PARTICLE ACCELERATORS FOR PARTICLE PHYSICS by qjp44028

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 35

									CONTENTS

  1. Executive summary

  2. Introduction

  3. Strategic Areas:
     (i) Synchrotron radiation
     (ii) Neutron scattering
     (iii) High powered lasers
     (iv) Radioactive particle beam facilities
     (v) Particle accelerators for particle physics
     (vi) Astronomy and solar system science facilities
     (vii) Fusion facilities
     (viii) Ocean research vessels
     (ix) Computing infrastructure
     (x) Major renewals, refurbishments and investments in Research Council Institutes

  4. Summary of actual and potential projects in the Road Map

  5. OGC Gateway Process and how it is used in Large Science Facilities

  6. Glossary of Acronyms

  7. Contacts
       1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Large Facilities Strategic Road Map updates the first version of the Road Map which was
published in June 2001. It is a tool by which Research Councils UK (RCUK) and its members
can assess strategically the most expensive and complex scientific facilities with which UK
researchers are or may wish to be involved. The road-map includes facility “projects” identified
by members of RCUK as a priority for consideration which meet one or more of the following
criteria:

   •   Where there could be an international dimension to the proposed facility and therefore
       opportunity to share costs and develop relationships to benefit the UK science
       programme;
   •   Where the facility supports the requirements of research communities of more than one
       Research Council;
   •   Where the capital investment is greater than the sum of £25 million, when it represents a
       significant element of an individual Research Council's budget line.

The Road Map is divided into the ten strategic areas listed below. The following paragraphs
provide a brief synopsis of each. For further information see Section 3 or click on the hypertext
links below.

Synchrotron radiation
Neutron scattering
High powered lasers
Radioactive particle beam facilities
Particle accelerators for particle physics
Astronomy and solar system science facilities
Fusion facilities
Ocean research vessels
Computing infrastructure
Major renewals, refurbishments and investments in Research Council Institutes

Synchrotron radiation is a major tool in many branches of physical and life sciences.
Substantial programmes are funded at the Synchrtron Radiation Source (SRS) in CCLRC’s
Daresbury Laboratory and the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) in Grenoble.
The UK’s access to ESRF is not enough to meet the needs of UK scientists, and as the SRS is
nearing the end of its useful life, the UK is constructing the new Diamond Synchrotron source at
the CCLRC’s Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, which will be operational by 2007. UK scientists
require access to high brightness radiation at a range of wavelengths, to probe everything from
biological molecules to quantum dots, and Diamond will be optimised to be complementary to
the ESRF. Diamond will not be an optimal source of low energy radiation, nor will it have the
capacity required to accommodate the UK’s world-class Very Ultra Violet and Extreme Ultra
Violet research communities, and the UK is developing the 4th Generation Light Source (4GLS)
proposal which would provide a suite of ultra-high brightness, short pulse sources of
spontaneous and stimulated synchrotron radiation. If approved, 4GLS might be operational by
around 2010. At the short wavelength end of the spectrum, access to a sub-Angstrom X-ray free
electron laser is likely to be required in the longer term.

Neutrons are an effective, and for many applications a unique, tool for probing the structure of
matter. The UK has access to the world’s most powerful reactor and accelerator based neutron
sources – the Institut Laue Langevin (ILL) in Grenoble and ISIS at CCLRC’s Rutherford
Appleton Laboratory. In the short term, the UK intends to build on these two investments. With
France and Germany, it has agreed to a ten-year extension of ILL (until 2013), and intends to
support the “Millennium Programme” of capital investment at ILL to maintain the ILL at its
world leading status. The UK has also agreed to develop a Second Target Station for ISIS, which
will offer unique instrumentation allowing a new range of structural and dynamics studies of
matter. In the longer term, the UK will need access to a Megawatt-class source, and there are a
number of possible scenarios to achieving this, which will need to be evaluated in the medium
term.

High power lasers enable the physics of matter at high densities and temperatures to be studied
in a laboratory environment. They are of interest both to civil and defence related research, and
several countries have developed military facilities with a component of open access for civilian
research. In the UK, the principal facility is Vulcan at CCLRC’s Rutherford Appleton
Laboratory, whose power has been increased to 1 PW in 2003. Vulcan is likely to remain the
primary facility for UK researchers, and a sustained and directed laser research programme
would allow the UK to remain at the forefront of key science areas. In the nearer term, provision
of high energy (kJ) beamlines would enable a much wider range of plasma parameters to be
studied. Longer term, new technologies need to be developed to increase the intensity of the laser
pulses. In the area of laser-driven fusion, there are opportunities for the UK to collaborate
international partners (with Japan in the near term, and possibly with European partners in the
long term leading to a potential European facility directed towards laser driven fusion).

Radioactive particle beams allow a number of fundamental studies to be carried out in nuclear
physics and nuclear astrophysics, and to a lesser extent in other fields. UK scientists participate
in many of the facilities around the world, gaining access on scientific merit. A previous option
of developing a new facility within the UK has not been supported, as it was not considered to be
of sufficiently high priority when compared with other potential investments. UK strategy is now
focussing on enabling UK researchers to gain access to key facilities abroad and be involved in
development programmes at those facilities – perhaps by trading access to UK based facilities in
other fields.

The main particle physics project over the next 5-10 years is the Large Hadron Collider (LHC)
at CERN, which is a major part of the PPARC particle physics portfolio during this period.
Beyond that, three particle accelerator facilities are likely to be needed over the next 15-20 years.
Firstly, a high-energy linear electron-positron collider with energy between 0.5 and 1.0 TeV is
needed to make precision studies of the discoveries at the LHC. Secondly, an intense neutrino
source ('neutrino factory') is needed to study the properties of the neutrino mixing matrix.
Thirdly, a higher energy collider with a centre of mass energy well above the TeV scale is likely
to be needed to test the new theories developed from the LHC and linear collider, and illuminate
the physics at even higher energy scales. This might be a higher energy linear electron-positron
collider, or it could be a muon collider which might also be needed at lower energy to make
complementary studies, in particular of the Higgs sector. If the UK is also to benefit from the
technology developed for these advanced facilities, it is important that the UK be fully involved
in the design and construction of the machine as well as of the detectors, even if these facilities
are not built in the UK. In future, partnerships of nations or groups of nations making major
contributions in kind, rather than cash, could be the favoured mechanism.

Within astronomy, 8-metre class optical/infra-red telescopes will dominate observational studies
for the next decade, and UK scientists currently have access via Gemini and the European
Southern Observatory’s Very large Telescope. For the future, three classes of astronomical
facilities will be essential: large space telescopes operating at wavelengths inaccessible from the
ground, large interferometers in space and on the ground, and extremely large (50-metre plus)
ground-based optical/infra-red telescopes. UK scientists currently have access to the Very Long
Baseline Interferometer radio array and the Newton XMM X-ray space telescope. Over the next
decade, these will be complemented by a millimetre/sub-millimetre array (ALMA), the James
Webb Space Telescope (successor to Hubble) and a space based gravitational radiation
observatory (LISA). R&D is under way for 50-metre plus telescopes and a Square Kilometre
Array radio interferometer. The UK is well placed to contribute to these projects, but needs to
invest in R&D in the short to medium term. In solar systems science, the UK participation
comes primarily through our membership of the European Space Agency (ESA). A new ESA
planetary programme called Aurora is planned for 2005-2015, and the UK is well placed to make
a significant impact.

 Facilities for UK researchers in magnetic-confined fusion are currently provided at the UK
Atomic Energy Authority’s Culham Science Centre, which is host for the European JET project
as well as the UK’s own spherical tokamak facility MAST. The next generation fusion facility,
the International Tokomak Experimental Reactor (ITER), is likely to be agreed before the end of
2004, with construction taking around 10 years, and costs in the region of £2.5 billion. ITER will
not be located in the UK, and European participation in ITER may mean insufficient funding is
available to operate JET. UK efforts in the near term are therefore likely to concentrate on major
participation in ITER, and continued experimentation with MAST. Significant research in
materials is needed in parallel to ITER if fusion power is to be realised on a fast track, and there
is a proposal for an international fusion materials irradiation facility (IFMIF) at around £300
million, although resources in all the main countries will be tight. If IFMIF does proceed, the UK
will want to be involved, and UK participation could range from contributing to experiments in
the detailed designed phase to hosting the design team or even IFMIF itself.

To maintain the UK’s world-class strengths in oceanography, and marine geology and
geophysics, UK scientists need access to high quality oceanographic research vessels.
Currently, UK researchers have access to two dedicated NERC research ships, the RRS Charles
Darwin and the RRS Discovery, and to an international pool of ships and equipment via NERC’s
barter arrangements with other countries. The replacement to the RRS Charles Darwin, which is
nearing the end of its useful life, will be delivered by 2006, costing in the region of £35 million.
The RRS Discovery will reach the end of its economic life by 2010, and a replacement will be
required, costing perhaps £60 million.

