The trouble with this idea is that university researchers have very little cash and are loathe to part with it. Almost all of their grant money goes to paying the salaries of people in their lab (fixed costs). If they need to use a piece of equipment at another institution, the current method is to propose a collaboration with a researcher at that university. Additionally, any decent researcher already knows where the specialized equipment resides (they can figure it out by reading the papers in their field or chatting at conferences), so there is no need for a centralized database.
As an university researcher (faculty at University of Miami) I agree that efficiency of spending is very important - what is interesting is that researchers are often unaware that by making use of economies of scale that exist at specialized core facilities it is often cheaper than conducting experiments in house (a good example is cloning).
In some fields salaries might comprise the majority of lab costs but in biology this is not the case - experimental costs which can be spent as the researcher sees fit comprise the majority of costs. These costs can be outsourced to pay core facilities (currently $2B is spent outsourcing experiments to core facilities annually in the US).
While i agree that it is possible for researchers to establish where specialized equipment resides by reading papers and chatting with colleagues at conferences this is obviously inefficient and an incomplete record of potential providers. A centralized marketplace is a more efficient method for identifying providers.
"A centralized marketplace is a more efficient method for identifying providers."
That's spot on. Access to resources shouldn't be based on "special knowledge" Success in research should be a result of insights, creativity, and hard work, not "being in the know." Best of luck.
You work at the University of Miami? Any chance you have internships available for UM students? (I sent an email through the contact us page on your website as well)
> Almost all of their grant money goes to paying the salaries of people in their lab (fixed costs).
That highly depends on the field. At my university in the math department, you're completely right. In the physics department however, the costs of the machines and experimental setups dwarf the salaries. Because the demand for things is so low, the cost is ridiculously high. For example suppose there were no plastic coke bottles, but you require one for an experiment. How much do you think it costs to make one coke bottle in a university's workshop, or to order one from a specialized company? The costs can easily go in the thousands of dollars. That's the situation scientists are in for parts used in their setups, and for the machines they use. If you can share machines, that can be a huge cost savings.
