Report on Proposed U.S. Budget Cuts and Their Impact on Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

Proposed 2026 budget reductions by the Trump administration and Congressional Republicans pose a significant threat to key national research laboratories in the United States, specifically the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). These cuts would severely impede progress toward several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those related to climate action, clean energy, and innovation. The proposed funding decrease of nearly 50% for these institutions jeopardizes critical research, risks substantial job losses, and could undermine U.S. leadership in sustainable technology and climate science.

Implications for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The work conducted by the NREL and PNNL is intrinsically linked to the achievement of multiple SDGs. The proposed budget cuts would have a direct and negative impact on the following goals:

• SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy: The laboratories are at the forefront of developing technologies to make renewable energy sources like wind and solar more accessible and affordable. Their research into battery storage and grid modernization is crucial for a stable and clean energy supply.
• SDG 13: Climate Action: A core mission of these labs is to address climate change by collecting and analyzing atmospheric data and developing strategies to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Reduced funding would cripple these essential climate mitigation and adaptation efforts.
• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure: These institutions are hubs of scientific innovation. The cuts threaten to dismantle research teams, leading to a “brain drain” of top scientists and engineers to other nations, thereby weakening U.S. competitiveness and its capacity for technological innovation in sustainable infrastructure.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The potential loss of up to 1,000 jobs at each laboratory would have a devastating economic impact on their local communities and represents a direct setback to providing decent work and fostering sustainable economic growth.

Details of Proposed Budget Reductions

The proposed 2026 budget for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) includes severe reductions for programs that are the primary funding sources for the NREL and PNNL.

Key Reductions

1. A 74% reduction ($2.5 billion) for the DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), which focuses on deploying technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
2. A 14% reduction ($1.15 billion) for the DOE’s Biological and Environmental Research program, which is responsible for analyzing climate change data.

Impact on National Laboratories

• National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL): Faces a potential funding loss of $387 million, representing more than half of its current budget.
• Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL): Faces a potential funding loss of approximately $280 million, or one-third of its current budget.

Stakeholder Analysis and Concerns

Scientific Community and Laboratory Personnel

Concerns have been raised by groups such as the Friends of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory regarding the potential for massive layoffs. Reports indicate that up to 1,000 positions could be eliminated at each lab. Former PNNL communications specialist Andrea McMakin highlighted the risk of losing top scientific talent to competing nations, which are actively recruiting U.S. scientists. This exodus would directly harm the nation’s ability to innovate and compete in the global clean energy market, undermining SDG 9.

Political Opposition

U.S. Senators from the affected states have voiced strong opposition to the proposed cuts, framing them as a direct assault on scientific progress and sustainable development.

• Senator Patty Murray (D-WA): Described the budget as a “devastating blow” that would eliminate over 1,000 jobs at PNNL and vowed to fight the cuts as Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee.
• Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR): Labeled the Republican budget “anti-science” and warned it would harm the growing clean energy sector, which is critical for achieving SDG 7 and fighting the climate crisis in line with SDG 13.

Conclusion and Outlook

The proposed budget cuts for the PNNL and NREL represent a significant reversal of U.S. commitments to sustainable development. By targeting the very institutions responsible for innovation in clean energy and climate science, the budget threatens to derail progress on SDGs 7, 8, 9, and 13. The final budget will be negotiated by Congress after its August recess, and the outcome will determine the future of U.S. leadership in climate action and sustainable energy innovation.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy

   • The article focuses on national laboratories whose mission includes improving “energy efficiency and affordability” and developing “clean energy strategies.” This directly aligns with ensuring access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all. The research on “wind and solar energy,” “battery and grid technologies,” and “white LED light bulbs” are all central to this goal.

2. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

   • The proposed budget cuts pose a direct threat to employment. The article explicitly mentions that “up to 1,000 people could be cut” from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and another 1,000 from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. This relates to providing decent work and maintaining economic stability in the affected regions, as PNNL is described as the “largest employer in Washington’s Tri-Cities area.”

3. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

   • The national laboratories represent critical infrastructure for scientific research and innovation. Their work involves “research and scientific experimentation” and developing new technologies. The article highlights concerns that budget cuts would undermine the U.S.’s “energy competitiveness” and lead to a loss of “brain power,” which is directly related to fostering innovation and upgrading technological capabilities.

4. SDG 13: Climate Action

   • A primary focus of the laboratories is “addressing climate change and its impacts” and curbing “climate-warming greenhouse gas emissions.” They achieve this by “collecting and analyzing atmospheric data from around the world.” The proposed cuts to the Biological and Environmental Research program, which is “meant to collect and analyze climate change data,” directly threaten urgent action to combat climate change.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy

   • Target 7.2: By 2030, increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix. The labs’ research on “improving battery and grid technologies to get more wind and solar energy flowing to homes and businesses” directly supports this target.
   • Target 7.3: By 2030, double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency. The article mentions the labs “study energy efficiency across U.S. infrastructure” and research on “white LED light bulbs that require far less energy.”
   • Target 7.a: By 2030, enhance international cooperation to facilitate access to clean energy research and technology. The threat of losing U.S. scientists to other countries highlights the competitive nature of clean energy research and the importance of maintaining national R&D capabilities, which is a core component of this target.

2. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

   • Target 8.2: Achieve higher levels of economic productivity through diversification, technological upgrading and innovation. The article discusses keeping “energy competitiveness” and “brain power here in the U.S.,” which are outcomes of the high-value innovation and research conducted at the labs.
   • Target 8.5: By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men. The potential loss of over 2,000 jobs for “U.S. scientists and engineers” is a direct contradiction to this target.

3. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

   • Target 9.5: Enhance scientific research, upgrade the technological capabilities of industrial sectors in all countries, in particular developing countries, including, by 2030, encouraging innovation and substantially increasing the number of research and development workers per 1 million people and public and private research and development spending. The article is centered on the threat to R&D spending (proposed budget cuts) and the number of R&D workers (potential layoffs of scientists and engineers).

4. SDG 13: Climate Action

   • Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning. The proposed budget cuts represent a national policy decision that would defund and de-prioritize climate change research and mitigation strategies.
   • Target 13.3: Improve education, awareness-raising and human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning. The national labs are key institutions providing the scientific capacity for climate change mitigation. Cutting their funding directly undermines this institutional capacity.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. For SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy)

   • Financial Flows: The proposed 74% reduction in the budget for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy is a direct indicator of reduced investment in clean energy and efficiency.
   • Technology Development: The mention of specific research areas like “batteries that can hold large amounts of wind and solar power” and “white LED light bulbs” serves as a qualitative indicator of progress in clean energy technology, which is now at risk.

2. For SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth)

   • Unemployment Rate/Job Loss: The article provides specific figures that can be used as indicators of negative progress: “the loss of over 1,000 jobs at PNNL” and potential cuts of “up to 1,000 people” from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

3. For SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure)

   • Research and Development Expenditure: The article provides several quantifiable indicators, including the proposed “$2.5 billion” cut from the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and the “$1.15 billion” cut from the Biological and Environmental Research program. The specific cuts to lab budgets (“$387 million” for the Renewable Energy Lab and “$280 million” for the Northwest National Lab) are also direct indicators.
   • Researchers per million inhabitants: The potential loss of over 2,000 “scientists and engineers” is a direct indicator of a reduction in the number of R&D personnel.

4. For SDG 13 (Climate Action)

   • Strengthening of institutional capacity: The proposed 14% ($1.15 billion) budget cut to the Biological and Environmental Research program, which is “meant to collect and analyze climate change data,” is a direct indicator of a reduction in institutional capacity to address climate change.
   • Integration of climate policy: The federal budget proposal itself serves as an indicator of national policy and planning, with the proposed cuts indicating a de-integration of climate change measures.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: opb.org