| |
What’s Ahead
 |
| Image credit – Architect of the Capitol |
Action Awaited on FY22 and FY23 Budgets
Lawmakers are pressing to wrap up work this week on legislation that will finalize fiscal year 2022 appropriations for federal agencies, as the stopgap measure funding the government is scheduled to expire on Friday. Congress may again resort to passing a short extension of the stopgap to buy more time for the negotiations, which have been complicated by President Biden’s request for emergency funds to address Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and to supplement pandemic recovery and preparedness initiatives. Of the $10 billion requested for Ukraine support, $21 million is for the Commerce Department to “bolster export controls for dual use technology” and $30 million is for the Department of Energy to help Ukraine integrate its electric grid with Europe. Of the $22.5 billion in pandemic funds, $1.5 billion would go to “near-term research and development” of vaccines for future coronavirus variants. The delay in finalizing the fiscal year 2022 budget has pushed back Biden’s budget request for fiscal year 2023, which was supposed to be sent to Congress in February and could in principle be released at any point now.
House Committees Examine Federal Climate Resilience Efforts
Federal efforts to increase resilience against climate change will be the subject of a House Science Committee hearing on Tuesday and a House Climate Crisis Committee hearing on Wednesday. The hearings come a week after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a major assessment of the regional risks and impacts of climate change, offering a particularly dire outlook for low-lying coastal communities and lower-income populations. Witnesses at the Tuesday hearing include Rick Spinrad, head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Ingrid Kolb, the Department of Energy’s chief sustainability officer; Joel Carney, head of NASA’s Office of Strategic Infrastructure; and Alfredo Gomez, director of the Natural Resources and Environment team at the Government Accountability Office. NOAA, DOE, and NASA were among the 23 federal agencies that released climate change adaptation plans last October, which outline actions each could take to address their own vulnerabilities and improve resilience nationwide. Spinrad also co-leads an interagency panel that is coordinating the federal government’s coastal resilience initiatives, including an effort to direct billions of dollars toward preparing low-lying coastal communities for the impacts of climate change. The Wednesday hearing will feature witnesses from the research community and a nonprofit organization focused on climate adaptation, as well as a local leader from southern Louisiana.
Small Business R&D Programs up for Renewal
The House Small Business Committee is holding a hearing on Tuesday on the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs, which aim to support technology commercialization by fostering partnerships between small businesses and federal science agencies. Launched in 1982, the programs are periodically renewed and are currently set to expire in September, and this week’s hearing is one in a series the committee is holding to examine the case for extending them. A provision extending both programs for five years was included in the America COMPETES Act that the House passed last month. The witness for the hearing is John Williams, director of innovation and technology at the Small Business Administration, which coordinates policy across the 11 science agencies participating in SBIR and STTR.
Panel to Examine US High Energy Physics in Global Context
During a short meeting on Monday, the High Energy Physics Advisory Panel is receiving a charge from the Department of Energy and National Science Foundation to recommend actions to improve the position of U.S. particle physics in a global context. The panel is asked to report back by July 1 on questions such as how the U.S. can maintain international cooperation amid competition for talent and resources, and how the country can sustain a reputation as a “partner of choice.” The study will also identify areas where the U.S. is, and can aspire to be, an international leader in high energy physics and what it can do to attract and retain talent, including from underrepresented groups. Previewing the charge at HEPAP’s last meeting, the head of DOE’s High Energy Physics program, Jim Siegrist, said the study would have a short turnaround so that it can feed into the strategic planning process for the field that is now beginning. This week’s meeting will also include an update on preparations for the “Snowmass” meeting scheduled for this summer, which will also inform that process, as well as remarks in appreciation of Siegrist, who is retiring from DOE at the end of the month.
DOE Convenes Energy Storage Summit
Berkeley Lab is hosting a two-day virtual summit on energy storage this week. Tuesday’s sessions will focus on batteries, exploring technical and policy advances needed to accelerate battery R&D and strengthen U.S. supply chains. The sessions will build on the National Blueprint for Lithium Batteries that the Department of Energy issued last June, which laid out a strategy for securing access to critical minerals, boosting domestic processing and manufacturing capacity, and improving recycling practices. Wednesday’s agenda focuses on deployment of energy storage technologies, including a discussion of recent and anticipated legislative and regulatory actions aimed at spurring deployment. The summit’s keynote speakers include Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, DOE Under Secretary for Science and Innovation Geri Richmond, and White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Deputy Director for Energy Sally Benson.
