Report on Proposed Budget Reductions for U.S. National Laboratories and Their Impact on Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

Proposed 2026 budget cuts by the Trump administration and Congressional Republicans pose a significant threat to the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). These reductions would severely impede the United States’ progress toward key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth). The proposed cuts could eliminate over a third of PNNL’s funding and more than half of NREL’s, potentially leading to substantial job losses and a decline in national scientific competitiveness.

Impact on National Laboratories and Sustainable Development Goals

Threat to SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) and SDG 13 (Climate Action)

The core mission of the NREL and PNNL is to advance scientific research that directly supports the achievement of SDG 7 and SDG 13. Their work is critical for developing solutions to combat climate change and transition to a sustainable energy future. The proposed budget cuts would directly undermine these efforts.

• SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy: The laboratories are at the forefront of research to increase the share of renewable energy (Target 7.2) and improve energy efficiency (Target 7.3). Their work on battery storage, grid modernization for wind and solar integration, and energy-efficient technologies is fundamental to making clean energy more accessible and affordable for all Americans.
• SDG 13: Climate Action: The labs lead efforts in collecting and analyzing atmospheric data to understand and mitigate climate risks. This research is essential for strengthening resilience to climate-related hazards (Target 13.1) and integrating climate change measures into national policies (Target 13.2). Slashing funding for the Biological and Environmental Research program would cripple the nation’s ability to contribute to global climate science.

Threat to SDG 8 (Decent Work) and SDG 9 (Innovation and Infrastructure)

The proposed funding reductions would have severe consequences for regional economies and the nation’s capacity for innovation, directly conflicting with the objectives of SDG 8 and SDG 9.

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The laboratories are major employers. The potential loss of up to 1,000 jobs at each facility would devastate local economies and represents a significant setback for promoting productive employment (Target 8.5).
• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure: These institutions are hubs of scientific research and innovation (Target 9.5). The potential loss of top scientists to other countries represents a “brain drain” that would diminish U.S. competitiveness and slow the development of sustainable infrastructure and clean technologies (Target 9.4).

Analysis of Proposed Budget Reductions

Department of Energy Funding Proposals

The proposed 2026 budget for the U.S. Department of Energy includes drastic reductions for offices that fund the national laboratories. The key cuts are as follows:

1. A 74% reduction ($2.5 billion) for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), which focuses on deploying technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in line with SDG 7 and SDG 13.
2. A 14% reduction ($1.15 billion) for the Biological and Environmental Research program, which is vital for climate change data analysis supporting SDG 13.

Laboratory-Specific Funding Impacts

The funding cuts would disproportionately affect the NREL and PNNL, which receive the majority of their budgets from these programs.

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

Stakeholder Responses and Political Context

Concerns from Scientific and Community Stakeholders

Community groups and former laboratory personnel have expressed alarm over the potential consequences. Andrea McMakin of the Friends of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory highlighted the risk of losing top scientific talent to competing nations, which would undermine the national capacity for innovation as outlined in SDG 9. Concerns have been raised that up to 1,000 staff members at each lab could face layoffs, impacting progress on all related SDGs.

Legislative Opposition

Key Democratic lawmakers have voiced strong opposition to the proposed budget, framing it as a direct assault on scientific progress and sustainable development.

• U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) described the budget as a “devastating blow” that would eliminate over 1,000 jobs at PNNL, undermining SDG 8. As Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, she has pledged to write a bipartisan bill that protects investments in the national labs.
• U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) labeled the Republican budget “anti-science” and detrimental to the growth of clean energy industries that support SDG 7 and fight the climate crisis (SDG 13).

The final budget will be negotiated by Congress after its return in September. Historical precedent from 2017 shows that Congress has previously rejected similar presidential proposals to cut funding for the Department of Energy.

SDGs Addressed in the Article

• SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy

  The article extensively discusses the work of the national laboratories in researching and developing clean energy technologies. It mentions their focus on “improving energy efficiency,” “wind and solar energy,” “battery and grid technologies,” and “white LED light bulbs.” The proposed budget cuts directly threaten funding for the “Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy,” which is central to achieving this goal.

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

  The potential for significant job losses is a major theme. The article states that up to 1,000 jobs could be lost at each of the two laboratories. These are high-skill jobs for “U.S. scientists and engineers.” The article also touches on economic competitiveness, noting the risk of losing “brain power” to other countries and the desire to “keep our energy competitiveness.”

• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure

  The national labs are described as leaders in “research and scientific experimentation” and “researching, developing and deploying technologies.” Their work on “improving battery and grid technologies” and enhancing “energy efficiency across U.S. infrastructure” is a direct contribution to building resilient infrastructure and fostering innovation. The proposed cuts to research and development funding directly undermine this goal.

• SDG 13: Climate Action

  The primary mission of the laboratories, as described in the article, is “addressing climate change and its impacts.” Their work includes “measuring extreme weather risks by collecting and analyzing atmospheric data” and developing technologies to “curb climate-warming greenhouse gas emissions.” The budget cuts threaten the “Biological and Environmental Research program, meant to collect and analyze climate change data,” which is crucial for climate action.

Specific SDG Targets Identified

1. Target 7.2: Increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix.

   The article highlights the labs’ research on “wind and solar energy” and the technologies needed to integrate them into the grid, such as “battery and grid technologies.” The proposed cuts specifically target funding for “wind and solar research and development.”

2. Target 7.3: Double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency.

   The labs’ focus on “improving energy efficiency and affordability for Americans” and studying “energy efficiency across U.S. infrastructure and commerce” directly aligns with this target. The article mentions the development of “white LED light bulbs that require far less energy” as a concrete example of this work.

3. Target 7.a: Enhance international cooperation to facilitate access to clean energy research and technology… and promote investment in energy infrastructure and clean energy technology.

   The article discusses the significant domestic investment in clean energy research through the national labs. The proposed budget cuts, such as the “$2.5 billion” reduction for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, represent a direct threat to investment in clean energy technology and research.

4. Target 8.5: Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all.

   The article explicitly states that the proposed budget could lead to the “loss of over 1,000 jobs at PNNL” and that “up to 1,000 people could be cut from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.” This directly relates to the target of maintaining employment, especially for highly skilled workers like “scientists and engineers.”

5. Target 9.5: Enhance scientific research, upgrade the technological capabilities of industrial sectors… and substantially increasing… public and private research and development spending.

   The core issue of the article is the proposed slashing of public R&D spending. The labs are meant to “lead research and scientific experimentation,” and the cuts threaten their ability to do so, potentially causing the U.S. to lose its “best scientists” and “energy competitiveness.”

6. 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 that build capacity for climate action. Their work in “measuring extreme weather risks by collecting and analyzing atmospheric data from around the world” is a direct contribution to climate change adaptation and early warning systems. The funding cuts jeopardize this institutional capacity.

Indicators for Measuring Progress

1. Indicator 7.a.1: International financial flows to developing countries in support of clean energy research and development and renewable energy production…

   While the article focuses on domestic funding, it provides specific financial figures that serve as a proxy for this indicator’s focus on investment in clean energy R&D. These include the proposed “$3.5 billion” cut to the Department of Energy, the “$2.5 billion” cut to the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the “$387 million” loss for the Renewable Energy Lab, and the “$280 million” loss for the Northwest National Lab.

2. Indicator 8.5.2: Unemployment rate, by sex, age and persons with disabilities.

   The article provides a direct, quantifiable measure related to this indicator by stating the potential number of job losses. It mentions that “up to 1,000 people could be cut” from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and that the cuts could result in the “loss of over 1,000 jobs at PNNL.”

3. Indicator 9.5.1: Research and development expenditure as a proportion of GDP.

   The article provides absolute figures for the proposed cuts to R&D spending, which is the numerator for this indicator. Specific figures mentioned include the “$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.

4. Indicator 9.5.2: Researchers (in full-time equivalent) per million inhabitants.

   This indicator is implied through the discussion of job losses among scientific personnel. The article warns that the U.S. “risks losing its best scientists” and that “up to 1,000 people could be cut” from each lab, directly impacting the number of researchers in the country.

5. Indicator 13.a.1: Amounts provided and mobilized in United States dollars per year in relation to the continued existing collective mobilization goal of the $100 billion commitment…

   The article provides specific figures for financial resources allocated to climate action. The proposed “$1.15 billion” cut from the “Biological and Environmental Research program, meant to collect and analyze climate change data,” is a direct measure of financial support for climate-related scientific activities.

Summary of Findings

Source: milwaukiereview.com