Policy : WASHINGTON : Government May Help Business Locate Technological Expertise
Think of it as a huge, nationwide, computer-accessed subject index catalogue. Something that would really impress Melvil Dewey, of decimal fame.
Type in “corrosion” and the names of half a dozen of the nation’s top experts pop up on the screen, complete with telephone numbers, short biographies and summaries of their research. Type in “hazardous-waste disposal” and get more names and numbers.
“A National Technology Extension Service is a way of harnessing our great strength in research for the needs of American industry,” said Rep. John J. LaFalce (D-N.Y.) in introducing legislation (HR 4659) before the U.S. House of Representatives. “It would give small firms, in particular, the opportunity to access technical expertise which can be crucial to their ability to compete and survive.”
LaFalce envisions a technology-access program that would construct bridges between federal experts doing research in national labs and industry where such research could be used to increase the productivity and competitive strength of American businesses in the global marketplace.
The Technology Extension bill would draw upon the experience of the U.S. agricultural research and extension system, which for a century has funded agricultural research and disseminated new technology to U.S. farmers.
Teltech Inc. is doing it already. “The centerpiece of our program is a network of 7,000 of the brightest technical minds in the country. These people come from major universities, national labs; some are consultants, some are even retired,” said Ron Helgeson, vice president of the Minneapolis firm. “The genius of the program is its simplicity. What we have done is to set up a knowledge commons that allows people to talk to one another. What a concept!”
In an informal survey of companies already offering a similar service, LaFalce’s staff found that the average cost per year per firm was $17,000 and the average increase in profit was $290,000. The bill, LaFalce said, “could have a major impact on our economic growth rate and standard of living, and on the international competitiveness of American goods.”
“Fifty percent of all U.S. research and development is funded by the federal government. If people can’t commercialize that, perhaps we would be better off not doing it,” said Joe Allen, director of the Office of Technology Commercialization at the Department of Commerce.
The first part of LaFalce’s bill would authorize the National Institute of Standards and Technology to create a user-friendly database of federal experts, technologies and research projects. The second part would authorize the creation of small-business centers to defray the cost of using the database.
As the bill stands, for businesses with gross annual sales of less than $5 million, there would be no charge. For businesses with gross annual sales of $5 million to $15 million, there would be no cost the first year, but they would pay 25% of cost the next year, 50% the next and then 100%. Businesses with gross annual sales of more than $15 million would pay at cost.
The Technology Extension Service has been referred to the Small Business and Science and Technology committees in the House for hearings. The start-up cost of the program is estimated at $5 million for the first year and $15 million in the following years. Details to be worked out will include compensation of the federal experts and access by foreign companies.
A Plan to Fight Mini-Oil ‘Spills’
Americans dispose of more than 400 million gallons of used motor oil a year--pouring it down storm drains or putting it in containers to be hauled away with the rest of the household garbage to the local landfill. From there, the oil can leach directly into ground water supplies.
It is the equivalent of 35 Exxon Valdez oil spills.
Rep. Esteban Torres (D-Calif.) has proposed legislation, the Consumer Products Recovery Act (HR 2648), designed both to stop the waste of a valuable natural resource and to remedy a major environmental problem.
Despite the severity of the problem, Torres is waving a carrot, not a stick.
“More regulations, even if they are reasonable, are difficult, if not impossible, to enforce without an army of inspectors and lawyers,” he said. “The installation of a system of ‘credits’ to provide economic incentives to the actors in this drama, together with a simple but highly effective enforcement mechanism, would have a positive impact on this process.”
The problem is that used motor oil has a negative value; it costs money to dispose of it properly. Gas stations and auto repair shops have accepted used oil from the do-it-yourselfers, who constitute roughly half of the motor oil market. But with today’s tougher regulations and liability issues, they’re reluctant to accept the oil. They have to pay to have their own hauled away.
The Consumer Products Recovery Act would give used oil an economic value. Here is how it would work:
The Environmental Protection Agency would get the authority to mandate annual recycling requirements. Producers could fulfill their obligation under the new law either by re-refining oil themselves, by purchasing recycled oil or by purchasing an “oil credit.”
The credit: For every gallon of used oil that is recycled, the recycler is entitled to sell a used oil credit. It is as if he is producing a second product. By selling the credit at whatever the market will pay, he has two income streams. Thus, the recycler has the ability to lower the price of his product or increase his capacity.
Currently, 30% of lubricate oil sold is recycled, 60% is thrown away and 10% is lost in the system--burned up by engines, leaked out on garage floors or tossed out in filters. The law would set a rising recycling requirement each year, perhaps reaching 50% at the end of 10 years.
The revenue generated could be used by the reprocessor/recycler to purchase used oil from gas station owners. The station owners, now realizing a profit from used oil, might be willing to pay for oil returned by individuals.
“Recycling is technically feasible and environmentally sound but does not get done because the wrong economic incentives are in place,” Torres said.
The Consumer Products Recovery Act has almost universal support from congressmen, environmental groups and even the oil industry.