|
|
In Case You Missed It
 |
| In a speech to the European parliament seeking more support against Russia, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy mentioned that the besieged city of Kharkiv hosts more than 20 universities, the most out of any city in the country. (Image credit – Dati Bendo / European Commission Audiovisual Service) |
Toll of Ukraine Crisis on Science Continues to Mount
As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine enters its second week, the harms it is causing to scientists and to longstanding international partnerships is compounding:
- Ukrainian science. Details have begun to emerge concerning the destruction the invasion is bringing to Ukrainian science, with researchers variously seeking shelter, becoming refugees, or taking up arms. Ukraine’s science minister called for countries to place “severe restrictions” on scientific partnerships with Russia, and the head of Ukraine’s national research foundation requested assistance programs be set up for Ukrainian scientists. The website Science For Ukraine is crowdsourcing job opportunities for displaced scientists. The Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology, an important center for nuclear science, was damaged by shelling over the weekend, though Ukrainian officials reported its neutron source had been shut down and that the “radiological situation at the site is normal.”
- EU ties. The European Union suspended joint projects with Russia that are funded through its flagship science grant programs, Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe, and it will not initiate new projects. The science academies of Russia and Belarus have also been suspended from the European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities. The European University Association has also suspended 12 universities in Russia whose rectors signed a statement supporting the war.
- Bilateral ties. After Germany quickly froze science ties with Russia following the invasion, similar moves were made last week by Lithuania, Denmark, Estonia and the Netherlands. Other countries such as the United Kingdom are still considering their stance. The U.S. federal government has not publicly indicated if science-specific sanctions are under consideration, though at least one state governor has ordered a review of Russian funding provided to public universities. Meanwhile, South Africa has decided to maintain ties with Russia.
- Academies statement. The U.S. National Academies released a statement expressing solidarity with Ukraine and a readiness to assist. It also noted that the Academies have a “long history of maintaining open lines of communication with the international research community, even in dire geopolitical situations,” and that they are “committed to keeping such channels of communication open, including with Russian scientists, many of whom have spoken out against the invasion.”
- CERN. Leaders of CERN, the world’s premier particle physics lab, are meeting Tuesday to discuss possible penalties against Russia. Although not a formal member of CERN, Russia is a major contributor and the lab, which currently hosts hundreds of scientists from the country. More than 150 Russian scientists at CERN have reportedly signed an open letter condemning the invasion, though the list of signatories was removed, apparently to protect them from possible retribution by the Russian government. (Update: CERN has suspended Russia’s observer status membership in the lab and will not engage in new collaborations with institutions in Russia.)
- Arctic Council. Russia currently chairs the Arctic Council, a body that facilitates international dialogue concerning issues in the Arctic region, including scientific cooperation. Other council nations stated they are pausing participation in council activities “pending consideration of the necessary modalities that can allow us to continue the council’s important work in view of the current circumstances.”
- Scholarly publishing. Some Ukrainian scientists have called for Russian-authored articles to be barred from international scientific publications. The Journal of Molecular Structure will no longer accept papers from scientists working at Russian institutions, regardless of their nationality, while still accepting papers from Russians working outside the country. The journal’s publisher, Elsevier, has condemned the invasion though it has not issued a statement on its overall stance toward article submissions from Russia.
Biden Pushes Innovation Initiatives in State of the Union Speech
In his State of the Union address last week, President Biden called on Congress to pass bipartisan legislation to increase federal spending on emerging technologies and domestic manufacturing, alluding to pending efforts to reconcile the Senate’s U.S. Innovation and Competition Act with the House’s America COMPETES Act. He lamented that the federal share of R&D spending as a fraction of gross domestic product has declined during a time of economic competition with “China and other competitors.” Highlighting the two bills’ subsidies for the semiconductor sector, he said that the company Intel is prepared to increase its spending on new domestic semiconductor manufacturing efforts to $100 billion should the legislation pass. Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger, who was seated with First Lady Jill Biden during the speech, recently announced plans to build a $20 billion semiconductor manufacturing complex outside of Columbus, Ohio. Later in his remarks, Biden also called on Congress to fund his proposed Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health, noting that the agency would support the goals of the Cancer Moonshot initiative he rebooted last month as well as address other diseases such as Alzheimer’s and diabetes.
Biden further used the speech to outline a new “Building a Better America” plan, which would likely be a reworked version ofthe Build Back Better spending bill that collapsed in Congress late last year due to opposition from Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV). Biden said the new plan would focus on reducing the costs of prescription drugs, childcare, and energy production, which he suggested could involve “combating climate change” by expanding wind and solar energy, offering tax credits to weatherize homes, and lowering the price of electric vehicles. After the speech, Manchin signaled he is open to new legislation linking Biden’s hoped-for clean energy investments with his push to cut off imports of Russian fuels and ramp up domestic fossil fuel production to compensate.
