SIL, who heads a research institute in area of computer science that was deemed “vital to the US economy and security”, lost a major NSF grant earlier this month when their corporate partner and co-sponsor withdrew at the last minute. The proposal involved over 20 researchers at 3 major academic institutions and one major tech/defense corporation. The reason for their sponsor’s cold feet? One possible benefit from the project mentioned in the grant was “improved clean energy generation”.
There isn’t public support. That’s why they’re doing it the way they’re doing it (illegally and unconstitutionally: without congressional approval and in the darkness of night and on weekends) since no senator or congressperson who cares about re-election would ever vote for these cuts. They will hurt every single American one or way or another eventually. It’s absolute madness.
No. Every oil producing/carbon dependent company right now is investing in various green technologies. Every single one. They aren’t worried about the new technologies making their “drill baby drill” business model obsolete-- they are worried about not being at the forefront of the new business models!
Take a look at the “skunk works” of the big oil companies. They are putting money, talent and other resources against carbon scrubbing, wind, other renewable sources, climate-friendly distribution strategies (recognizing that the days of huge derricks and massive pipelines are likely over).
I came across this article from Yale. Hopefully more universities will be able to step up and fund research for their own students. My son’s college has a program that provides funding for otherwise unpaid or underpaid internships. However, they did not extend the February 1 application deadline this year in response to the current situation leaving a lot of kids who were hoping to land REUs,NASA internships and other government funded research programs out in the cold. Students would need to have both the internship lined up and submit a proposal by the deadline. The Yale article also mentions that NASA internships are subject to the federal hiring freeze. I haven’t seen that mentioned elsewhere.
More than 1,200 scientists who responded to a Nature poll — three-quarters of the total respondents — are considering leaving the United States following the disruptions prompted by Trump. Europe and Canada were among the top choices for relocation.
The trend was particularly pronounced among early-career researchers. Of the 690 postgraduate researchers who responded, 548 were considering leaving; 255 of 340 PhD students said the same.
Many respondents were looking to move to countries where they already had collaborators, friends, family or familiarity with the language. “Anywhere that supports science,” wrote one respondent. Some who had moved to the United States for work planned to return to their country of origin.
But many more scientists had not planned on relocating, until Trump began gutting funding and firing researchers. “This is my home — I really love my country,” says a graduate student at a top US university who works in plant genomics and agriculture. “But a lot of my mentors have been telling me to get out, right now.”
I suspect for most it’s just talk. It’s not that easy to upend your life and relocate to a foreign country, more so if you don’t speak the local language or don’t have any cultural ties. It’s also far easier for those moving from a country with a lower standard of living (e.g. India or China) to a higher one hoping for a better life, than for those already living in a country that provides a relatively comfortable life. Something more threatening than economic upheaval is typically required like risk to freedom or safety. Also immigrating isn’t necessarily as easy as some think. Some countries have age limits and qualifying for a work permit can be challenging. It would be far easier for recent PhD grads and post-docs than established tenured professors. For them leaving can have significant financial implications and lead to loss of seniority and funding unless they’re some kind of superstar academic or researcher. It’s also easier for dual nationals returning to their birth countries.
For young scientists success is by no means assured either. Many of the target countries like the UK, Canada, Australia, and Germany are facing their own university and research funding challenges. Both the UK and the Netherlands have High Potential Individual visa programs but from posts I have read on Reddit from people who have successfully secured one and relocated, finding employment can be very challenging.
Beyond that, how do we know if the Nature poll is a truly representative sample of US researchers?
I know a plethora of early career scientists. The current state of affairs in the US is absolutely abysmal, and they are absolutely looking at other options. Whether they are successful in finding other options is another question, but if people don’t think the current climate is impacting research scientists, they are absolutely not looking at what is going on right now. I am very worried about the potential loss of our most talented scientists.
Agree completely. True, it is not simple for scientists to move outside the US, but I would not question that that Nature poll was representative of all scientists. Just look at what is happening. If even a small % of scientists leave the US, it is likely to be the best, then where does that leave us? Further, the next generations of scientists are looking at other careers given the current climate.
Young people have less ties and move more easily. It’s also my understanding that a lot of science research is done in English (not sure if correct). Almost everyone in Western Europe speaks English (at least in urban areas where the universities are). . Easy - depends on individual circumstances- but definitely doable.