Computing infrastructure requirements are growing rapidly, and expensive high performance
computing facilities are needed to meet research challenges across several disciplines. The UK
currently has two major cross-disciplinary facilities. HPCx, procured in 2002, has a sustained
capability of 3.4 Tflop/s, upgraded to 6 Tflop/s by July 2004 and to 12 Tflop/s by November
2006. The CSAR service began in 1998 and runs to 2006. It has two main systems, with
sustained performances of 671 Gflop/s and 316 Gflop/s, and a new service with a sustained
performance of 1 Tflop/s is scheduled for September 2003. In the future, it is likely that high
performance machines with different architectures will be required. At least one facility a factor
of 8 greater than the initial phase of HPCx by around 2005 is desired, doubling after 2 years and
doubling again two years later. The Research Councils are looking to collaborate with other
Government agencies to share future facilities.

A number of major renewals, refurbishments and investments in Research Council
Institutes are required over the coming years to ensure that UK scientist shave access to top
laboratory facilities.

•   The Laboratory of Molecular Biology, an institute of the MRC, is one of the world’s leading
    laboratories. The laboratory building was designed to meet the needs of molecular biology of
    the 1960s. It is over-crowded and inadequately ventilated. Its congested site, low ceilings,
    small rooms, and network of central load bearing concrete pillars severely limit the scope for
    modernisation and expansion. Such modernisation and expansion is needed to retain the
    laboratory’s world leading position, and for this a new building is required. It is hoped that
    the £90 million project could be completed around 2008.

•   The Pirbright Laboratory, part of the Institute for Animal Health, which is funded primarily
    by BBSRC and DEFRA, needs a new enclosed complex to meet modern international
    biosecurity standards. Without this it could lose its status as an international reference centre
    for major animal diseases. The new facility would cost around £40 million, and would take
    three years to build.

•   To maximise the value of the new Diamond synchrotron (see above), a research complex is
    proposed, with both new scientific and living facilities for visiting scientists. The total cost of
    the project would be around £40 million. Part of this infrastructure would need to be ready at
    the same time as Diamond in 2007, with the rest phased in over time.

•   The Halley station in Antarctica, operated by the British Antarctic Survey, a NERC Institute,
    provides a vital platform to conduct globally significant research across a range of sciences
    and provides a presence required by the UK Government in British Antarctic Territory. The
    Halley station is located on the Brunt Ice Shelf in Antarctica. Due to the movement of the ice
    shelf and snow accumulation, the station has to be periodically replaced (this will be the sixth
    replacement since 1956). The total costs of the new Halley Station (including its final
    dismantling, obligatory under the Antarctic Treaty) will be around £34M. The work must be
    completed by 2010.
INTRODUCTION

Maintaining access to leading edge experimental facilities is a key element of keeping UK
scientists at the forefront, and indeed competitive, in their fields of research. In many cases the
responsibility for the investment needed to maintain this access should properly fall to the
Universities and Institutes in which the scientists are employed. However, there is a range of
facilities that may, for a number of different reasons, fall outside the funding remit, or capability,
of any individual authority. The types of facility that fall into this class are typically those that
are: large and very expensive; have long useful lifetimes ie10-20 years; have multiple users both
nationally and internationally; are interdisciplinary; offer unique capabilities within the UK, or
more widely; and are potentially jointly funded or suitable subjects for international
collaboration. These features of such large facilities, often found in combination, require the UK
to take a strategic position as to the best way to maintain access for researchers and also to
manage and fund the investment.

Responding to this need, the first version of Large Facilities Strategic Road Map was published
in June 2001. This is the first update of the Road Map. The Road Map is a strategic management
tool of Research Councils UK (RCUK), allowing members of RCUK to get a prospective of the
total picture of the largest science facilities now and in the future in which the UK might be
involved, across all science disciplines. It includes both national and international projects,
within the UK and abroad.

The Road Map does not contain every possible project in which UK scientists might wish to be
involved. Instead it contains those projects which are currently identified by members of RCUK
as being of the highest strategic importance. However, there is no guarantee that the UK will
participate in all of these projects, and the Road Map implies no commitment from the UK
Government, RCUK or the Research Councils to fund any particular project. Neither does
inclusion on the Road Map imply possible contributions from any particular source or type of
funding. Large scale scientific facilities are funded through a number of mechanisms in the UK,
and that will continue to be the case.

This Road Map does not replace the planning decisions of individual Research Councils, and it is
not a formal part of the Spending Review process, although it is a tool which will help members
of RCUK consider and discuss possible capital requests for forthcoming Spending Reviews. The
provision of access to large-scale scientific facilities has always been a challenge, as for any one
area of science, infrequent but very large expenditure is required. The management of such
“lumpy” expenditure, particularly under the Government’s Resource Accounting and Budgeting
arrangements, needs careful planning, and this document helps members of RCUK to do this
collectively.

The road-map includes facility “projects” identified by members of RCUK as a priority for
consideration which meet one or more of the following criteria:

   •   Where there could be an international dimension to the proposed facility and therefore
       opportunity to share costs and develop relationships to benefit the UK science
       programme;
   •   Where the facility supports the requirements of research communities of more than one
       Research Council;
   •   Where the capital investment is greater than the sum of £25 million, when it represents a
       significant element of an individual Research Council's budget line.
Additions to the Road Map are agreed by the RCUK Strategy Group, following a
recommendation from at least one Research Council. UK scientists or others who wish to see
specific projects that meet one of the above criteria included in future versions of the Road Map
should contact the relevant UK Research Council in the first instance. A list of UK Research
Councils and links to their websites can be found in Part 7.

The diversity of projects and funding mechanisms means that projects are managed in different
ways. For example, projects funded through subscriptions to International Organisations (such as
CERN, the European Space Agency and the European Southern Observatory) are managed by
those organisations, whereas other projects are managed by Research Councils directly, by their
Institutes, by universities or by others whom the relevant Research Council might appoint.
Within this complex framework, it is the intention that all large capital investments included in
the road-map will be subject to review at key stages in their lifecycle to confirm the business
justification and sources of funding. The process used is designed to be consistent with the
Office of Government Commerce's guidelines embodied in their Gateway process. The key stage
reviews are:

   •   To confirm the overall strategic assessment
   •   To confirm the business justification
   •   To confirm the procurement method and sources of supply
   •   To confirm the investment decision - before letting any contracts
   •   To confirm “readiness for service”
   •   To confirm “in service benefits”

A summary of the OGC Gateway Process, and how RCUK is using it in the planning of large
facilities, can be found in Part 5.

The Road Map is divided into ten strategic areas, which are discussed in part 3. These areas are:

   •   Synchrotron Radiation
   •   Neutron Scattering
   •   High Powered Lasers
   •   Radioactive Particle Beam Facilities
   •   Particle Accelerators for Particle Physics
   •   Astronomy and Solar System Science Facilities
   •   Fusion Facilities
   •   Ocean Research Vessels
   •   Computing Infrastructure
   •   Major Renewals, Refurbishments and Investments in Research Council Institutes

It is intended that the Road Map will be updated every two years, to reflect the Government’s
Spending Review Cycle. This version is published in June 2003, and the next version is due in
June 2005.
3 STRATEGIC AREAS

3 (i) Synchrotron Radiation

The UK research community currently utilises synchrotron radiation via the Daresbury
Synchrotron Radiation Source (SRS) and the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF).
The CCLRC is responsible for day-to-day operation of the SRS and management of the UK
subscription to the ESRF. In addition, by bringing together the science requirements, the
technical options and opportunities for international partnerships, the CCLRC provides long-
term strategic advice on the large-scale facility portfolio for the UK.

Synchrotron radiation (SR) is very important in many branches of modern science and
technology and substantial programmes are currently funded at the SRS and ESRF by the
EPSRC, BBSRC, MRC, NERC and the Wellcome Trust. Over the last few years, some strategic
and much fundamental research using synchrotron radiation has mapped directly onto the areas
selected by the National Foresight Initiative. For example, the Foresight 2002 initiative
‘Exploiting the Electromagnetic Spectrum’ is directly applicable to the exciting developments in
longer wavelength SR science currently underway in the UK.

The UK has world-class strengths in several key areas including, structural biology, surface
science and materials research fields (e.g., magnetism, nanoscience and photonics), and
environmental science, which require access to advanced synchrotron radiation facilities.

In terms of facilities, UK scientists need access to high-brightness radiation over a wide range of
wavelengths so that matter ranging from biological molecules to quantum dots can be probed.

The leading high-energy sources in the world are the ESRF (Europe), APS (USA) and Spring 8
(Japan). Of these, the UK has guaranteed access to ESRF until January 2008. Although around
14% of the ESRF beamtime is available to the UK, this provides only a small part of the UK’s
medium and higher-energy SR needs.

As a consequence, the UK has approved and is constructing Diamond, a high brightness,
medium-energy source; this project is led jointly by CCLRC and the Wellcome Trust. At 3 GeV
and with 24 cells it will be optimised for the radiation energy and beam performance to
complement the high-energy ESRF.

Starting in early 2007, Diamond will have an initial suite of 7 beamlines, with another 4 planned
for the following year; different beamlines will allow different types of experiment. Over the
next few years, proposals for populating further beamlines over the period 2008-2012 will be
considered, along with possible investment profiles. The Diamond beamlines, each with their
individual experimental capabilities, will be phased-in over a period of around 5 years. Over the
next few years, the world-class UK community will develop its experimental capabilities and
scientific culture so that vibrant and experienced communities can take full advantage of the new
capabilities of Diamond from the outset. A migration plan from the SRS to Diamond is being
developed.

