R&D funding feels House budget knife By recent House actions on the fiscal 1990 appropriations bills, it now is pretty clear that the federal government's budget constraints have caught up with R&D funding. The highly touted plan to double funding for the National Science Foundation over five years, for example, is going nowhere fast. This despite its hearty endorsement from President Bush in February. The House has approved a mere 4% increase over current levels to $2 billion for NSF in fiscal 1990. The original budget requested a 14% rise. Its research and related activities budget would be set at $1.7 billion, up 6% from fiscal '89 but $88 million less than the Administration requested. NSF was directed by the House to take $7 million out of its budget for program management activities. The rest of the reduction is to be spread equally across all disciplines, including chemistry, chemical engineering, and materials science. The one bright spot was a 23% increase, to $210 million, for NSF science education activities. Rep. Robert A. Roe (D.-N.J.), chairman of the House Science, Space & Technology Committee—NSF's authorizing committee—led a successful effort to get language stricken from the bill, H.R. 2916, that would
Roe: not sure NSF spends efficiently
have prohibited NSF from using any of its funding for the academic research facilities modernization program, approved by Congress last year. However, Roe probably caused some nervous tremors at NSF when he said during the debate that he is "not so sure that the $2 billion we provide to the National Science Foundation is being spent in the most efficient way in this country." A number of other research programs are also getting increases that do little more than cover the cost of inflation, which the Office of Management & Budget now estimates at 4.1% for fiscal 1990. For example, the House approved an overall funding increase of 5% to about $3.7 billion for the Department of Energy's civilian R&D programs. Funding for basic energy sciences is up 8% to $598 million. Within that catagory, funding for chemical sciences is up 10% to $148 million, materials sciences is up 11% to $210 million, and university research support is up 27% to $28 million. Also up is funding for DOE's gen-
eral science and research activities— 15% to just under $1.1 billion. The total includes $200 million ($50 million less than requested) for the Superconducting Super Collider. And funding for DOE's fossil energy R&D program is up 11% to $423 million. That includes a 22% increase to $60 million for DOE's clean coal technology program. On the downside at DOE are magnetic fusion, down 12%> to $308 million, and nuclear energy programs, down 5% to just over $577 million. In the only other appropriations bill passed so far that includes R&D funding, the House approved a 5% increase over fiscal 1989 levels to $592 million for the Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service, and just a 1% increase to $320 million for the Cooperative State Research Service. The House doesn't have the final word on who gets what, however. The Senate traditionally has been somewhat more generous when it comes to R&D funding. Janice Long
Ethylene expansion should not bring glut With the flurry of ethylene plant a n n o u n c e m e n t s and process improvement activity in recent months, many fear that the chemical industry's past overcapacity problems may soon return to haunt it. But chemical construction firm M. W. Kellogg "does not foresee an ethylene glut." In North America, "we see a pretty good match of supply and demand by 1992, without the ethylene excesses of the late 1970s," Ray Orriss, Kellogg's manager of olefins technology, told the Southwest Chemical Association in Houston. Indeed, several producers are responding to current market demand. Quantum Chemical, Westlake Polymers, Formosa Plastics, Phillips 66, and Dow Chemical have all announced plans for ethylene plants. Still, Orriss predicts an average annual growth rate for ethylene of more than 3% through 1992, which will offset new capacity. That would put operating rates in 1992 in North American plants at about 90%, he says. And if growth rates continue to exceed that of the gross national
product, operating rates may run short term at nearly 100% of capacity by 1995, Orriss says. Other industry sources agree that demand for ethylene will grow more than GNP. Says one: "Whereas demand for many ethylene derivatives will grow at GNP-like rates, products like linear a-olefins and styrene are expected to grow faster." New derivative plants abroad probably will result in declining U.S. exports over the next few years. The new plants of the 1990s will differ from those of the 1970s in that they will incorporate significant technological improvements, notes Orriss. Process improvements, such as low feedstock contact times, give relatively h i g h e r e t h y l e n e yields and require less feedstock per pound of product. Other modifications will allow new plants to consume 30 to 40%o less energy than their predecessors and to have the flexibility to crack both petroleum and gas liquids, unlike the plants built two decades ago. Susan Ainsworth July 31, 1989 C&EN
5
