↓ Expand ↓

Category → jobs

Why FedEx is an Early Adopter of Transportation Tech

My colleague Steve Ritterrecently attended a conference about electrofuels. Electrofuels are made by using energy from the sun and renewable inorganic feedstocks such as carbon dioxide and water, processes facilitated by nonphotosynthetic microorganisms or by using earth-abundant metal catalysts.

The conference was attended by researchers and at least one early adopter who is ready to give them a try. Cleantech Chemistry is pleased to have Steve’s report on what he learned. [Edit: You can read Steve's story on electrofuels in this week's issue]

FedEx operates more than 680 aircraft and 90,000 motorized vehicles, including delivery vans and airport and warehouse support vehicles such as forklifts. Dennis R. Beal, the company’s vice president for global vehicles gave a talk at the conference explaining why FedEx is open to many new fuel and other transportation technologies that likely would not reach the masses for years, if ever.

A FedEx all-electric vehicle pauses at the Oklahoma City airport in front of a FedEx Airbus A310. Credit: FedEx

Although FedEx is a service company, “what we sell as a product is certainty—if you absolutely positively have to get it there, use FedEx,” said Beal. Beal gave a keynote talk during the Society for Biological Engineering’s inaugural conference on electrofuels research, which was held on Nov. 6–9, in Providence, R.I.

“That means we have a very high standard for our vehicles that pick up and deliver packages,” Beal added. “We have to be very careful in making business decisions to not negatively impact our ability to deliver certainty for our customers.”

With that philosophy, about 20 years ago FedEx starting taking a holistic view at transportation options, including battery and fuel-cell electric, hybrid, biofuel, and natural gas vehicles. “If it relates to fuel in any form, or alternative engines and drive trains, we are keenly interested,” Beal said.

The company has retrofitted delivery vans itself and partnered with vehicle manufacturers, electric utilities, electric equipment providers, and federal agencies on other fronts. FedEx even teamed up with the nonprofit group Environmental Defense Fund when pioneering the first hybrid electric delivery vehicles. Beal related that he and his colleagues have had a long climb up the learning curve searching for the most efficient transportation technologies that are safe, user friendly, meet driving range requirements, and offer a secure supply of affordable electricity or alternative fuel.

“We have tried a little bit of everything to see where these different technologies will and won’t work, Beal said. “We share the results with the rest of the delivery industry—the goal is to help advance the technology so that it will be widely adopted, not just for ourselves, but to help build scale to bring the cost down for everyone.”

FedEx has built its fleet to now contain 43 all-electric vehicles, 365 diesel hybrid and gasoline hybrid vehicles, and nearly 380 natural gas vehicles. In addition, the company has some 500 forklifts and 1,600 airport ground support electric and alternative-fuel vehicles in service.

The prototypes have a long way to go to be cost comparative with internal combustion engines, Beal said. For example, a typical all-electric delivery van costs $180,000 compared with $40,000 for a gasoline or diesel version. A consolation is that electric vehicles are 70% less costly to operate. “We believe the cost is going to come down and be economically viable in the long term,” Beal noted. “But given the logistics and needs of different regions—city versus rural and colder versus warmer climates—there is no one solution that fits all.”

FedEx plans to use a collection of approaches—gasoline, diesel, biofuel, hybrid, electric, fuel cell, and natural gas—and choose the right vehicle for each mission, Beal said. “What will drive adoption, once a technology passes the certainty test, is not that it is elegant, but that it also makes economic sense.”

Bayer MaterialScience, PPG Get Presidential Shout Out

Yesterday, President Obama was at Penn State to press for more federal support of green buildings. In his speech promoting the Better Buildings Initiative, he suggested that many in his audience might not consider green buildings to be “sexy.” But I suspect that chemists have many reasons to find green buildings to be pretty darned appealing.