To maximise the scientific benefit of SR activities to the UK, close cooperation between CCLRC
and Diamond Light Source (DLS) is essential. UK science and technology will benefit from
activities that bring neutron, laser and SR users closer together. In such an environment,
interdisciplinary activities and multi-technique approaches can flourish and developments (e.g.,
in detectors and beam diagnostics) initiated by one facility can, where appropriate, be rapidly and
effectively exploited by another. To expedite such cross-disciplinary work, a Research Complex
associated with the Diamond Synchrotron is being considered (see section 3(x))
Diamond will not be an optimal source of high brightness, short pulse, low-energy radiation nor
will it have the capacity required to accommodate the world-class UK low energy research
communities. High brightness, short pulse, low energy radiation will enable the dynamics and
kinetics of molecular interactions as well as the study of dilute or short-lived molecular systems
to be undertaken. These are relevant to broad areas of science including nano-science, bio-
molecular science, surface science, atomic and molecular science to name but a few. As a result,
the UK is developing the 4th Generation Light Source (4GLS) proposal to meet the SR needs of
the low energy community. 4GLS will be a world-leading, multi-user synchrotron radiation
facility, the primary focus of which is the study of dynamic processes in systems ranging in size
from atoms to macromolecules and solids. The emphasis is on the use of ‘pump-probe’ and
other two-colour experiments, in combination with high-resolution spectroscopy and imaging, to
study bond formation and disruption, often in systems with no structural order.

The 4GLS proposal combines energy recovery linac (ERL) and free-electron laser (FEL)
technologies to provide a suite of ultra-high brightness, short pulse sources of spontaneous and
stimulated (FEL) synchrotron radiation. The pulses of spontaneous radiation will, by virtue of
the ERL technology, be more intense and shorter than is possible from a storage ring source.
The peak pulse intensity from the FELs will be many (around 106) times more intense than that
of the third-generation storage ring synchrotron sources.

A three-year, research, development and design programme for the 4GLS project is under way.
Advanced technical issues will be addressed by computer based design work and by construction
of an Energy Recovery Linac demonstrator. If approved, initial operation of the 4GLS facility
could be in 2010, although a subset of sources could be operational by early 2008.

Combined SR/table-top laser experimentation is likely to be a very significant activity on 4GLS
and will undoubtedly be a larger part of Diamond’s portfolio of activities than has been the case
on the SRS.

Over the next 5 years at the SRS there is likely to be increased utilisation of SR and laser sources
- in combination - as part of a programme to develop the detectors, the diagnostics, and the
community’s understanding of how best to exploit the capabilities of third and fourth generation
sources.

In the much longer-term, access to a very short wavelength (sub-Angstrom) X-ray FEL is likely
to be required. Given the extreme technological demands and cost of an X-ray FEL, current
thinking indicates that only one project in Europe (probably TESLA XFEL) and one in the USA
(LCLS, SLAC) are likely to be funded.
3 (ii) Neutron Scattering

The advantages of neutron beams for the study of the structure and dynamics of condensed
matter impact across a broad spectrum of physics, chemistry, biotechnology, materials science,
geoscience and others fields. Neutron scattering is a highly versatile tool that probes matter in a
unique way that is complementary to other techniques such as synchrotron radiation and nuclear
magnetic resonance. A substantial programme of research contributes to EPSRC programmes,
and to a lesser extent those of BBSRC and NERC, and addresses priorities raised through the
National Foresight exercise. These include the characterisation of new magnetic materials,
composites, nano-scale structures, complex molecular sieves and catalytically active porous and
novel electrolyte materials. Process engineering, clean technology, data storage media, sensors
and quantum devices will all benefit from these new scientific developments. Similarly, in soft
condensed matter studies, the rapid screening of novel materials produced by combinatorial
synthesis; the examination of dilute samples and weak solutions; the understanding of
industrially-relevant systems; and the use of more complex environments relevant to processing
routes will lead to new insights into membrane structure, molecular self-assembly,
biocompatibility, biofunctionality, and the mechanisms of drug delivery.

The UK is in the fortunate position of having access to the world's most powerful reactor and
accelerator based neutron sources - the 58MW Institut Laue Langevin (ILL) nuclear reactor
facility in Grenoble and the equivalently powerful 160kW ISIS pulsed neutron source at the
CCLRC’s Rutherford Appleton Laboratory. Reactor sources, such as ILL, are continuous sources
that deliver strong steady fluxes of neutrons for scientific experiments. Spallation sources, such
as ISIS, are pulsed sources that deliver short bright bursts of neutrons for neutron scattering. The
sources have complementary instrumentation.

The UK (together with France and Germany) has historically made major investments at the ILL,
in the reactor and the instrumentation suite, to sustain its international status. This continues with
the ILL "Millennium Programme", a joint programme of capital investment in infrastructure and
instrumentation intended to maintain the world-leading position of the ILL into the next decade.
The three partners in ILL have recently agreed to a ten-year extension (to 2013) to the supporting
international convention. Subject to a satisfactory supply of uranium fuel, the ILL can be
expected to play a major role in European neutron scattering research until the middle of the next
decade and beyond.

It is widely accepted that future advances in neutron sources will be based upon the technologies
developed at ISIS. The development of a second target station for ISIS offers unique
instrumentation and the potential for a new range of structural and dynamical studies of matter,
particularly in the fields of soft condensed matter, biomolecular science and advanced materials.
The 18 beam ports will offer an opportunity for UK and international consortia to develop
advanced instrumentation exploiting the unique characteristics of the source. The new target
station will demonstrate how to optimise and utilise instrumentation for cold neutrons on pulsed
sources. Construction will commence in 2003 and the facility will be operational, with an initial
set of instruments, in 2007.

Such ongoing investment in both ILL and ISIS is a key component of the UK Strategy for
Neutrons1, which has been based on the OECD Megascience Forum recommendations, namely



1
    See www.cclrc.ac.uk/activities/strategy/UKNeutronStrategy2.pdf
   •   In the short to medium term, maximise the utilisation and potential of the current front
       rank facilities – ILL and ISIS
   •   Develop, in a timely manner, a next generation source for Europe.

Elsewhere in the world where present neutron scattering facilities are less well developed,
attention is now focusing on delivering so-called third generation neutron sources which
represent a significant advance in technology. In the USA, the 1.4 MW Spallation Neutron
Source (SNS) is being built at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Initial scientific operations are
scheduled for start in 2007 with the instrument suite being established incrementally over a
number of years. In Japan, a new facility (J-PARC) is planned at Tokai. This will incorporate a 1
MW neutron scattering centre as part of a multi-purpose facility for nuclear physics, research on
nuclear waste transmutation and high energy physics, and will become operational towards the
end of the decade.

In common with other European countries contributing to the European Strategy Forum on
Research Infrastructure (ESFRI), the UK recognised that although the baseline option of
developing ILL and ISIS will support scientific activities in Europe in the medium term, a next
generation neutron source will be required, and continuing work on the scientific and technical
capabilities is necessary to underpin future developments in this and related areas. The UK will
pursue these activities in collaboration with European partners and with the MW facilities under
construction in the USA and Japan.

Options for the realisation of a next generation neutron source for Europe will be informed by
the scientific and technological progress at the MW-class sources being developed in both the
USA and Japan. Scenarios identified in the ESFRI study were a MW upgrade to the ISIS
facility; a green field 5 MW + 5 MW short and long pulse source – the ‘European Spallation
Source’ – or a long-pulse only source with the potential to achieve power levels significantly
greater than 5 MW. These and other scenarios will involve extensive co-operation on neutron
policy at a European level.

The CCLRC, as part of its strategic role, will continue purse all of these options, working with
the community in refining the scientific case for neutrons and in evaluating technical solutions. It
will take a lead in developing accelerator and target technologies which have relevance for
neutron sources, neutrino factories and other uses of high power proton accelerators, in close co-
operation with developments world-wide.
3 (iii) High Powered Lasers

Lasers have become essential research tools which find application across a very broad range of
disciplines in science and technology. One of the reasons for their widespread use is their wide
range of performance characteristics. Their wavelengths span the ultra violet, visible and infra
red spectral region, they can operate continuously or produce powerful pulses with durations
down to femtoseconds and can produce powers from nanowatts to petawatts. The scale size of
lasers also varies enormously, from semiconductor lasers on a chip to high energy systems with
dimensions of hundreds of metres. While the smaller scale lasers can be widely distributed
throughout the research communities, the large-scale, high energy systems need to be centrally
located and long term strategies need to be developed for their effective use and development to
keep abreast of technological advances and scientific opportunities.

The interaction between high energy lasers and matter produces plasmas with extreme conditions
of temperature and density which are not only of immense scientific interest but are also relevant
to the design of nuclear weapons. As a result, the development and construction of the largest
lasers are usually driven by defence programmes related to nuclear stockpile stewardship. For
example, two very large scale systems are currently under construction; the National Ignition
Facility (NIF) (1.8MJ, 192 beams) in the US and MegaJoule (1.8MJ, 240 beams) in France.
These lasers will come into full operation around 2010 and will have a small component of their
programmes available for open access for civilian research. The largest systems currently in
operation and available for academic use are Omega at the Institute of Laser Energetics,
University of Rochester (40kJ) and Gekko XII (25kJ) at the Institute of Laser Engineering,
University of Osaka. The other principal facilities are Vulcan at the CCLRC’s Rutherford
Appleton Laboratory (3kJ) and LULI (2.4kJ) at Ecole Polytechnique, France.

