Tony Thurmond: “I have just told you about the CBO review. Now let me tell you about an analysis conducted by the Congressional Research…”

“I have just told you about the CBO review. Now let me tell you about an analysis conducted by the Congressional Research Service which was an exhaustive and complete examination of both the reactor and accelerator options. This assessment was released June 18, 1998, by the defense staff at the Congressional Research Service. This report found that the reactor and the accelerator options are "competitive on a cost basis." The CRS report states that the cost of the reactor option ranges from $2.5 billion to $3.7 billion, while the cost of the accelerator ranges from $2.5 to $2.9 billion. In other words the accelerator could cost less than the reactor. The CRS assessment is the most in depth assessment conducted on the costs of the two tritium options to date. It represents the most recent information available and it says the costs of the reactor and the accelerator are comparable, that there are no technical risks associated with the accelerator, and that the accelerator actually has a greater chance of returning revenue to the U.S. Treasury than the reactor. The revenue producing potential of the accelerator is one of the many things that the CBO assessment failed to account for fully. Because the accelerator will operate on a continuous basis, it is possible to use a portion of the accelerator beam to produce much needed medical isotopes which can be used to treat prostate, breast, and many other types of cancers.”