Bayer makes spray insulation for commercial building roofs. Credit: Bayer MaterialScience

For one thing, green building materials research – like that conducted by a clean energy hub in Philadelphia headed by Penn State - can earn chemical firms a Presidential shout-out. The hub includes corporate partners Bayer Material Science, which is working on new materials for insulation and facades that save energy, and PPG Industries, whose researchers are creating walls that reflect sun and windows that reflect infrared, according to the President’s remarks.

He pointed out that making buildings (and homes) more energy efficient is a green upgrade that comes with no tradeoffs. The whole point of retrofitting (or building green from the start) is to save on energy costs. The roadblock, though, is the initial upfront cost, which is a cash expenditure. The President’s initiative - through tax credits and financing help – is supposed to minimize the up-front sticker shock. He’d like to pay for the cost of the program by rolling back “subsidies to the oil companies,” saying, “it’s time to stop subsidizing yesterday’s energy.”

Pfizer: No Sacred Cows in R&D

Just when we thought it was over, the cost-cutting at Pfizer continues. In tandem with this morning’s fourth-quarter earnings announcement, Pfizer said it was closing its R&D site in Sandwich, U.K., and paring back research in Groton, Conn., both sites that had survived earlier cutbacks relatively unscathed. Upwards of 3,500 jobs are at risk in the cutbacks. First some details, and then some thoughts on what the new Pfizer research might shape up as.

The details:

–The closure of the Sandwich site will impact 2,400 jobs, although Pfizer says as the shutdown happens over the next 18-24 months, it hopes to move a few hundred folks over to other sites or to external partners.

–Some 25% of the 4,400 employees at Pfizer’s Groton and New London campuses will be shed.

–Internal research will be focused on a few core areas:  neuroscience, cardiovascular, metabolic and endocrine, inflammation and immunology, oncology, and vaccines.

–Pfizer is creating dedicated units focused on pain and sensory disorders, biosimilars, and Asia R&D.

–Pfizer is exiting research in multiple areas: allergy and respiratory, located in Sandwich, U.K.; internal medicine, which includes some research in lung, kidney, and genital urinary diseases, also located in Sandwich; oligonucleotides and tissue repair, in Cambridge, Mass.; and antibacterials, situated in Groton.

–Regenerative medicine research in Cambridge, Mass., is also being dumped. However, similar work in Cambridge, U.K., will be part of a new pain and sensory disorder research unit.

–The R&D budget for 2012 will shrink. The company previously expected to spend $8-$8.5 billion on research next year; now, it will shell out nearly 20% less, or between $6.5 and $7 billion. Remember back to 2008 and 2009, when R&D spending topped $10 billion?

–Pfizer will establish external relationships for several activities, including manufacturing of active pharmaceutical ingredients and dosage forms, toxicology, and bioanalytics.

–Pfizer is aligning its R&D network around a few hubs: Cambridge, Mass., San Francisco, New York, LaJolla, and Cambridge, U.K.

As for the new “innovation engine” at Pfizer, CEO Ian Read today told investors he would be working closely with R&D chief Mikael Dolsten to overhaul the research culture at Pfizer. The idea is to empower research units with the decision making and also hold them accountable for the outcomes. Or as he put it, give scientists a feeling of “owning the money and owning the results.” This strategy sounds a lot like one that’s been taking shape over the last two years at GlaxoSmithKline and, more recently, at AstraZeneca. One analyst asked whether the research programs falling to the ax will be spun out into biotechs. The possibility seemed real, and it again sounded a lot like the kind of de-risking approach GSK is using with its external discovery unit, which has started up several small companies out of clusters of assets.

Another question is what will happen with that Sandwich site. It’s worth noting that some of Pfizer’s critical small molecule discoveries happened at that site. Viagra, Norvasc, and Diflucan are among the inventions to come out of Sandwich.

There was a lot of talk on today’s call about external partnerships, and one has to wonder whether Pfizer will go the way of Lilly, Sanofi, and GSK. Recall that those companies have all sold major R&D sites to contract research organizations (Lilly/Covance, Sanofi/Covance, and GSK/Aptuit), but signed a long-term contract for services out of the sites they had just shed. Readers, any guesses on what will happen with that site?