The development of a pulse compression technique over the past 10 years has made possible the
generation of laser pulses of extreme power and intensity. Development of the Vulcan laser has
increased the peak power of pulses to 100TW and in 2003, this was further increased to 1 PW
(500J, 500fs), enabling the highest intensities available world wide to be produced. The only
comparable system is at the Gekko XII laser, although similar systems are now under
construction at GSI in Germany and LULI in France. In addition, a new system, Orion which
will incorporate two petawatt beamlines is planned for construction at AWE, Aldermaston for
defence programmes and a high energy petawatt laser (HEPL) programme is being considered
within the US which would involve both defence and university laboratories. The UK
community is mainly dependent on Vulcan for experimental studies although limited access to
LULI is available through EU-funded programmes and to Omega in the US.

High energy lasers are unique in enabling the physics of matter at high densities and
temperatures to be studied in a laboratory environment. Applications include particle
acceleration, laser induced nuclear physics, radiography and fusion. The strategy for high energy
laser science within the UK is to enable scientist to have access to the best facilities. Given the
strength of user demand, the only realistic option is for this to be provided by Vulcan with an
appropriate investment programme to continue to provide state of the art research facilities. It is
therefore important that a sustained, directed research and development programme in laser
science is maintained in order to provide the platform for future advances. For example, the
upgrading of the Vulcan laser to the petawatt regime has strengthened the position of the UK
programme at the forefront of high intensity laser-plasma interaction physics world-wide. The
provision of additional high energy (kJ) beam lines would enable a much wider range of plasma
parameters to be studied.
Increasing the intensity of laser pulses beyond those currently available will enable new areas of
physics to be addressed. This will require the generation and amplification of much shorter
pulses which, for high energy lasers, will require the use of new technologies. A possible
approach is the use of optical parametric chirped pulse amplification which adapts the current
high energy laser technology. For lower energy systems the use of alternative laser materials
(e.g. titanium sapphire) is a possible way forward. The development of these and other emerging
technologies should be continued.

Laser driven fusion (referred to as inertial fusion energy, IFE) offers an alternative approach to
the more conventional technology of magnetic fusion energy. Traditional approaches to laser
driven fusion have predicted that extremely large-scale systems were required to produce
ignition and generate significant yields. This philosophy is reflected in the designs of NIF and
MegaJoule. However, recent work by an Anglo-Japanese team working at the CCLRC’s
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory and Osaka have demonstrated that, using a variant of the
technique of fast ignition using combinations of high energy and petawatt pulses, it is likely that
much smaller, less expensive lasers might be employed. This would substantially change the
landscape for laser driven fusion, removing the dependence on defence oriented programmes and
encourage the participation of countries which are averse to weapons programmes. Japan has
initiated a new laser development programme (FIREX) to meet these objectives and is seeking a
partnership with the UK. Technical collaboration in the short term is desirable in order for the
UK to benefit from the scientific advances already made. However a longer term strategy
involving European partners is required to develop a scientific programme which would validate
the current projections and provide the framework for a European facility directed toward laser
driven fusion.
3 (iv) Radioactive Particle Beams Facilities

In nuclear physics, radioactive beams allow the study of entirely new nuclear topologies
comprising for example regions of nearly pure neutron matter and exotic nuclear shapes, to
probe the limits of nuclear existence, to approach the heaviest nuclei that can exist, to understand
the structure of loosely bound quantal systems, and to study new types and phases of nuclear
structure. In nuclear astrophysics, experiments with exotic beams will enable insight in to the
nuclear driving mechanisms of some of the most interesting phenomena in the universe, such as
supernova explosions, novae, X ray bursters, neutron stars and maybe even the recently
identified gamma ray bursters. Radioactive beam facilities also have some potential to provide
opportunities in other fields such as atomic physics, materials science, solid state physics and
medical diagnostics. While much of the research that can be undertaken is of fundamental
interest, currently it is not considered to be an area of high priority for the Research Councils.

At present there are several first generation radioactive beam facilities in operation or under
construction within Europe. Principally these include the Rex Isolde facility at CERN the
SPIRAL facility at GANIL in France, the Munich Accelerator for Fission fragments (MAFF) on
the FRM II reactor in Germany and the heavy ion fragmentation facility at GSI in Germany.
Facilities also exist in Canada and Australia

Currently UK nuclear physicists are participants on many of the facilities around the world -
gaining access on scientific merit. The UK community has also contributed to projects to
develop detectors which enable the science studies to take place. These in kind contributions
along with international collaboration has enabled programmes of research to be carried out with
out there being a UK based facility.

A previous option of building a new facility in the UK has not been supported. The current
strategy is to consider options for maximising the benefit to UK science from the existing
investment in detector development projects and collaborative programmes with other
international researchers such that the UK community can gain access to facilities based
elsewhere. Options for consideration include longer term commitment to development projects
recommended for support to enable collaborations to be established on a firmer footing (this
support could be in principle with regular review points to identify the resources to be allocated)
and consideration of options for trading facility access at existing UK based facilities for other
facilities in Europe. EPSRC along with CCLRC will establish a small working group in the
spring of 2003 to look at the options with members of the research community.
3 (v) Particle Accelerators for Particle Physics

Experimental particle physics has advanced over the past 40 years by raising the energy
threshold (equivalent to probing finer structure, or equivalently, going further back in time
towards the 'Big Bang'), and then following up the first discoveries with a precision probe. Each
of these steps has required new accelerators and new technology.

The main particle physics project over the next 5-15 years is the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at
CERN, which is a major part of the PPARC particle physics portfolio over this period. The LHC
is a proton-proton collider at a total centre of mass energy of 14 TeV. Because the effective
collision energy of the constituents (quarks and gluons) is only around 1 TeV, the LHC will
directly explore the particle spectrum up to this energy. It will raise the energy threshold to that
at which new phenomena, predicted by measurements at lower energy, should be revealed.

There are already discussions about the facilities needed beyond the LHC. Three particle
accelerator facilities likely to be needed over the next 15-20 years have been identified. Firstly, a
high-energy linear electron-positron collider with energy between 0.5 and 1.0 TeV is required as
the precision probe to follow up the discoveries at the LHC. Secondly, an intense neutrino source
is needed to study the properties of the neutrinos. Thirdly, a higher energy collider with a centre
of mass energy well above the TeV scale is likely to be needed to test the new theories developed
from the LHC and linear collider, and illuminate the physics at even higher energy scales. This
might be a higher energy linear electron-positron collider, or it could be a muon collider which
might also be needed at lower energy to make complementary studies, in particular of the Higgs
sector. There has also been discussion of a very large hadron collider at around ten times the
energy of the LHC, but it is unlikely that the scientific case could be made convincingly until
after the LHC has been operating for several years.

There have been preliminary discussions in the major laboratories, within the scientific
communities in Europe, the US and Asia, and in ICFA (International Committee for Future
Accelerators) about these facilities, and the future evolution of particle physics is the subject of a
OECD Global Science Forum working group that is chaired by the UK. Discussions are
beginning between interested potential funding agencies world-wide on the options for a linear
collider. These facilities are likely to be global projects that will be built by a consortium of
nations or organisations. The UK particle physics community will need access to these facilities
to remain at the forefront of particle physics research, and the UK will have to contribute to their
provision, either directly or through international organisations to which the UK belongs. If the
UK is also to benefit from the technology developed for these advanced facilities, it is important
that the UK be fully involved in the design and construction of the machine as well as of the
detectors, even if these facilities are not built in the UK. For example the UK is well placed to
make a significant input to the beam delivery system of a 1 TeV electron-positron linear collider.

There is general agreement that the next major facility after the LHC is such a linear electron-
positron collider, operating from the top quark threshold at around 350GeV to around 1 TeV.
There are three proposed technologies from Germany, US and Japan and it is likely that a
technology choice will be made by the physics community within the next 18 months. The
machine will be 30-40 km in total length, and there are potential sites in the US, Germany and
Japan close to existing accelerator laboratories. It is unlikely that construction of such a machine
could be started before 2008. A recent estimate produced by SLAC of the total cost of the X-
band machine was around $8 billion.

A new technology is needed to reach energies much beyond about 1.5 TeV, and a novel two-
beam accelerator design with a much higher accelerating gradient is being developed at CERN,
which might be installed as an upgrade to any of the present designs after several years of
operation. There is already significant collaboration between the major accelerator laboratories in
Europe, the US and Japan, and national laboratories in France and Italy, on the development of
the technology.

While it could be argued that the technology needed to design and build the next linear electron-
positron collider is mature (at least for energies up to 1 TeV), the technology for a muon collider
has still to be developed. The technological challenges are formidable (the idea was first
explored in the 1960's, but it is only in the past five or six years that it has been studied
seriously). Recently a three-stage scenario has emerged. The first stage is the design and
construction of a muon storage ring to create a 'neutrino factory', with the intense neutrino beams
from muon decay directed hundreds or thousands of kilometres through the earth to the
detectors. This would also demonstrate the production, creation, capture, cooling and
acceleration of muons in sufficient numbers to make the muon collider feasible. The second
stage would be a 'Higgs factory' - a muon collider operating from the Higgs mass (assumed to be
between 100 and 200 GeV) to somewhat above the top quark mass (175 GeV). The third stage
would be a multi-TeV muon collider.

The scientific case for the neutrino factory is very strong. The main evidence for neutrino
oscillations comes from observations on atmospheric and solar neutrinos. Controlled
experiments use neutrinos from a variety of sources. Low energy electron neutrinos come from
nuclear reactors. Intermediate energy electron and muon neutrinos can be obtained from the
decay of slow muons, for example, the KARMEN experiment at ISIS. Beams from high energy
accelerators are mostly muon neutrinos from pion decay, with a small electron neutrino
contamination. The neutrino beam from a muon storage ring contains approximately equal
numbers of muon neutrinos and electron antineutrinos (or muon antineutrinos and electron
neutrinos) with a similar energy. This allows in principle a complete measurement of the two
mass differences and the 4 parameters describing the neutrino mixing matrix - only the absolute
mass remains to be determined in an independent experiment. The preferred location for the
neutrino factory and the detectors depend upon the mixing parameters.

The CCLRC’s Rutherford Appleton Laboratory is a possible location for the neutrino factory
building on ISIS experience. This would give potential baselines of 330 km (Boulby), 1520 km
(Gran Sasso), 5890 km (Soudan) or 8600 km (Kamiokande). Alternative sites include CERN,
Brookhaven, Fermilab and KEK/JAERI. It will take several years to develop the technology and
an important first step will be the establishment of a muon ionization cooling experiment
(MICE). A proposal to site this experiment at RAL is currently under consideration. The results
of the next generation of neutrino experiments is needed to complete the machine specification,
so that construction could not begin before 2008, and would take at least seven years to
complete. There has been no detailed cost estimate of a neutrino factory, but it is likely to be at
least £2B.

High power proton accelerators can be used as drivers for neutron spallation sources, tritium
production, hybrid power reactors and nuclear waste incineration, the production of intense
muon and neutrino beams, radioactive beam and for materials irradiation. Technical discussions
on high power accelerators are taking place in European and International forums.
3 (vi) Astronomy and Solar System Science Facilities

Cosmology and Astrophysiscs

The key challenge for Astronomy over the next decade(s) is to push back the boundary of our
knowledge to the hitherto unexplored epochs, i.e. the initial stages of star and galaxy formation;
the dawn of the universe and the birth of light. To do this we need to plan the generation of
facilities to cover the wavelengths at which fundamental processes occur and can be studied.
Another key target is the development of the ability to explore through the evolving technique of
gravitational radiation.

Three classes of astronomical facilities are essential for the future; they are:
   • space ‘telescopes’ operating at wavelengths inaccessible from the ground, for example X-
       ray
   • large interferometers on the ground (radio) and in space (gravitational radiation)
   • extremely large (50m+) optical/IR telescopes equipped with adaptive optics

The UK now has access to the equivalent of 1.3 x 8 metre optical/IR telescopes (Gemini and
VLT), large radio arrays (VLBI) and high energy facilities (Newton XMM). These will soon be
complemented by ALMA and the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) the successor to
Hubble. LISA, the space based gravitational radiation ‘observatory’ is scheduled for launch in
2011/12. Together, these facilities will allow scientists to address the key issues of the next 10-
15 years in the areas of cosmology, the formation and development of galaxies, star formation
and extreme environment astrophysics. However, development work for the next generation
optical/IR telescopes and radio telescopes is already under way and these facilities, which will be
operational 10+ years into the future, will allow the next big leap in understanding, and could
well revolutionise our perception of the universe as much as Galileo's telescope did. The next
generation of facilities will be billion dollar enterprises requiring global partnerships and Europe
in general and the UK in particular are potentially well-placed to make a major impact, but this
requires investment in R&D in the short to medium term.

Extremely Large Telescope (ELT): There are studies already underway in Europe on the likely
format for a 50-100 metre telescope with a segmented mirror. In addition to the work on the core
facility the UK will be placed to contribute to the next generation of instruments, inter alia based
on the detector technology being developed for SCUBA-2. As with all future facilities, ‘new
generation’ data handling and analysis systems will be required. Key science targets for ELT will
be, understanding the formation of the first generation galaxies and stars, tracing the evolution of
dust, probing the evolution of the astrophysical constants, high resolution studies of the Solar
System and direct imaging of earth-like planets


Square Kilometre Array (SKA): The SKA will be a phased array interferometer operating at
radio wavelengths and the advanced technology required is now being researched. This will be
the ‘post-ALMA’ facility. It will be a global project but the European input will not be via ESO,
rather individual nations will contribute, as far as possible through in-kind contributions.
Key science targets for the SKA will be searching for the Epoch of first light, detecting the
transitional epoch from a dark universe to one with light, searching for the first stars at redshifts
less than 10 and understanding the first energy sources.
X-Ray Evolving Universe Spectroscopy (XEUS): This is the ESA-led mission which would the
successor to Newton XMM, with a launch date 2015+. Only at these wavelengths can we
observe the hottest and most violent events in the early universe. Key science targets for XEUS
will be understanding the early evolution of black holes in the primeval Universe, investigating
the first galaxy groups and their evolution into the massive clusters observed today and
determining the evolution of heavy element abundances;


Solar System Science

The key challenges for Solar System Science over the next decade(s) are the influence of the
space environment of life on Earth and beyond and the origin and evolution of the Solar System.
Largely the facilities required to address these issues are space based with the total cost of
missions running into hundreds of millions of pounds. The significant element of this is the
provision of the launch and the platform, which is paid for by ESA and covered through our
subscription. Partner nations in ESA provide the experimental payloads through which they gain
influence in the design and specification of the missions and a guaranteed share in the data.
Typically a Principal Investigator role in an instrument costs £10M. The PPARC Road Map2
identifies those missions in the current ESA programme in which the already UK intends playing
a significant role, for example, Solar Orbiter and Bepi-Colombo.

The key future planetary science programme requiring new investment will be the ESA Aurora
programme. Aurora is a planetary programme, currently in definition phase, leading to a decision
in 2004 on the shape of the programme for the period 2005-2015. This period would be one of
robotic missions in which the UK will be well placed, both scientifically and technologically, to
make a significant impact. The UK will also need improved national facilities for the handling
and analysis of sample returns.

Key missions for the space environment studies will be an extension to the MOSAIC
programme, coupled to the development of cheap, integrated satellite and payload systems,
positioning the UK to play a leading roles in future ESA science and Earth observation
programmes.




2
    http://www.pparc.ac.uk/Rs/Pp/Sp/Roadmap.asp
3 (vii) Fusion Facilities

A controlled fusion reactor holds out the prospect of clean, safe and competitive electricity
production. Although the physics is well understood, a practical reactor might still be decades
from realisation, because of the significant engineering and materials research challenges still to
be addressed. The UK has a proud tradition in fusion research, both through its domestic fusion
programme at the UKAEA Culham Science Centre, and through its hosting of the highly
successful JET (Joint European Torus) project at Culham. A key element of the Culham
programme is the successful spherical tokamak facility MAST (Mega Amp Spherical Tokamak),
which uses a novel highly effective and geometrically efficient solution to magnetic
confinement. From April 2002 responsibility for fusion was passed from Nuclear Industries
Directorate of DTI to the OST, with EPSRC taking responsibility for the domestic fusion
programme from April 2003.

International plans are well advanced for a follow-on mission to JET, the so-called International
Tokamak Experimental Reactor (ITER) – with site options including France, Spain, Japan and
Canada (the UK decided not to bid to host ITER, despite the excellence of JET and the Culham
Science Centre). ITER is now seen as a key part of a “fast track” approach to fusion power, as
advocated by the UK government. The other key ingredient is the IFMIF facility for testing
materials at neutron fluences typical of fusion power stations. It is clear that research at the
Culham Science Centre should contribute as much as possible to the "fast track" approach.
Specifically, it should (a) do everything possible to help keep ITER on track and maximise its
effectiveness, including the production of some specialist subsystems and (b) improve
understanding, development and testing of materials for fusion power plants. This is likely to
require increased contributions on the technology and materials science required for ITER and a
fusion power station. Opportunities could be taken to increase the involvement of UK
universities and industry; the latter, for example, might play a bigger role than hitherto in the
design as well as the manufacture of future fusion equipment and subsystems required for the
programme at Culham and ITER.

There are several options that can be considered in the context of the road map:

MAST

Several developments at MAST could contribute to the fast track development of fusion and
these include:

   •   experiments on ITER physics. These help perfect tokamak understanding before ITER
       operates, to ensure that it reaches optimum performance as soon as possible;

   •   determining whether the spherical tokamak concept could provide the basis for a
       Component Test Facility (CTF) which may be required to strengthen the fast track
       approach to fusion by allowing tests of components in neutron fluences typical of a
       fusion power station;

   •   determining the spherical tokamak's suitability as a future power plant system, so that
       when fusion reaches the commercialisation stage it is clear whether or not this system is
       an option.

