Chief of Department of Energy’s science wing envisions it an as engine of change | Science
When President Joe Biden nominated Asmeret Asefaw Berhe as the seventh director of the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Office of Science in April 2021, many scientists were surprised. Physicists have most often been tapped to lead the office, which is the United States’s single largest funder of the physical sciences and the premier builder of large scientific machines such as x-ray sources. In contrast, Berhe is a soil biogeochemist who studies dirt’s ability to soak up carbon. Born and raised in Eritrea, she is also the first person of color to lead the agency, which has a $7.5 billion annual budget.
Although Berhe, whom the Senate confirmed in May, may not fit the usual description of the director, she is determined to leave her imprint on the agency. She has followed the Biden administration’s lead in pushing to expand diversity, equity, and inclusion both at the Office of Science’s 10 national laboratories and in the research sponsored by its six research programs, such as advance scientific computing research, basic energy sciences, and nuclear physics. Earlier this month, Berhe announced that every grant application to the agency must include a plan to help promote diversity and inclusion.
In a 25 October online press conference, Behre discussed the office’s budget, including an additional $13 billion the recently passed CHIPS and Science Act authorized (but does not obligate) Congress to give it over the next 5 years. She also talked about multiple initiatives to improve diversity, such as the effort known as Reaching a New Energy Sciences Workforce (RENEW), which launched this year to engage underrepresented students and researchers at the Office of Science’s 10 national laboratories.
The following interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Q: What is your vision for the Office of Science?
A: This is a mission-driven agency, so we have missions [from DOE] we’re obligated to carry out. Within that, my top goal is to make sure that across everything we do, we are realizing the best possible support for the science. And a big part of that is realizing as much as possible the appropriations requested for fiscal year 2023, and then getting as close to the authorized levels in CHIPS and Science as possible.
My vision is also ensuring that people from all walks of life are served equitably with the work that we do. That’s not just my personal goal. It’s also the goal of the department and of the Biden administration.
Another key priority is ensuring that Washington, D.C., policymakers and everybody we interact with knows what the Office of Science does and why it matters for the nation’s economic advancement, global competitiveness, and everything else.
An important vision for me is making sure that we are leading in terms of the labs and the facilities that we manage, so we can bring to bear on the climate crisis all the resources that we have to realize as much as possible the administration’s goal of net-zero emissions.
Q: In recent years, DOE has initiated multiple cross-cutting efforts to try to get the Office of Science’s notoriously “stovepiped” research programs to collaborate. Some people complain these initiatives soak up resources. Does the Office of Science have too many cross-cutting efforts?
A: A lot of these cross-cutting initiatives address timely, critical societal or scientific challenges that we have to address. And from a scientific perspective, these cross-cutting initiatives cover really exciting areas at the interface of two or more programs. Supporting those kinds of efforts has always really been part of how [the office] operates. My focus is on ensuring that we’re raising the top-line budget, so that we can do everything that we think is important.
Q: In 2003, Ray Orbach, then the director of the Office of Science, put together a plan for major facilities to be built in the following 20 years, and DOE has largely stuck to it. Is it time to make a new one?
A: Possibly. That was a very important plan. I’m being cautious because that kind of a plan is not something that should be entered into in a rush. It requires careful deliberation with all our stakeholders. So we will continue to think about this because the importance is well recognized. Stay tuned.
Q: Improving equity and inclusion has been a difficult challenge—especially in physics. How can the agency best expand its reach?
A: It’s extremely important that we’re addressing as many pieces of this issue as possible. For example, for many years, there have been efforts to recruit students [from diverse backgrounds]. In partnerships with national labs, we’re now focusing not just on recruiting, but also on retaining people and ensuring that the students we train can enter and stay in the scientific workforce and can even move towards leadership.
Another part of the effort is creating paths and opportunities for members of institutions that are historically underserved and underrepresented in our portfolio to form partnerships with the labs and facilities—to not just develop the workforce, but also to build the capacity of these institutions. That’s what RENEW and FAIR are for. [FAIR, which launches next year, aims to build energy and climate research capacity at minority-serving institutions.]
The Office of Science is a major enabler of science in the U.S. We have a major role to play, and we take that responsibility very seriously.
Q: What do you say to the critics who claim these efforts undermine meritocracy?
A: It doesn’t have to be either inclusion or meritocracy. There is no reason to sacrifice one for the other. Our goal is to aim for inclusive excellence. We’re addressing these issues because these inequities have become so glaring that we can’t ignore them. Let’s do what we can right now to remove barriers and let the wider community be part of what we’re doing, so that we have access to the most talented workforce possible. Why limit ourselves? There’s no reason for not being inclusive.
Q: Like you, my father was an immigrant, and he spent his entire career as a physicist at DOE’s Argonne National Laboratory. You’re leading one of the nation’s largest research agencies. What does that mean to you personally?
A: It means a lot that I’m able to not just advance in my education and my academic career, but also be in this position. It’s not an exaggeration to say that the U.S. is one of the few places in the world where immigrants could do what your father and I were able to do. Where I was born, there’s no way I would have built the kind of scientific career that I have. But knowing that [the circumstances of your birth] don’t have to decide your potential, that if somebody gives you an opportunity that you can build these kinds of scientific careers, that’s incredibly American, right? And it’s exciting is so many ways.