Another Week in Pharma Job Cuts

This week brought a stream of bad news on the pharma job front, with at least four companies announcing substantial cutbacks. Worse, scientists were the main target for layoffs at three of those companies—Sanofi-Aventis, Arena, and Elan. As everyone’s favorite employment watchdog Chemjobber commented on an In the Pipeline post about cuts at Abbott: When, when, when will it stop? Here’s a look back at the news from this week:

–Sanofi is shedding 90 research jobs at its Bridgewater, N.J., site as part of “the evolution of the R&D portfolio towards more biologic-based therapies,” the company told C&EN. The French pharma firm is ceasing chemical library and chemical development activities, including pharmaceutical development and analytical science. Meanwhile, discovery-stage laboratory activities within several groups, including Lead Identification Technologies, Structure, Design & Informatics, and Analytical Sciences, will be reduced.

Some people will be shifted over to the company’s Molecular Innovative Therapeutics group, which will be transformed into “a cluster of small multidisciplinary biotechs with specialized expertise in key diverse therapeutic approaches.” This new approach sounds an awful lot like what GlaxoSmithKline has been doing over the last two years—creating smaller, more independent units in the hopes of mimicking the culture and innovative spirit of small biotechs.

–Arena Pharmaceuticals is cutting 25% of its staff, or 66 employees, by the end of March. The move isn’t unexpected. Last fall, FDA gave the San Diego-based biotech a thumbs down for its obesity drug lorcaserin based on concerns that it had caused tumors in rats. Now, FDA is asking for a slew of new data, meaning Arena will be unlikely to refile its application for approval until 2012, analysts say. See here and here for more on its lorcaserin trials and tribulations.

–Abbott is slashing 1,900 jobs in the U.S., mirroring layoffs it made last year in Europe following its acquisition of Solvay Pharmaceuticals. The cuts will come from its commercial and manufacturing operations, with over half the job losses concentrated in Northern Illinois. In a conference call, Abbott CEO Miles D. White blamed the restructuring on several factors: the slow recovery of the global economy, costs associated with healthcare reform, European pricing pressures, and a harsher regulatory environment that has made it tough for drugs to get approved.

–And last but not least, Elan has laid off 10% of its staff, or about 130 workers, with its R&D site in South San Francisco most heavily impacted. Researchers accounted for about half of the job losses.

If we’ve missed any layoffs that chemists should be aware of, drop us a note or leave a comment.

Germany Unwinds Solar Gravy Train

The German government will begin to pare back its generous subsidies for solar-generated power with an up to 15% cut in feed-in tariffs. The trimming won’t start until July, and will be dependent on how much solar input is actually being generated by the scores of rooftop panels that have been installed in the most solarific of European countries.

Continue reading →

Haystack 2010 Year-In-Review

This Friday, we’re looking back at 2010′s big news in pharma and biotech, both the good and the bad. Check out our picks and be sure to weigh in on what you think we missed.

1. Provenge Approved

In April, Dendreon’s Provenge became the first approved cancer immunotherapy. Dendreon CEO Mitch Gold called it “the dawn of an entirely new era in medicine.” And while prostate cancer patients are excited for a new treatment option, the approval is perhaps most exciting for its potential to reignite interest in cancer immunotherapy research. There’s a lot of room for improving the approach—Provenge is, after all, expensive and highly individualized. Now that immunotherapy have been proven to work, there’s hope that the lessons learned in both its discovery and clinical development will aid scientists in inventing even better cancer vaccines.

2. Obesity Field Slims

The obesity drug race played out in dramatic fashion in 2010, with three biotech companies-Vivus, Arena, and Orexigen, each making their case for its weight-loss medication before FDA. As of this writing, Orexigen’s drug Contrave seems to be on the surest footing to approval, but longtime obesity-drug watchers know that caution seems to rule the day at FDA, so nothing is a sure bet.