   •   training new fusion scientists for work on future devices especially ITER.
An investment of £4M pa over five years would be needed to bring MAST to the state where
experiments are possible with the sustained, hot plasmas necessary to optimise its contributions
on these four fronts.

Use of JET Facilities

If funding were no constraint, JET could continue operating through much of the ITER
construction period refining operating modes for ITER, testing these occasionally with tritium
fuel, and testing technologies to be deployed on ITER such as heating and measurement systems.
This would help ensure that ITER "hits the ground running" and makes the quickest progress on
the fast track. It would ensure that the Culham Science Centre remained the world's leading
operational fusion site for several years, and that the UK would have a wide skills-base to
transfer to ITER when this machine starts operations. However the future EURATOM fusion
budget may be insufficient to both keep JET operational and pay Europe’s share of ITER
construction.

IFMIF

The International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility (IFMIF) is the planned, accelerator-based
materials testing facility. A conceptual design has almost been completed (by Europe, the US,
Russia and Japan, under IEA auspices) and it is intended, resources permitting, to commence in
2004 the detailed design and the remaining validating R&D. However, on present plans and with
current resource constraints, first operation is presently not envisaged until 2017. The initial
construction cost would be in the region of 500MEuro.

There has so far been no direct UK involvement in the IFMIF project. Culham is now
commencing fringe activities (for example, on material activation by the IFMIF neutron
spectrum which extends well above the fusion neutron energy, 14 MeV). Some experimental
work will be needed in the detailed design phase, concerning for example the flowing lithium
target for the deuteron beam, and Culham would have the skills to participate in this. And UK
expertise outside Culham could also have much to offer in the accelerator technology needed for
IFMIF. A more ambitious contribution would be to offer to host the design team, providing
design office services established for JET.

IFMIF construction would not start for several years, but if there is increased commitment
internationally to the "fast track" approach, serious discussions about its schedule may start once
ITER is fully launched. The UK could consider offering a site for this, which would be clear
confirmation of its commitment to establishing fusion power on an early timescale, but might
exclude it from other major fusion developments. The IFMIF siting issue may well be affected
by where ITER is sited (if France or Spain is selected for ITER, it is unlikely that IFMIF would
also come to Europe).

Although all the above options are worthy of further consideration, the most near-term in terms
of positioning on the facilities road map is a proposed £20M investment in MAST for ITER-
related physics experiments and component development and tests.
3 (viii) Ocean Research Vessels

The UK has world-class strengths in oceanography, marine geology and geophysics. These
strengths arise both from the abilities of the UK research community and their access to modern
high quality research ships and marine equipment. Such access is essential for the UK to
maintain its scientific competitiveness in marine environmental science and technology.
At the present time UK marine researchers have access to two dedicated NERC research ships,
the RRS Charles Darwin and the RRS Discovery, and to an international pool of ships and
equipment via NERC’s barter arrangements with France, Germany, the Netherlands and the
United States. These arrangements allow for no-cost exchanges of ship-time and major marine
equipment, and promote a more efficient and cost-effective use of each country's resources by
giving the scientific communities access to a wider range of marine facilities and geographical
areas in a given year than would otherwise be possible. At present the arrangements give UK
marine researchers access to thirty-nine research ships and other marine facilities such as
manned submersibles, remotely operated vehicles, towed arrays, and shipboard surveying
systems. Continuation of these arrangements is contingent on members having state-of-the-art
facilities to exchange which would benefit partner countries. In this regard, ongoing
modernisation and enhancement of NERC's existing research ships is a prerequisite to
maintaining its access to its barter partners’ facilities.

Seagoing science is an essential element of NERC's existing science strategy and is fundamental
to NERC's developing strategy of Earth-system science. To implement this strategy, and to
maintain the UK's strong international reputation for producing high quality research in this area,
NERC Council considers that it has a minimum scientific requirement for two dedicated state-of-
the-art research ships. This requirement is illustrated by the full cruise programmes in 2001,
2002, 2003 and 2004 for the RRS Charles Darwin and the RRS Discovery.

The RRS Discovery will reach the end of its economic life by 2010 – by which time it will have
been in service for 48-years. Funding is therefore required for a new operational ship, to be
delivered in 2010, that will support leading edge, multidisciplinary marine research from the
coast out to the open ocean. Failure to invest in a replacement facility would mean that NERC
could meet only a fraction of the ship-time demand of the UK research community, and that
NERC would have to withdraw from the barter arrangements as it would not have any spare
capacity available for barter. This would ultimately mean that the UK would drop out of the first
division of seagoing science nations.

NERC is currently developing an outline specification for its new operational ship (to replace the
RRS Charles Darwin), which will be delivered in 2006, and contracts are likely to be placed in
2003. It is anticipated that the proposed RRS Discovery replacement will have a similar
specification. Alternative sources of finance (including PFI) and joint ownership possibilities
(with NERC’s barter partners) will continue to be considered for both ships, but the overall cost
is likely to be of the same order. The estimated replacement cost, including specialist scientific
equipment, for the RRS Discovery is £60m.
3 (ix) Computing Infrastructure

The nature of research in science and engineering has changed over the past two decades – from
an activity based almost entirely on theory and experiment, to one based on theory, experiment
and computation in comparable measure. The emergence of computation as a distinct branch of
research, of importance matching those of theory and experiment, has resulted from the quite
remarkable growth in the power of high performance computing. Whilst epochs in experiment
are normally defined by an order of magnitude improvement in capability (for example in
measurement sensitivity or resolution), in high performance computing epochs are defined in
terms of improvements in capability of three orders of magnitude (for example, the transition
from gigaflop/s to teraflop/s computing power, or from petabyte to exabyte storage).

The UK no longer has an industrial capability in high performance computers, and is therefore
dependent on the purchase of top-end machines from vendors in the US or Japan. However UK
researchers have maintained a position amongst the world-leaders in computational science and
engineering. The UK’s computing infrastructure must help retain this position of research pre-
eminence. The UK strength in computation feeds into many applications relating to wealth
creation and quality of life – such as molecular modelling for the pharmaceuticals industry, and
climate monitoring and prediction.

For the UK to retain its position amongst the world-leaders in computational science and
engineering, there must be significant investment in the development of skills, and researchers
must be provided with access to high performance computers that are amongst the best in the
world - with regular upgrades to keep pace with the accelerating rate of technological advance.

High Performance computing is essential to address some of the biggest research challenges
right across the scientific fields, from environmental science to engineering, and from biology to
particle physics. One dominant theme is progressing from the simulation of components to the
simulation of whole systems.

Current Provision of HEC within the UK

There are two national high performance computing services, which EPSRC has procured on the
behalf of all the Research Councils in its role as Managing Agent. The latest is HPCx, which is
provided under a managed services contract with a consortium of the University of Edinburgh,
Daresbury Laboratory of CCLRC, where the system is located, and IBM. The initial system,
which is based on IBM POWER 4 technology with 1280 processors, has a sustained capability of
3.4 Tflop/s3, which will be upgraded to 6 Tflop/s by July 2004 and to 12 Tflop/s by November
2006. The main emphasis of the service will be on capability work, and so computational science
and engineering support is a significant component of the service, with a complement of 12 Full
Time Equivalents for the first two years.

The Computer Services for Academic Research (CSAR) service started in November 1998 and is
currently planned to finish in June 2006. It is provided under a PFI contract by the Computation
for Science consortium, comprising of the Computer Sciences Corporation, the University of
Manchester, where the system is located, and SGI. There are currently two main systems: a Cray
T3E1200 with 816 processors and sustained performance of 671 Gflop/s; and a SGI Origin 3000
400 MHz with 512 processors and sustained performance of 316 Gflop/s. An SGI Altix system


3
    Unless otherwise stated, all sustained figures are against the Linpack benchmark.
with 256 Itanium 2 Madison processors is scheduled for September 2003, with a sustained
performance of 1 Tflop/s.

Future Facility Requirements

In order to address the research challenges outlined above it is likely that the science and
engineering base will require high performance machines with different architectures. The
Research Councils, and within the wider strategy for high end computing (`A Strategic
Framework for High End Computing’, issued by the cross-Council High End Computing
Strategy Committee4), have initiated a formal capture of requirements, which will take place
during November 2003 to March 2004. A likely outcome will be the need for more than one
hardware system, large capacity data management, visualisation facilities, computational science
and engineering support, and training. The initial service capability for one of these systems
would be for a peak performance of 50 to 100 Tflop/s by the end of 2005 (at least a factor of 8
greater than the initial phase of the HPCx service), doubling to 100 to 200 Tflop/s after 2 years,
and doubling again to 200 to 400 Tflop/s 2 years after that.

In developing their procurement strategy, the Research Councils will be seeking partnerships
with other Government Agencies to share future facilities. In particular, discussions are
underway between DEFRA and the Hadley Centre of the Met Office with respect to the
requirements of the Global Environmental Change Committee.




4
    See under “HPC Publications” at http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/hpc
3 (x) Major Renewals, Refurbishments and Investments in Research Council Institutes

The seven Research Councils operate between them a number of institutes, centres and surveys
with a suite of laboratories and equipment in the UK and abroad. Some of the facilities within
these institutes fall under other categories of Large Facilities, as described elsewhere within this
plan. There are occasionally major refurbishments and new building projects associated with
Research Council Institutes which are not covered in the other categories but which are
nonetheless of a sufficient size to classify them as Large Facilities. Four such projects have been
identified in the next few years.