Republicans Probe Extent of ‘Toxic’ Culture at OSTP
On March 3, the top Republicans on the House Science and Oversight Committees sent a letter to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy seeking internal records concerning allegations that OSTP leaders verbally abused their staff. Addressed to acting OSTP director Alondra Nelson, the letter alleges that she and other senior OSTP leaders were “complicit” in former director Eric Lander’s creation of a “toxic work environment” at the office. Lander resigned last month after reporting by Politico revealed he had frequently berated subordinates. Citing “information reviewed by committee Republicans,” the letter also alleges that other OSTP leaders beyond Lander “yelled at staff, mocked career employees’ political affiliations, and retaliated against staff when they raised these issues to OSTP ethics attorneys.” It also states the ethics attorneys were “derisively characterized as ‘rule followers,’” citing information provided by a “whistleblower.” The letter does not specifically accuse Nelson of abusive behavior, but it calls her promotion to acting director “troubling” and also suggests she and other OSTP staff have used an encrypted messaging service to sidestep federal records laws. Separately last week, Politico reported that OSTP leaders have attempted to tamp down on leaks to the press, which it learned about from a leaked recording of an internal OSTP meeting on the subject.
Senators Examine DOE Innovation Efforts, EPSCoR Proposal
Department of Energy Under Secretary for Science and Innovation Geri Richmond made her first appearance before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee since her nomination hearing last August. While the subject of the hearing was legislation pending before the committee, Richmond answered questions on a variety of subjects, including DOE’s ongoing efforts to increase coordination between its basic research programs and the development and deployment of energy technologies. Chairing most of the hearing, Committee Ranking Member John Barrasso (R-WY) brought up issues such as U.S. dependence on Russian sources for high-assay low-enriched uranium and certain medical isotopes, DOE’s process for vetting researchers with Chinese citizenship to work at its national labs, and the department’s resistance to making the head of its grid cybersecurity office a Senate-confirmed position. In addition, Barrasso and Committee Chair Joe Manchin (D-WV), among other members, pushed a proposal to vastly expand DOE funding for EPSCoR states and territories, which have historically received a small share of federal R&D funds relative to other states. Richmond expressed interest in increasing the geographical distribution of funding but also a reluctance to impose a “quota” on it, citing issues such as receiving institutions’ grant-management capability and the potential to infringe on the “principles of merit-based allocation” of funds. In a discussion of STEM education, Richmond advocated for increasing graduate students’ stipends as a measure for retaining talent, particularly from underrepresented groups. “We’re asking them to work 80 hours a week making basically minimum wage. We have to get those stipends across through all agencies up to at least $45,000 a year,” she said.
Science Committee Presses for Firmer Lunar Exploration Plans
At a House Science Committee hearing last week, committee members from both parties suggested NASA has not adequately answered questions about the goals and status of its Artemis lunar exploration campaign. Subcommittee Chair Don Beyer (D-VA) asked, “Are we establishing a sustainable lunar program of unlimited duration, or are we meeting milestones and defined objectives that feed forward to enable the Mars goal? Are we developing national capabilities needed for Moon-to-Mars, or investing in commercial capabilities designed for objectives other than national needs? Is Artemis going to be a national program, or disparate set of projects?” Committee Ranking Member Frank Lucas (R-OK) suggested Congress could better support Artemis if it had firmer plans in hand, saying, “I am tired of the narrative that Congress isn’t giving NASA the money it needs. NASA needs to give us a robust and accurate budget request so that Congress can authorize and fund appropriately.” In his testimony, NASA Inspector General Paul Martin highlighted that the agency is not managing Artemis as an integrated program and offered some of his office’s most pointed comments to date on the expense of Artemis’ Space Launch System rocket and Orion crew vehicle. “NASA must accelerate its efforts to identify ways to make its Artemis-related programs more affordable. Otherwise, relying on such an expensive single-use, heavy-lift rocket system will, in our judgment, inhibit if not derail NASA’s ability to sustain its long-term human exploration goals of the Moon and Mars,” he remarked.
Advisory Panel Deals Blow to International Linear Collider
On Feb. 25, a panel organized by Japan’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) recommended physicists “shelve” discussions on Japan hosting the International Linear Collider, a proposed multibillion-dollar particle physics facility that would be tailored to study the Higgs boson, a particle that was first detected in 2012 at CERN in Switzerland. An ILC project has been under consideration for decades, and the Japanese physics community expressed interest in hosting the collider nearly a decade ago, but the government has been reluctant to move forward, citing concerns about cost and insufficient international support. Officials at KEK, a Japanese particle physics lab, have been working to secure pledges from international partners, and in June 2021 ILC proponents submitted a proposal for a “preparatory laboratory” that lays out an organizational framework and work plan for the development phase of the project. However, the MEXT panel argues it would be “premature” to move forward with that effort, which could be seen as an endorsement of the project from Japan. Pointing to “increasing strain in the financial situation of the related countries,” the panel recommends the ILC proponents “reexamine the approach towards a Higgs factory in a global manner” and suggests looking at alternatives such as the proposed Future Circular Collider at CERN.
|
|
Events This Week
All times are Eastern Standard Time, unless otherwise noted. Listings do not imply endorsement.