Orexigen’s Contrave and Vivus’s Qnexa are both combinations of already-approved drugs, whereas Arena’s Lorqess is a completely new molecule. When C&EN covered the obesity race in 2009, it seemed that Lorqess (then going by the non-brand-name lorcaserin) had the cleanest safety profile, but Qnexa was best at helping patients lose weight.

But FDA’s panels didn’t always play out the way folks expected. There were safety surprises- notably the worries about tumors that cropped up in rats on high doses of Lorqess, and the extensive questioning about birth defect risks from one of the ingredients in Vivus’ Qnexa. The fact that FDA’s panel voted favorably for Orexigen’s Contrave, a drug that’s thought to have some cardiovascular risks, generated discussion because FDA pulled Abbott’s Meridia, a diet drug with cardiovascular risks, from the market in October.

The dust still hasn’t fully settled. Arena and Vivus received Complete Response Letters from FDA for Lorqess and Qnexa. Vivus has submitted additional documentation and a followup FDA meeting on Qnexa is happening in January. Also to come in January is the agency’s formal decision on Contrave. And if you’re interested in learning about the next wave of obesity drugs coming up in clinical trials, read this story in Nature News.

3. Sanofi & Genzyme: The Neverending Story

Speaking of drama, Sanofi’s pursuit of Genzyme has been in the headlines for months now, and promises to stretch well into 2011. The story goes something like this: Genzyme had a tumultuous year, as it struggled to correct the manufacturing issues that created product shortages and eventually led to a consent decree with FDA. In walked Sanofi, who offered—in a friendly way—to buy the company for $18.5 billion. Genzyme refused to consider what it viewed as a lowball offer. Weeks passed, they remained far apart on price with no signs of anyone budging, until Sanofi finally went hostile. Genzyme suggested it would be open to an option-based deal, which would provide more money later on if its multiple sclerosis drug candidate alemtuzumab reached certain milestones. Sanofi stuck to its $18.5 billion guns and is now trying to extend the time period to convince shareholders to consider its offer.

4. Final Stretch in HCV Race

This year, the industry finally got a peek at late-stage data for what are likely be the first drugs approved for Hepatitis C in more than two decades. Based on Phase III data, analysts think Vertex’s telaprevir will have an edge over Merck’s boceprevir once the drugs hit the market. Meanwhile, the next generation of HCV drugs had a bumpier year, with several setbacks in the clinic. Still, the flood of development in HCV has everyone hoping that eventually people with HCV can take a cocktail of pills, rather than the current harsh combination of interferon and ribavirin.

5. Pharma Covets Rare Diseases

Historically, research in rare diseases has been relegated to the labs of small biotechs and universities. But in 2010, big pharma firms suddenly noticed that if taken in aggregate, a pretty sizable chunk of the public—on the order of 6%–suffer from rare diseases. They also noticed that when there’s a clear genetic culprit, drug discovery is a bit more straightforward. Further, rare disease can sometimes be a gateway to approval in larger indications, making them all the more appealing. With that, Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline both launched rare diseases units and made a series of acquisitions and licensing deals (Pfizer/FoldRx, GSK/Amicus, GSK/Isis, etc) to accelerate their move into the space. Meanwhile, Sanofi is trying to jump in with both feet through its proposed acquisition of Genzyme.

6. MS Pill Approved

Novartis gained approval in September for Gilenya, the first treatment for multiple sclerosis that is a pill rather than an injection. In even better news for people with MS, there more pills are rounding the corner towards FDA approval: Sanofi’s teriflunomide, Teva’s laquinimod, and Biogen’s BG-12. All of these drugs come with safety caveats, but the idea of new treatment options after years depending on interferons has gotten everyone in the MS field pretty excited.

7. Antibody-Drug Conjugates Prove Their Mettle

The concept of linking a powerful chemo drug to a targeted antibody, thereby creating something of a heat-seeking missile to blast tumor cells, isn’t new. But antibody-drug conjugate technology has finally matured to a point where it seems to be, well, working. Seattle Genetics presented very positive results from mid-stage studies of SGN-35 in two kinds of lymphoma. And ImmunoGen provided clear data showing its drug T-DM1 could significantly minimize side effects while taking down breast cancer.