The first potential project is the Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB) in Cambridge, an
institute of the MRC. The LMB is widely recognised as one of the leading laboratories in the
world, with 12 Nobel prizes awarded to staff past and present and with eighteen of its current
group leaders elected as Fellows of the Royal Society. It has led to several successful spin-out
companies such as Celltech and Cambridge Antibody Technology. LMB is at the forefront of
understanding biological processes at the molecular level, and has amongst its plans for the
future:

   •   Development of the relatively young Neurobiology Division, building on its progress on
       receptors, vesicle fusion and the molecular basis of Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s
       diseases;
   •   Expansion of work in mammalian systems, taking advantage of the opportunities for
       studying cellular systems and models of human disease in transgenic animals, following
       the completion of sequencing of the human and mouse genomes.

The present LMB building was designed to meet the needs of molecular biology of the 1960s. It
is over-crowded and inadequately ventilated. Its congested site, low ceilings, small rooms, and
network of central load bearing concrete pillars severely limit the scope for modernisation and
expansion. In addition, the increasing number of machines generate heat in a building not
designed for air-conditioning, leading to an inefficient and uncomfortable environment for
research.

A new building for LMB is needed, and negotiations are currently underway with the relevant
bodies. It is hoped that the new building would be completed around 2008. The total cost,
including land acquisition, might be in the region of £90M. The construction of a new building
for LMB would also create opportunities for other developments which MRC are considering on
the same site and which are currently the subject of consultation.

The second potential project is the redevelopment of the Pirbright Laboratory, part of the
Institute for Animal Health (IAH), funded primarily by BBSRC and DEFRA. It plays a unique
national and international role in research on, and surveillance of, highly infectious, mainly viral,
exotic diseases of farm animals. It has a world-wide reputation for foot-and-mouth disease, for
which it is the world reference centre, and is a major disease reference centre for the OIE, the
animal equivalent of the WHO. The whole range of research from basic to applied is carried out
at the laboratory, including vaccine development, and the laboratory operates to high
containment levels with total barrier control. IAH and its neighbouring DEFRA laboratories of
the Veterinary Laboratory Agency carry out the vast majority of UK civil research into highly
infectious viral diseases of animals.

The future of the laboratory as an international reference centre is threatened due to the fact that
it no longer meets modern international biosecurity standards. The buildings are old, inadequate
and not interconnected. The biosecurity area is open to the environment. In order to meet new
international standards the main laboratory must be completely enclosed. The current buildings
are unsuitable for refurbishment, and the only viable option is for a new enclosed complex.

Any new building should also enable a higher category of disease containment, allowing the
manipulation of emerging animal exotic viruses with zoonotic potential. The new facilities
would form a key component in the UK strategy for managing infectious animal diseases
following a future outbreak of foot-and-mouth or other viruses. The cost of the new facility
might be in the region of £40M, and construction might begin around 2005, taking three years.

The third potential project is a Research Complex to sit alongside the new Diamond
Synchrotron. The current Diamond project (see Section 3(i) on Synchrotron Radiation) will
provide the synchrotron itself, minimal laboratory space plus an administration building. To
fulfil its potential as a UK flagship resource, Diamond needs to be complemented by essential
scientific facilities and infrastructure support. Three different types of infrastructure are required:

   •   Scientific infrastructure: There will different types of users of Diamond – visiting
       researchers, permanent research groups and beamline scientists. These scientists will
       require laboratory space and equipment. A major lecture theatre is also planned for
       international conferences, with smaller meeting and training rooms.

   •   People infrastructure: With around 720 additional scientists on the site at the CCLRC
       Rutherford Appleton Laboratory at any one time, and with Diamond running 24 hours per
       day, there is a major increase in the need for people to live, work and eat. Simple hostel
       type accommodation and a central cafeteria are planned.

   •   Additional site works will be required, including moving the site entrance and building
       new car parks.

Much of this infrastructure should be ready in 2006-07 when the Diamond synchrotron begins
operations. Other parts could be phased in over the following few years. The total costs of the
research complex are estimated at £40M.

The fourth potential project is the replacement of the Halley station in Antarctica. Owned by
NERC and operated by the British Antarctic Survey, one of its institutes, the Halley station
provides a vital platform to conduct globally significant research in space science, atmospheric
science, glaciology, snow chemistry, meteorology, geomagnetism, geosciences and human
biology. Studies at Halley have been fundamental in alerting the world to human impacts on the
Earth system, and it is expected that the value of the location will continue to be maintained into
the foreseeable future as the UK community focuses on the general area of Earth System science.
There is also a very strong international dimension to the research programmes and many of the
studies have continued uninterrupted since the first base was established, providing vital long
term data series. Halley also provides a presence in British Antarctic Territory required by the
UK Government.

The Halley station is located on the Brunt Ice Shelf in Antarctica. Due to the movement of the
ice shelf and snow accumulation, the station has to be periodically dismantled and a replacement
built elsewhere, to avoid the station drifting with the ice into the sea. The new station will be the
sixth one built since the first was established in 1956. Under the Antarctic Treaty, NERC has an
obligation to fully remove items from the Antarctic after their useful life. The total costs of the
new Halley Station, including provision for its final dismantling, will be around £34M. The work
must be completed by 2010, which is when current studies indicate the current Halley station
will become unsafe due to movement of the ice shelf.
4. SUMMARY OF ACTUAL AND POTENTIAL PROJECTS IN THE ROAD MAP

Synchrotron radiation

DIAMOND Synchrotron Core facility and initial beamlines
Additional DIAMOND beamlines
4th Generation Light Source (initially a Test Bed and Design Study)
Free Electron Lasers

Neutron Scattering

Institut Laue Langevin renewal and Millennium Programme upgrade
ISIS Second Target Station – core facility and new beamlines
Next generation neutron source for Europe – possibilities include:
    • New 5MW + 5MW short and long pulse source (the “European Spallation Source”)
    • New long pulse only source, >5MW
    • MW upgrade to ISIS

High Powered Lasers

Upgrades to Vulcan

Radioactive Particle Beams

Identify options for UK scientists in facilities overseas

Particle physics

Large Hadron Collider at CERN
Electron-positron linear collider
Muon collider
Neutrino factory (initially MICE)

Astronomy and Solar System Science

Atacama Large Millimetre/submillimetre Array (ALMA)
James Webb Space Telescope
Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA)
R&D for 50-metre plus optical/infra-red telescopes, Square Kilometre Array (SKA) and X-ray
Evolving Universe Spectroscopy (XEUS)
Euopean Space Agency (ESA) Aurora Programme
Extension to ESA MOSAIC programme

Fusion

International Tokomak Experimental Reactor (ITER)
Mega Amp Spherical Tokomak (MAST) upgrades
International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility (IFMIF)

Oceanographic research vessels

Replacement for RRS Charles Darwin
Replacement for RRS Discovery

Computing Infrastructure

HPCx upgrades
1 Tflop/s system addition to CSAR
Future multi-Tflop/s high performance computing provision

Renewals, refurbishments and investments in Research Council Institutes

New building for the Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB)
Refurbishment of the Pirbright Laboratory at the Institute for Animal Health (IAH)
Research Complex to sit alongside Diamond synchrotron
Replacement of the Halley Research Station in Antartica
5. OGC GATEWAY PROCESS AND HOW IT IS USED IN LARGE SCIENCE
FACILITIES

The OST and members of RCUK use the Office of Government Commerce’s Gateway process
to help procure large scale scientific facilities. All new procurement projects in civil Central
Government – including NDPBs - are subject to the Gateway process, which examines a project
at critical stages in its lifecycle to provide assurance than it can progress successfully to the next
stage. The process has a series of Gateway Reviews, as follows:

   0.   To confirm the overall strategic assessment
   1.   To confirm the business justification
   2.   To confirm the procurement method and sources of supply
   3.   To confirm the investment decision - before letting any contracts
   4.   To confirm “readiness for service”
   5.   To confirm “in service benefits”

Each project has a Senior Responsible Owner (SRO), a Project Manager (PM), and possible a
Project Owner (PO). One of these assesses the overall level of risk of the project (high, medium
or low) using a standard Project Profile Model. For the highest risk projects the Gateway reviews
are led by a leader appointed by the OGC, and all members of the team are independent of the
procuring Department. For medium risk projects, OGC appoint an independent team leader and
the remainder of the team are independent departmental staff. For low risk projects, departments
can appoint their own team leader and team members, who are independent of the project. The
reviews give each a project a red, amber or green status, depending upon the readiness of the
project at that point. Gateway 0 reviews are not required by the OGC for medium and low risk
projects. However, as a general rule, large scale scientific projects seeking funding from the
Large Facilities Capital Fund will carry out an internal version of Gateway 0 when it is not
required by OGC.

Details of the Gateway process can be found on the OGC website at: www.ogc.gov.uk

Although the overall Gateway process is a requirement of procurement, the emphasis within
Gateway is flexibility, with Departments adopting the framework in a way which meets their
own needs, according to the nature and complexity of the projects. The Office of Science and
Technology, as part of the DTI, and the Research Councils as NDPBs, are adopting the Gateway
process as set out in the following paragraphs.

