探花视频

Atomic devastation?

Nuclear physicists claim to have been singled out by the STFC for cuts that could destroy the discipline. Zo毛 Corbyn reports

Published on
December 18, 2009
Last updated
May 11, 2015

Nuclear physicists are not only claiming to be the biggest victims of the funding cuts announced by the Science and Technology Facilities Council this week, but have also accused the STFC of operating a 鈥渃artel鈥 to slash their funding.

Key academics in the field say that they are bearing a 鈥渄isproportionate鈥 percentage of the STFC鈥檚 cuts, which have the potential to 鈥渒ill off鈥 the UK鈥檚 skills base in nuclear physics. They have also accused the council of intentionally targeting their subject area.

鈥淣uclear physics鈥 has clearly been 鈥榮idelined鈥 by a cartel for cuts that are way out of proportion,鈥 said Paddy Regan, a physics professor at the University of Surrey.

He calculated that the cuts planned over the next five years in nuclear physics funding represented a 52 per cent reduction, 鈥渇ar more than the other STFC disciplines鈥.

探花视频

ADVERTISEMENT

鈥淭he nuclear physics community鈥檚 fears that scientific debate and prioritisation would give way to 鈥榖loc voting鈥 within the STFC鈥 appear to be borne out,鈥 he said. 鈥淭he community has basically been 鈥榙one in鈥 by the STFC, which seems intent on killing off nuclear physics as an academic pursuit in the UK.

鈥淭hese acts of scientific vandalism must be challenged and overturned.鈥

探花视频

ADVERTISEMENT

On 16 December, the STFC announced a swath of cuts to deal with a 拢40 million black hole in its finances, which it hopes to return to a more sustainable footing.

In addition to the 拢12 million knocked off the nuclear physics budget over the next five years, there will be 拢42 million in cuts to space schemes, 拢39 million to astronomy projects and 拢32 million to particle physics initiatives.

Professor Regan said that compared with the 52 per cent cuts to nuclear physics, space projects were being cut by 10 per cent, particle physics by 5 per cent and astronomy by 11 per cent.

Responsibility for nuclear physics was transferred from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council to the STFC when the latter was formed in 2007.

John Womersley, director of science programmes at the STFC, denied nuclear physics had been in any way 鈥渟ingled out鈥.

鈥淣uclear physics projects were compared with all others in our science programme in a single, rigorous peer-review process based on independent advice from leading academics,鈥 he said.

探花视频

ADVERTISEMENT

He added that total funding for UK nuclear physics would be reduced from roughly 拢8 million per year in 2007 to 拢6 million in 2013, a 25 per cent reduction rather than the 52 per cent claimed by Professor Regan.

鈥淲e acknowledge that this reduction will be challenging for the universities and we have committed to continue to support already issued grants to enable a managed transition,鈥 he said.

探花视频

ADVERTISEMENT

He added that the STFC鈥檚 nuclear physics programme addresses 鈥渃uriosity-led questions鈥.

鈥淭he EPSRC, which supports nuclear engineering in the UK, is increasing its spending in nuclear skills,鈥 he said.

Under the programme of cuts, from next year STFC studentships and fellowships will be reduced by 25 per cent and grants by 10 per cent.

The reductions have led the whole sector to warn of their potentially grave ramifications.

鈥淸We are] seriously concerned at the effect the loss of so many smaller projects will have on the health and morale of physics groups in British universities,鈥 said Andy Fabian, president of the Royal Astronomical Society. 鈥淭he potential damage to one of the UK鈥檚 leading activities could be huge.鈥

However, there was a warm welcome for the parallel announcement by Science Minister Lord Drayson that he will 鈥渨ork urgently鈥 to review the STFC鈥檚 remit in light of the fact that much of the cuts are a result of the increased costs of international facilities subscriptions caused by changes in the exchange rate. Such factors are beyond the council鈥檚 control.

探花视频

ADVERTISEMENT

鈥淚t has become clear to me that there are real tensions in having international science projects, large scientific facilities and UK grant-giving roles within a single research council,鈥 Lord Drayson said. 鈥淚 will work urgently鈥 to find a better solution by the end of February 2010.鈥

zoe.corbyn@tsleducation.com

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT