Enlarge / Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency Scott Pruitt delivered the press briefing in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House, on Friday, June 2, 2017. (Photo by Cheriss May) (Photo by Cheriss May/NurPhoto via Getty Images) (credit: Getty Images)
An independent review of ARPA-E and a graduate study program offered by the EPA has found that the two embattled, federally-funded grant programs are necessary, contrary to claims made by Washington. The studies relied on years of record-keeping and could be useful for politicians arguing against the aggressive budget cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Energy (DOE) proposed by the Trump Administration.
The studies focused on the DOE’s ARPA-E (or Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy) program, and the EPA’s STAR (Science To Achieve Results) program. The Trump Administration has proposed that funding be cut entirely for ARPA-E, and that funding for the EPA’s Office of Research and Development (which directed the STAR program) be cut by half.
Both studies were conducted by the National Academies of Sciences—the ARPA-E study was conducted at Congress’ request, and the EPA STAR study was conducted at the EPA’s own request.
Read 15 remaining paragraphs | Comments
Source: Ars Technica – Studies say ARPA-E, EPA programs have worked well, contrary to political rhetoric