature plasmas; and theoretical and computational plasma science. It was directed to address the following:

1. Assess the health of basic plasma science in the United States as a research enterprise: (a) Identify and describe selected scientific opportunities. (b) Identify and describe selected technological opportunities. (c) Assess and prioritize new opportunities for research using the criteria of intellectual challenge, prospects for illumination of classic research questions, connection with other fields of science, and potential for applications. (d) Assess applications using the criteria of potential for contributing to industrial competitiveness, national defense, human health, and other aspects of human welfare.
2. Identify and address the issues in the field, including the following: (a) Evaluate the quality and size of the educational programs in plasma science in light of the nation's future needs. (b) Assess the institutional infrastructure in which plasma science is conducted, and identify changes that would improve the research and educational effort. (c) Characterize the basic experimental facilities needed to increase scientific productivity. (d) Develop a research strategy that is responsive to the issues. (e) Compare the U.S. program with those of Japan and Western Europe, and identify opportunities for international cooperation. (f) Identify the interactions and synergism with other areas of physics, chemistry, mathematics, and astronomy. (g) Assess the linkage of theory and experiment. (h) Assess manpower requirements and the prospects for meeting them. (i) Identify the users of plasma science and their needs.
3. Make recommendations to federal agencies and to the community that address these issues.

During the course of the study, the panel held three two-day meetings and two lengthy teleconferences. As part of the process, the panel took steps to solicit input from the plasma science community. Letters were sent to 200 scientists and engineers, requesting their input on the issues raised in the charge to the panel. This list was selected from the list of Fellows of the Plasma Physics Division of the American Physical Society (90), and it also included others suggested by members of the panel (65) and by grant officers involved in funding plasma science (45). The letters went to university faculty and staff (90), industrial scientists (25), staff at national laboratories (50), and others (5). A separate, more specialized survey was sent to 33 experimentalists engaged in basic plasma physics research. Input was also solicited by announcements of the panel's work that appeared in the newsletters of the American Geophysical Union, the American Physical Society, the Plasma Physics Division of the American Physical Society, the Committee on Plasma Science of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), and the University Fusion Associates. Town meetings were held at American Physical Society Plasma Physics Division meetings and the Gaseous Electronics Conference. There is general agreement from these sources on the themes expressed in this report: There is concern about the decline in basic plasma science, particularly in the area of basic plasma experiment and other small-scale research efforts, and basic plasma science is perceived to lack a "home" in the federal agencies.

Also during the course of the study, the panel heard presentations from grant officers involved in funding plasma science from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, the Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Department of Energy, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Science Foundation, and the Office of Naval Research.

The task statement requested that the panel assess specific areas of plasma science, such as beams, accelerators, and coherent radiation sources (called topical areas in the report), and broad areas of plasma science, including fundamental plasma experiments, theoretical and computational plasma physics, and education in plasma science. At the first meeting of the panel, these areas were renamed slightly and the topical area of low-temperature plasmas was added, since it had been omitted from the task statement through an oversight. The resulting seven topical areas are assessed in Part II of the report, and the three broad areas of plasma science are assessed in Part III. Part IV consists of some concluding remarks.

During the course of the study, the panel had numerous discussions about the desirability of establishing organizational units specifically devoted to plasma science in the relevant federal agencies. Many members of the plasma science community who were consulted strongly advocated the establishment of such homes, believing that they are needed if basic plasma science is to be given the focused attention and increased support that the panel recommends. While this subject is beyond the scope of the panel's work, the panel suggests that the federal government might give this issue further consideration.

NAS Home Page | NAP Home Page | Reading Room | Report Home Page