Science Diplomacy in Large International Collaborations

Barry BarishCaltech

APS -- Anaheim03-May-11ITER

Importance Forefront science is being carried out more

and more through large-scale international collaborations.

The contributing factors include: a shrinking world that is making international collaboration easier, and the obvious advantages, such as the imperative to combine resources, skills and ideas.

What are the implications for US Science policy?

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 2

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 3

International Science

Present day examples:» Small scale International Collaborations

» Large Infrastructure – Polar Program; Underground Laboratories

–Complex management–International treaty–International participation

» Large-scale Science Projects–ITER, LHC, ILC, etc–International collaborators

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 4

Auger Experiment

Argentina

Origin of the highest energy cosmic rays?

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 5

ALMA Project

Argentina

Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array of up to 80 high-precision antennas

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 6

Ice Cube Project Neutrino Astrophysics – Investigating

astrophysical sources emitting ultra high energy neutrinos

South Pole

The Tevatron / B-factory

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 7

DoE Laboratories• Fermilab, SLAC• CDF, D0, BaBar

International governance • Experiments, Lab?

Policy decisions• Turning-off of B-factory, Tevatron

Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 8

Global Collaboration•~ $2B investment•U.S. Roles

• DoE integration• NASA launch

•Governance, Decisions?

Pamela positron excess

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 9

Mega-scale Projects --- LHC

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 10

Mega-scale Projects --- ITER

Goal is to produce a self-

sustaining fusion-heated

plasma

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 11

Mega-scale Global Projects --- ILC

International Linear Collider

Importance is in different ways

Large science facilities are becoming more and more important for pursuing: » National priorities (ITER); » Strategic priorities (Antarctica and South

Pole); » Transformational science (Forefront goals

(ALMA); » Leading research projects (Large Hadron

Collider at CERN)

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 12

Benefits: Large-scale projects Large-scale state of the art facility development

advances technological applications for society, often in unpredictable ways.

The World Wide Web was developed at CERN to facilitate long distance collaboration;

Accelerator development has helped material studies and medical applications

Research motivated electronics development commonly becomes incorporated in many modern devices.

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 13

“We need each other”

The complexity, technical challenges and cost of large-scale forefront projects requires bringing together the most talented scientists, technical skills and shared costs to jointly develop the projects (examples shown earlier)

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 14

Comments: U.S. example projects ITER is a seven country collaboration

jointly costing billions of $$. The US is an equal scientific/technical partner (1/7th) of the technical part of the project (the host country France (or region Europe) is responsible for conventional facilities.

Antarctica / South Pole Station has foreign collaborators for developing the large scale neutrino experiment at the South Pole.

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 15

Comments: U.S. example projects

ALMA is an equal US (NSF) – Europe (ESO) collaboration, with substantial contributions from Japan, Taiwan, etc.

LHC at CERN has a broad US contribution to the European project at CERN for the accelerator and the experimental facilities

Future large scale projects may become global collaborations; Square Kilometer Array (future of radio astronomy) and International Linear Collider (future high energy physics beyond LHC)3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 16

A U.S. strategic imperative

Developing and supporting such large facilities must be an important part of US Science Policy, in order to keep US science at the forefront; to develop the state of the art skills, etc.

The U.S. must be part of the most important science to be most competitive and to have the biggest impact on society

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 17

Science policy and international partnerships

Our agencies, policy makers and scientific communities develop strategic long range plans and priorities.

Sharing resources through international partners is essential for broadly pursuing forefront science.

How can we make these decisions and policies in an international context?

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 18

A case example

International Linear Collider

Managing global science projects: a case example

Progress & Issues

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 20

Electron Positron CollidersThe Energy Frontier

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 21

2003 年 7 月

Asia

Global Effort on Design / R&D for ILC

Joint Design, Implementation, Operations, ManagementHost Country Provides Conventional Facilities

EU US

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 22

The ITRP Recommendation We recommend that the linear collider be based

on superconducting rf technology

» This recommendation is made with the understanding that we are recommending a technology, not a design. We expect the final design to be developed by a team drawn from the combined warm and cold linear collider communities, taking full advantage of the experience and expertise of both

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 23

» 11km SC linacs operating at 31.5 MV/m for 500 GeV» Centralized injector

– Circular damping rings for electrons and positrons

– Undulator-based positron source» Single IR with 14 mrad crossing angle» Dual tunnel configuration for safety and availability

ILC Reference DesignReference Design – Feb 2007

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 24

RDR Design & “Value” CostsSummary

RDR “Value” Costs

Total Value Cost (FY07)4.80 B ILC Units Shared

+1.82 B Units Site Specific

+14.1 K person-years

(“explicit” labor = 24.0 M person-hrs @ 1,700 hrs/yr)

1 ILC Unit = $ 1 (2007)

Σ Value = 6.62 B ILC Units

InternationalCosting

•Labor costs?•Contingency?•Escalation?

•In-kind Contributions•Integration

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 25

The Role of Governments Governments are the key – they will make the

decisions that lead to the establishment of an ILC or other global project

The scientific community, through ICFA, are maintaining close contact with the key government agencies » The main forum is the Funding Agencies for Large

Colliders (FALC), which meets about twice a year. Major strategy steps (like ITRP, GDE etc) are discussed with FALC to ensure acceptance by the governments of ICFA’s actions

US Role: we need new policies For the future of US science and

technology development, US must enable increased international science collaboration and facility development (like LHC, ITER, ILC, SKA, etc)

We must learn how to do it. » For international partnerships we must figure

out how to most effectively integrate our way of doing things with others: governance; project management; accountability, etc

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 26

Some issues One year at a time budgeting does not make for stable

funding required for large project international commitments (Recent example: ITER was zeroed out in Omnibus Bill a couple years ago)

Participating in shared governance for joint projects conflicts with our system of rigid steps, reviews, etc, which we impose even when we are a minority partner

There are no examples of the US hosting a major international science project, having international participation, governance, etc.

To host a major international project, we must solve problems of governance, visas, in-kind contributions, accountability, contingency and cost overruns, etc

3-May-11 APS Science Diplomacy 27