Morning James, thanks for your attention to this issue. I don’t mean to hijack your thread, but I’d also like to point out that here in the US, the proposed DOE FY2023 budget request includes cutting a 10% funding *cut* to X-ray light sources (based on 2018 baseline). It seems the timing couldn’t be worse, so I am pasting below a call to action that was shared with the SSRL user group:
Dear Colleagues: I write to you as a member of the Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource (SSRL) user community to solicit your support for SSRL and the other Department of Energy (DOE) Basic Energy Sciences (BES) - funded X-ray light sources in the face of a potential cut in funding for facility operations. The cut in funding was proposed in the DOE’s FY2023 Presidential Budget Request (PBR) and, if enacted, would support only 90% of optimum, based on a 2018 baseline for SSRL and the other DOE BES X-ray Light sources. If this email has reached you in error, then I apologize, but if not then please read on. Thank you for your attention, Graham George, Chair, Users’ Executive Committee, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource Attachments: 1. Separate copy of this message (pdf) 2. May 25th 2022 Letter sent to House and Senate Chairs and Ranking Members of Energy and Water subcommittees (pdf) 3. Example letter – please edit – (MS Word) Professor Graham N. George, B.Sc., D.Phil., D.Sc., FRSC(UK), FRSC Molecular and Environmental Sciences Group, University of Saskatchewan The issue: This DOE response to the FY2023 PBR stipulates that all five DOE-funded light sources (ALS, APS, NSLS-II, SSRL and LCLS) will be supported at approximately 90% of optimum level, with funding levels for normal operations based on a 2018 baseline. This proposed cut adds to the considerable deficit that has accumulated across the DOE-funded light source complex since the 2008 financial crisis. For example, between FY2018 and FY2022, facility operating budgets have increased at less than half the rate of inflation. As a result, facilities have already been forced to reduce scientific staffing levels to well below the optimum. Remaining staff are increasingly overworked in close to an unsustainable fashion, and this may lead to the mothballing of beamlines in FY2023. Given the importance of light sources in the modern scientific research environment, a direct consequence is severe erosion of US scientific competitiveness on the international stage. This impact will become dramatically worse should the trend not be rectified by a substantial increase in facility operating budgets. What you are asked to do: We are asking users to telephone and write their elected representatives. This is especially important for users who are from states with members in the House and Senate who are on the Energy and Water Subcommittees. Please examine the membership to see if this is you, and if so then please act soon. Senate: The membership list of the Senate subcommittee on Energy and Water Development is given at the following URL: https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/subcommittees/energy-and-water-development Telephone numbers are listed here: https://www.senate.gov/general/resources/pdf/senators_phone_list.pdf House: The membership list House subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, and Related Agencies is given at the following URL: https://appropriations.house.gov/subcommittees/energy-and-water-development-and-related-agencies-117th-congress Telephone numbers, arranged alphabetically by location, are listed here: https://www.house.gov/representatives Telephone Contact: This is an especially important mechanism because it is easy to do and because all telephone calls must be logged, whereas letters may not always be read. This is important if your representative serves on the House or Senate Energy and Water Subcommittees. Here is some advice for an effective telephone call: * Be brief * Identify yourself and your position (faculty, grad student, etc.) and that you are a constituent * Indicate the importance of the Department of Energy X-ray light sources for your work * Recognize the past support from Congress for scientific research then indicate your concern about the operating budget cut * If you leave a voicemail leave your complete address * Avoid acronyms as staff may not know what these mean * If you talk to an individual make a note of the name of the person * Make a note of the date and time that you called Writing to your representative: If you are from a state with a committee member, then write to them and copy both the committee chairperson and the ranking member. Letters can be communicated by email; the information for which can be found on your member’s web site. If your state does not have representation on the subcommittee then write to the chairperson and the ranking member: * Start with the issue in the first sentence of the letter – the FY 2023 Department of Energy Office of Science Operating Budget for large scale X-ray light sources, and in particular the Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource. * Identify yourself and your position * Indicate the importance of the X-ray light sources for your research and for the nation * Recognize the past support from Congress for scientific research then indicate your concern about the operating budget cut * Avoid acronyms From: CCP4 bulletin board <CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> on behalf of James Holton <jmhol...@lbl.gov> Date: Monday, June 13, 2022 at 8:17 AM To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK <CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Attention APS users - where will you go? Thank you everyone who responded to my little poll. To summarize and paraphrase, most common response was: "I haven't really thought about it." A distant second place was: "I don't collect data at APS, so I'll be fine. (aka I'm not worried about all those APS users out-competing me for time at my favorite beamline) and 3rd/4th place: "I will go 'somewhere else' " and/or "we have an old rotating anode we can dust off." Noteworthy responses I did NOT get were: "I will just use cryoEM instead for a year or two" nor "I will just use AlphaFold " With all due respect to the amazing recent advances in those fields, it would appear X-rays still play an important role in structural science, and a year of no data doesn't seem to be an option for most labs. However, it would appear there is not much concern in the community. Personally, I wonder if that is justified. From what I can tell looking at public-facing calendars, most MX beamlines are being used about 80% of the time, and the APS represents at least half of total capacity in the USA. So, in April, I expect demand will rise to ~160% of supply. That means ~60% of beam time request proposals will get turned down. To try and help illustrate, we at ALS have been pasting together a master calendar we call the "fly chromosome chart" here: https://als-enable.lbl.gov/wordpress/2022/05/19/dark-period/ The width of the bars is proportional to the number of beamlines available. Yes, they vary widely in flux and other capabilities, but assignment of beam time is usually done in "shifts". Now, try to picture next year when the "APS" bar is all black. Also, what kind of pins and pucks do you use? For many beamlines you may have to buy different ones. Looking forward to the June 21 APS/U town hall discussions, as well as the ACA's "Bridging the APS dark period" session. We will definitely be discussing this at the Diffraction Methods GRC, which is July 24-29, 2022. Space is still available! -James Holton MAD Scientist On 5/9/2022 3:12 PM, James Holton wrote: > Greetings all, > > I was just thinking of taking a little poll. When the Advanced Photon > Source at Argonne shuts down for the APS-U upgrade on April 17, 2023, > it will take with it about 90,000 hours of X-ray beam time until well > into 2024. So, if you are a routine user of APS, what are your plans? > Will you just stop collecting X-ray data for 12 months or so? Do you > have a proposal lined up at another synchrotron? Is it in the USA? > Europe? Asia? Or are you, like me, a big procrastinator and haven't > really thought much about it? > > Whatever it is, I'd like to hear from you. Either on- or off-list is > fine. I expect this community will be interested in the digest. > > -James Holton > MAD Scientist > ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB<http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB>, a mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk<http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk>, terms & conditions are available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/