Monday, March 7
Tuesday, March 8
Wednesday, March 9
Thursday, March 10
Friday, March 11
Monday, March 14
|
|
Opportunities OSTP Seeking Input on Scientific Integrity Framework
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is accepting input as it develops a framework for the “regular assessment and iterative improvement of agency scientific integrity policies and practices,” building off its initial report on the topic released in January. Among the topics of interest to OSTP are how to ensure the “long-term viability” of policies, practices, and culture through future administrations, and how scientific integrity policies can “address important and emergent issues of our time, including diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility; new technologies; emerging modes of science; and coordination with related policy domains.” Comments are due April 4.
NSF Hiring Deputy Research Security Chief
The National Science Foundation is seeking a deputy chief of research security strategy and policy responsible for “all aspects of research security, including proposer disclosure, malign foreign government talent programs, research infrastructure, and cybersecurity.” Among other duties, the incumbent will work to “establish and maintain the appropriate balance that protects intellectual property and pre-publication information while sustaining an open scientific research environment.” Applications are due March 22.
Energy Futures Initiative Hiring Director of Research
The Energy Futures Initiative, a non-profit clean energy think tank, is seeking a director of research to oversee the organization’s various policy studies, such as its Building to Net Zero initiative, which explores the Biden administration’s goal of achieving net-zero emissions across the U.S. economy by 2050. Applicants with an advanced degree in engineering, science, public policy, economics, or a related field, and at least six years of experience are preferred.
Know of an upcoming science policy event either inside or outside the Beltway? Email us at fyi@aip.org.
|
|
Around the Web
News and views currently in circulation. Links do not imply endorsement.
Ukraine Crisis
- Horror and hope for Ukrainian scientists (Physics World, perspective by Volodymyr Dudko)
- Indian, Algerian students killed in Ukraine amid Russian invasion (Washington Post)
- Joint statement on Russia’s attack on Ukraine (G7 Science Academies)
- Nobel laureates letter in support of Ukraine (Nobel Campaigns)
- Russia’s brutal attack on Ukraine is wrong and must stop (Nature, editorial)
- Updates on the response to the Ukraine crisis from the physics and astronomy community (Physics World)
- More US universities cut student, research, and financial ties with Russia (Forbes)
- Science community continues cutting links with Russia and Belarus (Science|Business)
- Europe divided on whether to isolate Russia scientifically (Science|Business)
- German academics told not to cut informal ties with Russian counterparts (Science|Business)
- Universities UK cautions over ‘blanket academic boycotts’ amid war (Research Professional)
- Global Young Academy adds to calls to keep ties to Russian researchers (Research Professional)
- Universities face crisis of isolation, Russian scientists warn (University World News)
- Expel Russian students? A controversial idea gets panned (Chronicle of Higher Education)
- European universities hit with Russian disinformation about student expulsions (Science|Business)
- To hurt Putin, steal his top students (Politico, perspective by Milkhail Kokorich)
- Some practical rules for Western scientists dealing with Russia (Science|Business, perspective by Boris Lushniak)
- A price to pay: What science diplomacy means in wartime (University World News, perspective by Joybrato Mukherjee)
- What can US scientists do about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine? (Science and Diplomacy, invited perspectives)
- Decoupling from Russia (Scholarly Kitchen, perspective by Lisa Hinchliffe and Roger Schonfeld)
- US extends technology restrictions to Belarus and the Russian oil industry (New York Times)
- War to hit the chemical industry (Chemical and Engineering News)
- Biotech leaders call on industry to cut ties with Russia amid Ukraine invasion (Fierce Biotech)
- Ukraine war and US politics complicate climate change fight (New York Times)
- Russia looks to China for collaboration in space but faces isolation over Ukraine invasion (SpaceNews)
- The ending of an era in international space cooperation (Space Review)
- The International Space Station isn’t above global politics (Vox)
- Russia’s war in Ukraine has put a Mars rover, an X-ray telescope ,and several low-Earth satellites all on hold (Science News)
- Ukraine nuclear power plant attack: Scientists assess the risks (Nature)
- How international law applies to attacks on nuclear and associated facilities in Ukraine (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, perspective by George Moore)
- IAEA Director General statement on situation in Ukraine (International Atomic Energy Agency)
White House
Congress
Science, Society, and the Economy
Education and Workforce
Research Management
Labs and Facilities
Computing and Communications
Space
Weather, Climate, and Environment
Energy
Defense
Biomedical
International Affairs
|
|
|
| |
| |
|