When President Joe Biden nominated Asmeret Asefaw Berhe as the seventh director of the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Office of Science in April 2021, many scientists were surprised. Physicists have most often been tapped to lead the office, which is the United States’s single largest funder of the physical sciences and the premier builder of large scientific machines such as x-ray sources. In contrast, Berhe is a soil biogeochemist who studies dirt’s ability to soak up carbon. Born and raised in Eritrea, she is also the first person of color to lead the agency, which has a $7.5 billion annual budget.
Although Berhe, whom the Senate confirmed in May, may not fit the usual description of the director, she is determined to leave her imprint on the agency. She has followed the Biden administration’s lead in pushing to expand diversity, equity, and inclusion both at the Office of Science’s 10 national laboratories and in the research sponsored by its six research programs, such as advance scientific computing research, basic energy sciences, and nuclear physics. Earlier this month, Berhe announced that every grant application to the agency must include a plan to help promote diversity and inclusion.
In a 25 October online press conference, Behre discussed the office’s budget, including an additional $13 billion the recently passed CHIPS and Science Act authorized (but does not obligate) Congress to give it over the next 5 years. She also talked about multiple initiatives to improve diversity, such as the effort known as Reaching a New Energy Sciences Workforce (RENEW), which launched this year to engage underrepresented students and researchers at the Office of Science’s 10 national laboratories.
The following interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Q: What is your vision for the Office of Science?
A: This is a mission-driven agency, so we have missions [from DOE] we’re obligated to carry out. Within that, my top goal is to make sure that across everything we do, we are realizing the best possible support for the science. And a big part of that is realizing as much as possible the appropriations requested for fiscal year 2023, and then getting as close to the authorized levels in CHIPS and Science as possible.
My vision is also ensuring that people from all walks of life are served equitably with the work that we do. That’s not just my personal goal. It’s also the goal of the department and of the Biden administration.
Another key priority is ensuring that Washington, D.C., policymakers and everybody we interact with knows what the Office of Science does and why it matters for the nation’s economic advancement, global competitiveness, and everything else.
An important vision for me is making sure that we are leading in terms of the labs and the facilities that we manage, so we can bring to bear on the climate crisis all the resources that we have to realize as much as possible the administration’s goal of net-zero emissions.
Q: In recent years, DOE has initiated multiple cross-cutting efforts to try to get the Office of Science’s notoriously “stovepiped” research programs to collaborate. Some people complain these initiatives soak up resources. Does the Office of Science have too many cross-cutting efforts?
A: A lot of these cross-cutting initiatives address timely, critical societal or scientific challenges that we have to address. And from a scientific perspective, these cross-cutting initiatives cover really exciting areas at the interface of two or more programs. Supporting those kinds of efforts has always really been part of how [the office] operates. My focus is on ensuring that we’re raising the top-line budget, so that we can do everything that we think is important.
Q: In 2003, Ray Orbach, then the director of the Office of Science, put together a plan for major facilities to be built in the following 20 years, and DOE has largely stuck to it. Is it time to make a new one?
A: Possibly. That was a very important plan. I’m being cautious because that kind of a plan is not something that should be entered into in a rush. It requires careful deliberation with all our stakeholders. So we will continue to think about this because the importance is well recognized. Stay tuned.
Q: Improving equity and inclusion has been a difficult challenge—especially in physics. How can the agency best expand its reach?
A: It’s extremely important that we’re addressing as many pieces of this issue as possible. For example, for many years, there have been efforts to recruit students [from diverse backgrounds]. In partnerships with national labs, we’re now focusing not just on recruiting, but also on retaining people and ensuring that the students we train can enter and stay in the scientific workforce and can even move towards leadership.
Another part of the effort is creating paths and opportunities for members of institutions that are historically underserved and underrepresented in our portfolio to form partnerships with the labs and facilities—to not just develop the workforce, but also to build the capacity of these institutions. That’s what RENEW and FAIR are for. [FAIR, which launches next year, aims to build energy and climate research capacity at minority-serving institutions.]
The Office of Science is a major enabler of science in the U.S. We have a major role to play, and we take that responsibility very seriously.
Q: What do you say to the critics who claim these efforts undermine meritocracy?
A: It doesn’t have to be either inclusion or meritocracy. There is no reason to sacrifice one for the other. Our goal is to aim for inclusive excellence. We’re addressing these issues because these inequities have become so glaring that we can’t ignore them. Let’s do what we can right now to remove barriers and let the wider community be part of what we’re doing, so that we have access to the most talented workforce possible. Why limit ourselves? There’s no reason for not being inclusive.
Q: Like you, my father was an immigrant, and he spent his entire career as a physicist at DOE’s Argonne National Laboratory. You’re leading one of the nation’s largest research agencies. What does that mean to you personally?
A: It means a lot that I’m able to not just advance in my education and my academic career, but also be in this position. It’s not an exaggeration to say that the U.S. is one of the few places in the world where immigrants could do what your father and I were able to do. Where I was born, there’s no way I would have built the kind of scientific career that I have. But knowing that [the circumstances of your birth] don’t have to decide your potential, that if somebody gives you an opportunity that you can build these kinds of scientific careers, that’s incredibly American, right? And it’s exciting is so many ways.
Denial of responsibility! Techno Blender is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – [email protected]. The content will be deleted within 24 hours.