8. Pharma Forges Further into Academia

With nearly every pharma firm paring back internal research, the focus on external partnerships has never been greater. Broad deals with universities are becoming more common, and Pfizer has arguably gone the furthest to evolve the model for working with academic partners. In May, Pfizer announced a pact with Washington University under which the academic scientists will look for new uses for Pfizer drug candidates. As part of the deal, they gain unprecedented access to detailed information on Pfizer’s compound library. And last month, Pfizer unveiled the Center of Therapeutic Innovation, a network of academic partnerships intended to bridge the “valley of death,” between early discovery work and clinical trials. The first partner is University of California, San Francisco, which scores $85 million in funding over five years, and the network will eventually be comprised of seven or eight partners, worldwide. Most notable is that Pfizer is planting a lab with a few dozen researchers adjacent to the UCSF campus to facilitate the scientific exchange.

9. Finally, New Blood Thinners

This year saw the FDA approval of a viable alternative to coumadin (aka warfarin), a 50-plus-year-old workhorse blood thinner that interacts with many foods and herbal supplements.

Boehringer’s Pradaxa (dabigatran) got a unanimous thumbs-up from an FDA panel for preventing stroke in patients with a common abnormal heart rhythm called atrial fibrillation. FDA approved the drug in October. The next new warfarin alternative to be approved could be Xarelto (rivaroxaban), which has had favorable results in recent Phase III clinical trials, as David Kroll over at Terra Sig explained. Both Xarelto and Pradaxa had already been approved for short term use outside the US.

Rivaroxaban and dabigatran work at different stages of the biochemical cascade that leads to clotting, as we illustrated here. Another drug candidate in the warfarin-alternative pipeline is BMS’s and Pfizer’s apixaban. Check out coverage of apixaban trials here and at Terra Sig. And in a separate blood-thinner class, FDA today rejected Brilinta, a possible competitor to mega-blockbuster Plavix.

10. Alzheimer’s Progress & Setbacks

Alzheimer’s disease has been a tough nut to crack, and news in 2010 has done little to dispel this reputation. This year Medivation’s Dimebon, which started life as a Russian antihistamine and showed some promise against Alzheimer’s, tanked in its first late-stage clinical trial. Later in the year, Eli Lilly halted development of semagacestat after the compound actually worsened cognition in Alzheimer’s patients. Semagacestat targeted the enzyme gamma-secretase, and the New York Times and other outlets reported the news as shaking confidence into a major hypothesis about what causes Alzheimer’s and how to treat it– the amyloid hypothesis.

But not everyone agreed with that assertion. Take Nobel Laureate Paul Greengard, who told C&EN this year (subscription link) that semagacestat’s troubles may have been due to the drug’s incomplete selectivity for gamma-secretase.

This year Greengard’s team discovered a potential way to sidestep the selectivity issue, by targeting a protein that switches on gamma-secretase and steers it away from activities that can lead to side effects. Greengard thinks the amyloid hypothesis is very much alive. But the final word on the amyloid hypothesis will come from trial results in next year and beyond, for drugs such as BMS-708163, Bristol Myers Squibb’s gamma-secretase inhibitor.

11. Avandia (Barely) Hangs On

Avandia was once the top selling diabetes medication in the world, but in 2010 long-running rumblings about the drug’s cardiovascular risks reached fever pitch. By the fall, Avandia was withdrawn from the European Union market and heavily restricted in the US.

Avandia (rosiglitazone) helps diabetics control their blood sugar levels by making cells more responsive to insulin. Widespread scrutiny of Avandia dates back to 2007, when a study led by Vioxx-whistleblower and Cleveland Clinic cardiologist Steve Nissen suggested Avandia increased the risk of heart attacks. In February 2010, a leaked government report that recommended Avandia be pulled from the market made headlines. In July, an FDA advisory panel voted on what to do about Avandia, and the results were a mixed bag, with most panel members voting either to pull the drug entirely or add severe restrictions. In the end, FDA sided with the “restrict” panelists- Avandia is still on the market, but it can only be prescribed to patients who can’t control their blood sugar with a first-line medication.

Clearly, researchers still have a lot to learn about how the drugs in Avandia’s class work. But we enjoyed reading Derek Lowe’s self-characterized rant about just how much effort has been put in so far. Among several other drugs in Avandia’s class, Rezulin (troglitazone) was pulled from the market many years ago because of adverse effects on the liver, but Actos (pioglitazone) remains on the market and appears to be safe.

12. Executive Musical Chairs

The year after a trio of mega-mergers and at a time when patent losses are piling up, drug companies shook up their management. The most notable changes came at Pfizer: First, the company abandoned its two-headed approach to R&D leadership and picked Michael Dolsten, former head of R&D at Wyeth, to lead research. Martin Mackay, Pfizer’s head of R&D, meanwhile jumped ship to lead R&D at AstraZeneca. Then, in a move that took everyone by surprise, Pfizer’s CEO Jeff Kindler suddenly stepped down and Ian Reade took over. At, Merck, president Kenneth Frazier will take over as CEO in January;  Richard T. Clark will stay on as chairman of Merck’s board. And just this week, Sanofi-Aventis saidformer NIH director Elias Zerhouni would replace Marc Cluzel as head of R&D, while Merck KGaA appointed Stefan Oschmann as head of pharmaceuticals. Oschmann comes on from Merck & Co., where he was president of emerging markets.

In the biotech world, the most notable shift came in June, when George Scangos moved over from leading Exelixis totake the top job at Biogen Idec.

13. RNAi Rollercoaster

The year has been a tumultuous one for RNAi technology. Leaders in siRNA technology are experiencing growing pains as they try to turn promising science into commercialized products. Alnylam, arguably the best-known and biggest player in the RNAi arena, laid off 25% of its staff after Novartis decided not to extend its pact with Alnylam. Things only got worse when Roche announced it was exiting RNAi research, a move that hit its development partners Alnylam and Tekmira. Roche seemed to be primarily worried about delivery, an issue that is holding the field back from putting more RNAi-based therapeutics into the clinic.

But it’s not all bad news: the year brought a spate of big-ticket deals for companies developing other kinds of RNAi technology. GSK signed on to use Isis Pharmaceuticals’ antisense technology, which uses single-stranded rather than double-stranded oligonucleotides. And Sanofi entered into a pact with Regulus, the microRNA joint venture between Isis and Alnylam, worth $740 million. Further, Isis and Genzyme made some progress with mipomersen, the cholesterol drug developed using Isis’ antisense technology.

14. Revival of Interest in Cancer Metabolism

In cancer research, the old was new again in 2010, with a flurry of publications about depriving cancer cells of their energy source by taking advantage of quirks in their metabolism. That idea has been around since the 1920′s- when German biochemist Otto Warburg noticed differences in how cancer cells and normal cells deal with glucose. This year, Celgene handed over $130 million upfront for access to any cancer drugs that come out of Massachusetts biotech Agios Pharmaceuticals’ labs. One target in Agios’s crosshairs is an enzyme involved in glucose metabolism- pyruvate kinase M2. In addition to the Celgene/Agios deal, we noted that AstraZeneca and Cancer Research UK are in a three-year pact related to cancer metabolism, and the technology behind GlaxoSmithKline’s much-talked-about $720 million purchase of Sirtris has to do with depriving cells of energy.

15. More Job Cuts

Not to end this list on a sour note, but it wouldn’t be complete without acknowledging the ongoing narrative of layoffs and retooling at drug companies. This year brought brutal cuts at AstraZeneca, GSK, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Abbott, along with the widespread and ongoing layoffs at Pfizer and Merck. Several features in C&EN looked at the impact the cuts are having on chemists:

How some laid-off pharma chemists migrate to new careers

How academic programs are adapting

And the views from the ground in New England and California, two hotbeds of pharma/biotech (hint- it ain’t pretty).

For more jobs insight, join the discussions happening with Chemjobber and Leigh aka Electron Pusher, and check out their chemistry jobs blog roundtable, which just wrapped today.

New Cleantech Jobs Report

BP Solar shut its Frederick, MD plant last year, eliminating 320 jobs. Worldwide, solar leads in cleantech job creation.

Research and advisory firm CleanEdge has released the 2010 edition of its report Cleantech Job Trends. The company tallies up 3 million jobs in the green sector, including more than 500,000 in wind power (direct and indirect employment) and over 300,000 in solar photovoltaics worldwide.

Overall, the report ranks the leading industries for cleantech employment starting with solar power, followed by biofuels and biomaterials; smart grid and energy efficiency; wind power; and advanced transportation/vehicles.

In the U.S., the biggest metropolitan areas for green jobs are San Francisco, Los Angeles, Boston, New York, Denver, and Washington, DC. But worldwide, the bad news for the U.S. is that of the 10 largest “pure play” cleantech employers in the world, six are in China (one in Hong Kong), two are in the U.S., and there is one each in Denmark and Spain. Denmark is home to Vestas Wind Energy, the largest cleantech employer with 20,730 employees.

The authors also include their assessment of the impact government spending in China and the US has had on creating cleantech jobs, as well as some policy recommendations for domestic job creation (including feed-in tariffs and a carbon tax). Check it out.

This Week in Pharma Job Cuts…

As we know, its tough out there for scientists working in the pharmaceutical and biotech industries. This week brought yet another spate of drug industry cutbacks that seemed worth chronicling. For those keeping track:

Abbott Laboratories is getting rid of 3% of its workforce, or about 3,000 jobs, as it folds Solvay’s pharmaceuticals business into its operations. Most of the cuts will come from Europe: 300 jobs will be trimmed in Hannover, Germany; 500 in Weesp, the Netherlands; and Solvay’s U.S. headquarters in Marietta, Ga., will be shuttered. According to SEC filings, certain R&D programs will be discontinued (perhaps they can be auctioned off?).

Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, a leader in RNAi technology, is shedding 25-30% of its employees after Novartis decided not to opt-in to a technology licensing clause worth $100 million at the end of a five-year pact between the companies. The biotech raked in $125 million in funding during the lifetime of the pact, and had 25 full-time employees working on projects for Novartis. An interesting tidbit from a conference call held this morning from Alnylam: According to Alnylam’s CEO John Maraganore, Novartis now has 100 people working on RNAi technology at its site in Cambridge, Mass. Clearly they made a commitment to the field with their five-year pact with Alnylam, but somehow the sheer numbers were surprising. Alnylam expects to end the year with $320 million in cash on hand.

Bristol-Myers Squibb is cutting 3% of its workforce, estimated at around 800 jobs, as generic competition on its blood thinner Plavix looms. The company had already unveiled plans in 2008 to eliminate about 10% of its workforce, or about 3,700 jobs, by the end of this year. A 2007 cost-savings program had separately targeted 4,350 jobs.

Genzyme said last week it would eliminate 1,000 jobs over the next 15 months as it tries to right its manufacturing operations and combat takeover attempts.

Lundbeck is shedding 50 R&D jobs amid a reorganization of its R&D operations in Denmark and the U.S. The specialty pharma firm is shifting its focus to three main areas of biology– neurodegeneration, neuroinflammation and synaptic transmission—related to brain diseases, and will rely more on external partnerships.

Merck, meanwhile, appears to be having a tough time making cuts in the Netherlands, where it is essentially ridding itself of Organon’s R&D operations. According to Radio Netherlands, the big pharma firm is now negotiating with the Dutch government over the thousands of jobs slated to be lost in the region.