Long Range Planning Pier Oddone September 24, 2007.
-
Upload
tamsin-shepherd -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of Long Range Planning Pier Oddone September 24, 2007.
Long Range PlanningLong Range Planning
Pier Oddone
September 24, 2007
22
If you were Office of Science…If you were Office of Science…
If you were Office of Science making a ten year plan…… What would you have received as the “ships of the line” for HEP from the community?
LHC Upgrades: uncertain in time scale or scope. Detectors? Accelerators?
JDEM/SNAP: $400M assumed by BEPAC
ILC: time scale undetermined; is 0.5 TeV enough? Size requires Presidential initiative outside of HEP
33
If you were Office of Science…If you were Office of Science…
What would you place in the plan?
Clearly an allowance for LHC upgrades. $500M? – but lack of concrete plans and knowledge of what is needed might limit how much and when
Clearly $400M for JDEM/SNAP. If selection other than SNAP, we might acquire more astronomers?
Not construction $$ for ILC: if it does not happen, clearly Office of Science would not need the $$
44
If you were Office of Science…If you were Office of Science…
How much $$ would you put in the plan?
HEP will spend >$8B in the next ten years at the present level
More than enough for the program proposed -excluding the ILC
Way too little for an ILC; need of a separate stream
55
Problems for P5 to solveProblems for P5 to solve
Problems that arise from the “rules of the road”
Problems that arise from competitive facilities in other regions
Problems that arise from “selection” of projects as opposed to “roadmap”
66
Rules of the roadRules of the road
Operating facilities with essential programs get top priority. Example: Tevatron running
Next priority is construction projects with a budget and a schedule
R&D programs are squeezable when confronted with the top priorities
77
Problem from the rules of the roadProblem from the rules of the road
We are shutting our major facilities (program done): Tevatron, B-factory, CESR
We are not building any large projects. NOvA is the exception and it is modest ($260M for detector and accelerator)
Problem: no driver to maintain/increase the resources for the field
88
Competitive situationCompetitive situation
Energy Frontier: Europe unique for the next one to two decades; ILC is our first priority in the US
Intensity frontier: if we do nothing we will lose the lead in proton intensity to JPARC (Japan) and the SPL (Europe) and quark flavor physics to SuperB in Japan or Italy
Particle Astrophysics: US has had a leading role and should maintain it with JDEM, LSST
99
Problems with competitive situationProblems with competitive situation
In a world with a delayed ILC or no ILC – grave risk that we are left ONLY with accelerator R&D without world leading facilities either at the energy frontier or the intensity frontier
Once we are in that bucket: much harder to get out to a position to build the next global facility: the accelerator based program will be smaller
1010
Problem: selection vs. roadmapProblem: selection vs. roadmap
We have selected the projects to start: DES, NOvA, Daya Bay – only NOvA is a “large project”. First step of a roadmap
Problem: “…I want a dialog with the HEP community…” leads to “we’ll talk to you in three years when we know more….”
Example: can say “wait until we know sin213” or build a roadmap that depends on that number
1111
Fermilab Steering GroupFermilab Steering Group
Steering Group NOT to provide a plan A vs. plan B, rather an integrated roadmap with discovery opportunities in the next two decades that:
supports the international R&D and engineering design for as early a start of the ILC as possible and supports the development of Fermilab as a potential host site for the ILC;
develops options for an accelerator-based high energy physics program in the event the start of the ILC construction is slower than the technically-limited schedule; and
1212
Fermilab Steering GroupFermilab Steering Group
includes the steps necessary to explore higher energy colliders that might follow the ILC or be needed should the results from LHC point toward a higher energy than that planned for the ILC
Broad community engagement under the leadership of deputy director Young Kee Kim
1313
What we are asking P5What we are asking P5
Take into consideration it takes a minimum of four years to break ground on any new project
Need recommendations on the roadmap that take account of the full complexity of the world in which we live
If the roadmap we propose is to be effective, it needs R&D support for project preparation