Several local universities are among the country's top recipients of congressional earmarks, according to a report published yesterday in The Chronicle of Higher Education.

West Virginia University received the 13th highest amount of money among the 920 higher education institutions that received earmarks in the 2008 fiscal year, getting $17.6 million for projects ranging from research on coal liquefication technology in China to the construction of a multiple sclerosis center.

Penn State University ranked 22nd, with $15.3 million in earmarks, Carnegie Mellon University ranked 86th with $5.3 million and Wheeling Jesuit University ranked 117th with $4.3 million.

Federal spending on earmarks to colleges and universities increased to $2.3 billion for the 2008 fiscal year, up by more than $300 million from 2003, the last time that The Chronicle surveyed such spending. In 1990, legislators spent $270 million on higher education earmarks.

The growth in earmarks has led critics to deride them as pork projects that are effectively replacing the traditional method of peer-reviewed scientific grants. In recent years, funding for competitive grants at the National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation has not kept pace with inflation.

Some schools, such as Harvard University, Stanford University and the University of Michigan, choose not to pursue earmarks on that principle, said Michael Lubell, director of public affairs at the American Physical Society.

"If this is carried to its logical conclusion, you will have all scientific projects earmarked," said Mr. Lubell. "Funding is not going to be aimed at doing the best science, but aimed at satisfying people with best political connections."

For those in political power, however, earmarks to universities for academic research are just as logical as money for road spending or agricultural subsidies.

Last month, the Senate rejected a moratorium on earmarks, with Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter speaking against portions of the ban.

"Members of the House and Senate are intimately knowledgeable about the legitimate needs of their districts," he said.

Often described as the Senate's "King of Pork," West Virginia Sen. Robert C. Byrd asked last year during a speech on the Senate floor: "Who shall control expenditures from the public treasuries? The unaccountable bureaucrats in the executive branch or the elected representatives of the people in the legislative branch?"

Mr. Byrd sponsored or co-sponsored 13 of WVU's 14 earmarks in fiscal year 2008. WVU President Michael Garrison said in a statement that the university has benefitted immensely from federal appropriations over the last decade and that university administrators "support the continued involvement of our elected representatives in the process."

The federal appropriations have enabled WVU to build the infrastructure to become competitive in the peer-reviewed grant process as well, said Mr. Garrison.

At other area universities, officials categorized the earmarks as just small pieces of their overall federal research budgets.

Much of Penn State's earmarks came from defense-related research, said spokeswoman Jill Shockey, including projects related to the university's Navy University Affiliated Research Center.

The Department of Defense tends to rely more on earmarks as part of its funding process than other government agencies, said Mr. Lubell.

Most of Carnegie Mellon's earmarks are also defense-related. It receives more than $300 million in total research funding, said Teresa Thomas, assistant vice president for media relations, the vast majority of which is awarded through a competitive process.

The university primarily seeks earmarks when it is looking for new partnerships or regional development, she said.

Compared with other large area schools, the University of Pittsburgh's earmarks were relatively scant: a mere $400,000, ranking the school 497th nationally.

Pitt hasn't quite taken the principled stance of Michigan or Harvard, said spokesman John Fedele, but it hasn't made earmarks a priority.

"We've not eschewed earmarks, but we place a greater emphasis on securing peer-reviewed sponsored research," he said.

There are some earmarks that are worthwhile, said Mr. Lubell, citing the Human Genome Project. But it is up to the universities to keep earmarks under control.

"Don't blame Congress for this one," he said. "Blame the community of scientists who basically are on the lookout for this kind of money."