The US government layoffs rattle chemical start-ups

The chemistry start-ups strive to adapt their plans after the layoffs have brought obstacles to the US government authorities and delays in federal funds. Many entrepreneurs also fear that the uncertainty about the commitment of the US government will suppress progress for emerging chemistry technologies.

The problem of start-up pheronym for agricultural technology almost started when President Donald J. Trump took up his office. The company, which develops pheromon -based crop protection products, expected a payment by the end of January as part of a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF).

Shortly before the scholarship should have come through, the Trump government said to freeze all federal loans and grants. A few days later, Fatma Kaplan received an e -mail with the inscription with a pheronym co -founder and CEO that the payment had been canceled.

The pheronym counted on the financing to scale pheromone production. Kaplan immediately turned to research assistants and investors to strategy about the next steps. Then the company took a break. A court order blocked the financing freeze, and pheronym managed to secure his Sbir financing, albeit later than expected. Kaplan breathed relief.

The feeling didn't last long. The following week, several US agencies, including the NSF, the US Agriculture Ministry (USDA) and the Ministry of Energy (DOE), began to take employees. Pheronym planned to work with the USDA to carry out field trials. Kaplan contacted her employees at the USDA and learned that two postdoctoral researchers who would help with the implementation of these attempts were fired.

After the vegetation period approaches quickly, Kaplan has no time for a plan B. She hopes that the USDA will be able to group and carry out field tests with fewer employees.

“The USDA does a really great job. We have credibility, our technology has credibility because we have third -party tests,” she says. “Now everything is in the air.”

While Kaplan solved to solve the problems with field trials, he also applied for an addition to her SBIR scholarship, in which the money of private donors agreed. She says that the addition would have been an important step towards commercialization. Before she was able to submit the application, the NSF program director, who managed her scholarship, shared her that he had been released in February in February, which was removed by the agency's workforce.

The NSF said Kaplan that she would assign a new program director to her. According to the chaplain, however, the program directors were stretched thinly in front of the mass degrees. She fears that a new director who juggles a larger number of grants cannot quickly check her application.

Even if funds and resources come through, Pam Marrone, the founder of several agricultural technology start-ups and pheronym consultants, expects turbulence with persistent effects. She says that programs such as SBIR subsidies for companies with promising technologies that are too risky for private investments are of essential importance. If the recent layoffs in the SBIR program cause delays, Marrone worries, risk capital providers will only slowly invest in new technologies, and innovations will come to a standstill.

“All companies and managing directors want certainty and stability,” she says. “Nobody does anything or make investments if there is chaos, uncertainty and lack of stability.”

The NSF did not answer any specific questions about how the layoffs would affect the SBIR program, but a spokesman referred to a website that found that the NSF still accepts SBIR parking spaces. The USDA did not answer questions about the ability of the agency to work with start-ups. In a press release, the agency says that it “pursues an aggressive plan to optimize your workforce by eliminating positions that are no longer necessary”.

Some start-ups had it easier. After Solomon Ssenyange, CEO and co-founder of the start-up start-up from Greenhouse Gas Monitor Rednox, about which layoffs had belonged, he contacted the USDA to check the Sbir Grant of his company. So far the grant is certain.

A spokesman for Niron Magnetics, who was awarded a doe scholarship in December to develop magnets without rare earth, says that the company has recorded delays in the obligation to grant in the past few weeks, but expects DOE financing that they are progressing.

Jeremy Patt, Chief Technology Officer of the Lithium Extraction Start-up Summit Nanotech, says that changes in the doe have delayed the final negotiations for a grant that was awarded in December. “I think they just try to find out what landing is,” says Patt. “You are in a dilemma and try to find out the new rules of commitment.”

While the Doe Grant is a welcome acceleration for Summit, Patt is that this is not of crucial importance for the success of the company. For younger companies that rely on government funding, such delays could be an existential threat, he says.

Laura Lammers, CEO and founder of the start-up travertin start-up start-up starts, says that the layoffs and financing problems for a doe-financed project that your company has completed have not caused any immediate problems. But she says that the changes have caused confusion about what state financing will look like for new technologies in the future.

According to Lammers, for example, there are still some DOE financing options a language of the Joe Biden administration, in which companies asked to describe a plan that describes how the project benefits the municipalities near their projects. Lammers feared this information to send this information to the DOE under the Trump administration, which no longer wants to use the use of these plans. “There is so much uncertainty that it is difficult to put together a convincing proposal,” she says.

While the DOE cuts its workforce, Lammers is also concerned about the livelihood of programs that support the marketing of new energy technologies such as the office of the credit program and the Clean Energy Demonstrations office. Travertine begins to plan his first commercial area and consider to apply for these programs for support. In view of the uncertainty, Lammers says that they focus more on grants that are available in individual states or other countries.

“Start-ups are in a very short financing cycle,” she says. “Even relatively low. . . Breaks or uncertainty times can have a major impact on decision -making. “

Derrick Flakoll, a political analyst by the research company Bloombergnef, says that this seems to reconcile two political priorities. He points out that the Trump government hopes to make energy cheaper by investing in the production of fossil fuels and advanced nuclear and geothermal energy. At the same time, the new administration tries to reduce expenses through layoffs, which could hinder the ability of the Doe to achieve these goals. “It is not clear what political choice the administration is more of an effort,” says Flakoll.

Ben Brenner, Senior Vice President of Clean Technology Government Relations company Boundary Stone Partners, agrees that the Trump government is planning to support some innovative energy technologies. He expects the government to continue to use grants, loans and other financial support in order to advance these projects. “Can a slim Doe workforce do this as quickly and effectively as the administration expects?” Asks Brenner. “That remains to be seen.”

C&EN contacted the doe to ask whether the reductions of the employees influence the agency's ability to support companies that develop new technologies. The agency did not answer these questions.