Ph.D. scientists/engineers shift from physical sciences Physical sciences Mathematical sciences Computer sciences Environmental sciences Engineering Life sciences Psychology Social sciences
1973
Employment 1977
44,200 11,700 2,700 10,100 34,200 55,600 23,400 24,400
51,300 13,600 5,700 12,600 42,400 68,100 31,300 36,000
% change 1979
54,400 14,100 6,600 14,100 47,100 76,000 35,000 39,800
1977-79
6% 4 16 12 11 12 12 10
1973-79
23% 20 146 40 38 37 50 63
Source: National Science Foundation
fundamental long-term trends. The most rapid science and engineering employment growth rates for 1973 to 1979 have been in computer sciences, psychology, and social sciences, and the slowest in physical and mathematical sciences. The largest absolute growth in employment was among life scientists. Across all sectors, R&D replaced teaching as the largest work activity
in 1979. And shifts in activities within R&D reflect, in part, the shift toward business/industry employment, with a more rapid increase in the number engaged in development/design (up 77%) than in basic and applied research (up 33%). Also, within research, there was a shift away from applied research in business/industry and from basic research in academia—both toward development/design. D
EPA directed to review 1 ur regulations Once more into the fray. With its tax and budget-cut battles won, the Reagan Administration again is focusing on the third integral part of its economic recovery program—regulatory relief. Among the 30 regulations selected for this round of reviews are a number of environmental regulations. But at a press conference announcing the review, Vice President George Bush, head of the Presidential Task Force on Regulatory Relief, emphasized that "nothing in our approach is intended to diminish the quality of the environment. We're not prejudging whether anything in these regulations is bad. We're going to review them. Complaint after complaint comes in that we've gone too far . . . that there has to be a better way—and that is what we're trying to find." The Environmental Protection Agency has been directed by the task force to review four of its regulations. One of these is its recent order reducing the maximum amount of lead that can be added to gasoline from 0.8 g per gal to 0.5 g per gal. According to documents issued by the task force, the rule is being reviewed because the phasedown imposes a substantial energy penalty as a result of the increased amount of crude oil required to produce low-lead or unleaded gasoline. It also imposes onerous capital requirements on small refiners. In addition, the documents note,
the gradual decline in the number of vehicles using leaded gasoline has reduced lead emissions by nearly the amount originally sought by the phasedown program, and this may offer adequate protection for most of the country where lead concentrations in the air are already below the level judged safe by EPA. The second regulatory area EPA has been directed to review is its premanufacture notification requirements under the Toxic Substances Control Act, which, the documents
Bush: trying to find better way
say, hold the potential for obstructing the introduction of new chemicals. EPA will consider waiving or relaxing its requirements for chemicals that do not pose an unreasonable risk to health or the environment. The other two areas the agency has been directed to review are its pesticide registration process, which the documents say appears to delay unnecessarily the distribution of new pesticide products, and its consolidated permit program, whose implementation has resulted in greatly increased complexity, including often unnecessary procedural requirements and information burdens. D
Du Pont wrapping up takeover of Conoco The prize is at hand in the threemonth quest for control of Conoco. The runaway winner in the bidding, Du Pont, faces its own stockholders this week for approval of the extraordinary merger, which would make oil and natural gas the largest business of the combined firm (C&EN,Julyl3,page6). Several preliminary moves after the bidding war between Du Pont, Mobil, and Seagram cleared up some of the major questions remaining on who would own exactly what of Conoco or Du Pont. Settling one question, Du Pont exercised its option to buy 15 million additional Conoco shares held by Conoco itself at a price of $87.50 per share. Du Pont obtained the option in its original merger negotiations with Conoco. With this stock, Du Pont held about 63 million Conoco shares, or 62% of the total shares outstanding of about 102 million. More than half the Conoco shares not yet in Du Pont hands belong to Seagram, which finished its tender offer with about 28 million Conoco shares. Seagram says it will tender these shares to Du Pont in return for Du Pont stock. The result would be Seagram's becoming Du Pont's largest individual stockholder with more than 18% of the total. Du Pont says it looks forward to a constructive relationship with Seagram. Since Seagram seems to be content with a holding in Du Pont, it appears there will be no immediate deal for Seagram to purchase Conoco's big coal operation. Conoco also denies that any such selloff was in the making, although coal was considered a possible prize for Seagram during the tender battle. D Aug. 17, 1981 C&EN
7
