Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.
A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.
“These instruments are incredibly expensive and hard to run,” says Andrew P. Capaldi, a professor of molecular and cellular biology who is among the researchers who use them. “They break down all the time” — so his lab also pays $65,000 a year for each of two service contracts. The machines, which are almost 10 years old, run nearly 24 hours a day. They will soon need to be replaced.
Those costs don’t account for even half of the expensive equipment that’s essential for Capaldi’s research. It’s all at risk, thanks to disruptions in support from the National Institutes of Health that forced Capaldi in February to suspend his most important experiments. In the spring, the university bridged the gap with an internal fund. On July 1, Capaldi’s five-year, $3.4-million NIH grant came through.
Still uncertain: Whether the NIH will cap its reimbursement of indirect costs at 15 percent — a huge drop from the 53-percent rate that the university now enjoys. The lab also relies on NIH money for the lion’s share of labor costs, which include a lab technician, several doctoral students, and three undergraduates. If Congress passes Trump’s proposed cut to the agency’s budget, of nearly 40 percent, Capaldi and everyone with an NIH grant will feel the pinch.
In June, Capaldi walked us through his lab to describe many of the other costs of doing his research.