Each project will have a lead Research Council. The Chief Executive, as Accounting Officer,
will either take on the role of SRO for that project himself/herself, or will delegate it to one of
his/her senior staff. The SRO will appoint a PM – who might be a staff member of the Research
Council or one of its institutes, or located in a university or elsewhere. Gate 0 of the Gateway
Process for large scale science projects is a review of a Science Case. The PM must ensure that
an independent assessment of the scientific value of the project has been made. In practice this
will be some form of peer review, which needs to cover the following criteria:

        •   Importance (depth) of science knowledge to be delivered by project
        •   Breadth of science knowledge that will benefit from investment
        •   Match with international positioning of UK science
        •   Strength of opportunity for training (links to number of users)
       •   Contribution to/from UK technology/industry base
       •   Opportunity for spin/off and exploitation
In addition, the science case should cover the timing (for the facility to be in service, and
therefore for key decisions to be made), other possible options, total budgetary estimate and any
costs of feasibility studies required before the business case can be completed. The Science Case
should also indicate whether sources of funding are in place, or whether the project would
require funding from other sources. Other funding sources include other Government
Departments, other countries, UK universities and industry. It also includes the Large Facilities
Capital Fund (LFCF), a capital fund held and managed by the OST to help fund large facilities.
The LFCF is approximately £50M per year over the SR2002 period.

The Gate 0 Review will assess whether the scientific assessment has been completed and
whether a comprehensive case has been established. It will not review the quality of the science
itself.

For the largest projects, and any which may want to draw some funding from the LFCF, the SRO
will present the results of Gate 0 to the RCUK Strategy Group. The Strategy Group acts as the
top level review and advisory board for all projects, for the Large Facilities Road Map and for
the Large Facilities Capital Fund. Assuming that they are satisfied the process has been correctly
completed, with either a Green status from Gateway 0 or the expectation of Green status
following the completion of certain actions, the RCUK Strategy Group will authorise the project
to move on to the next stage, the Business Case. If funding is sought for a project from the
LFCF, the Strategy Group will also provide early advice on the relative priority of the project in
comparison to other possible calls on the Fund.

Gateway Review 1 will confirm the justification and robustness of the business case. In
particular it needs to include:

       •   A more detailed requirement that reflects user requirements – possibly an outline
           specification.
       •   Confirmation of technical feasibility of the project.
       •   Identification of success criteria against which options for delivery of capability from
           the investment can be judged.
       •   Analysis of main options e.g. UK only, collaboration etc & cost effectiveness and risk.
       •   Analysis of “opportunity cost” of undertaking this project versus other competing
           for funds in same time-scale.
       •   Assessment of affordability.
In addition, Gateway Review 1 will confirm that any actions required to achieve Green status at
Gateway 0 have been completed.

The SRO will present the results of Gate 1 to the RCUK Strategy Group. The business case
should confirm that funding for the project is in place. However, for projects which are seeking
some funding from the Large Facilities Capital Fund, the RCUK Strategy Group will only
recommend to OST that such funding is made available once they have seen the results of the
Gateway 1 Review. If the project is recommended for approval by the RCUK Strategy Group,
that approval will need to be confirmed by OST. Approval by DTI Ministers is required in most
cases, and if the project is above the DTI’s delegated powers, or requires funding from beyond
the current three-year Spending Review period 2003-04 to 2005-06, approval is also required
from HM Treasury.

The Gateway Review 2 will assess the procurement strategy. By the time of this review, all
funding should be in place, including any necessary in-principle approvals from Ministers and
HM Treasury. This review is undertaken before sending out Invitations to Tender (ITTs) and
before any major capital expenditure has been undertaken. The procurement strategy will need
to:

       •   Confirm that project is under control (on plan, to budget so far).
       •   Confirm that project as planned will deliver expected benefits, or success criteria.
       •   Review value for money of procurement strategy proposed.
       •   Confirm that costs are within current budget line.
       •   Confirm that issues of whole lifecycle funding have been addressed (eg where do
           future running costs come from and commitment in principle).
       •   Identify risks and confirm that appropriate risk management plans in place.
       •   Ensure that specifications (ITTs if appropriate) reflect project output requirements.
       • Ensure that adequate and realistic project plan and management structure in place for
          the remainder of the project.

In general the Gateway 2 Review, and further Gateway Reviews, would go to the SRO and/or a
Project Board rather than to the RCUK Strategy Group, except for those projects where the
procurement strategy has major implications across the Research Councils (e.g. where the
location of an international facility might have an impact on other possible facilities). From this
point on, the RCUK Strategy Group will want to assess progress on all current projects every
six-months, on a “by exception” basis.

Progress through the remaining Gateway Reviews will be related to the procurement strategy.
For projects being completed under the direct control of one of the Research Councils, the
Gateway process should be followed fairly closely. Where, for example, the project is
multinational and has developed its own project review procedures, the SRO may use these to
assure himself/herself that an equivalent level of project control information is being provided.
Research Councils will in all cases incorporate the Gateway process into their own normal
strategic, financial, and administrative procedures.
6. GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS


4GLS        4th Generation Light Source

ALMA        Atacama Large mm/sub.mm Array
APS         Advanced Photon Source, Argonne USA
AWE         Atomic Weapons Establishment

BBSRC       Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council

CCLRC       Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils
CERN        Conseil Europèen pour la Recherche Nucleaire
CSAR        Computer Services for Academic Research
CTF         Component Test Facility

DEFRA       Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
DESY        Deutsches Elektronensynchrotron, Hamburg Germany
DTI         Department of Trade and Industry

ELT         Extremely Large Telescope
EPSRC       Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
ERL         Energy Recovery Linac
ESA         European Space Agency
ESFRI       European Strategy Forum for Research Infrastructure
ESO         European Southern Observatory
ESRF        European Synchrotron Radiation Facility
EU          European Union
EURATOM     European Atomic Energy Community

FEL         Free Electron Laser
FIREX       Fast Ignition Realization Experiment, Japan
FRM-11      Reactor based neutron source being constructed near Munich, Germany

GANIL       Grand Accelerateur National d'Ions Lourds
            Gesellschaft fur Schwerionforschung (Heavy Ion Research Association
GSI
            Darmstadt, Germany)

HEPL        High Energy Petawatt Laser
HPC         High Performance Computing
HPCx        High Performance Computing facility in UK
IAH          Institute of Animal Health
ICFA         International Committee for Future Accelerators
IFE          Inertial Fusion Energy
IFMIF        International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility
ILL          Institute Laue Langevin
IR           Infra-Red
ISIS         Neutron Spallation Source at CCLRC’s Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
ITER         International Tokomak Experimental Reactor
ITT          Invitation to Tender

JAERI        Japanese Atomic Energy Research Institute
JET          Joint European Torus
J-PARC       Japan Proton Accelerator Research Complex
JWST         James Webb Space Telescope

KARMEN       Muon decay experiment on ISIS
KEK          Koh -Ene - Ken : National Laboratory for High Energy Physics, Japan

LCLS         Linac Coherent Light Source at SLAC, USA
LFCF         Large Facilities Capital Fund
LHC          Large Hadron Collider
LISA         Laser Interferometer Space Antenna
LMB          Laboratory of Molecular Biology
LULI         Laboratoire pour l'Utilisation des Lasers Intenses, Paris

MAFF         Munich Accelerator for Fission Fragments
MAST         Mega Amp Spherical Tokamak
MICE         Muon Ionisation Cooling Experiment
MOSAIC       Micro Satellite Applications in Collaboration
MRC          Medical Research Council

NDPB         Non-Departmental Public Body
NERC         Natural Environment Research Council
Newton XMM   X-ray Multi-mirror space mission, ESA
NIF          National Ignition Facility, USA

OECD         Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
OGC          Office of Government Commerce
OIE          Office International des Epizooties
OST       Office of Science and Technology

PO        Project Owner
PPARC     Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council

RCUK      Research Councils UK
RRS       Royal Research Ship

SCUBA-2   Submillimetre Common User Bolometer Array - 2
SKA       Square Kilometre Array
SLAC      Stanford Linear Accelerator, USA
SNS       Spallation Neutron Source, Oak Ridge USA
SPIRAL    Radioactive ion beam facility at GANIL
SR        Synchrotron radiation
SRO       Senior Responsible Officer
SRS       Synchrotron Radiation Source at CCLRC’s Daresbury Laboratory

TESLA     Proposed linear accelerator and FEL, DESY German

UKAEA     UK Atomic Energy Authority

VLBI      Very Long Baseline Initiative
VLT       Very Large Telescope, ESO
VUV       Very Ultra-Violet

WHO       World Health Organisation

XEUS      X-Ray Evolving Universe Spectroscopy
XUV       Extreme Ultra-Violet
7. CONTACTS

Any general enquiries about the Large Facilities Strategic Road Map should be directed to:

Gavin Costigan
Assistant Director Large Scale Scientific Facilities
Office of Science and Technology
gavin.costigan@dti.gsi.gov.uk


Anyone wishing to discuss individual projects on the Road Map, or who wish to see other
projects added to the Road Map, should contact the most relevant member of Research Councils
UK. Contact details can be found on their respective websites:

Arts and Humanities Research Board
www.ahrb.ac.uk

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
www.bbsrc.ac.uk
Responsible for the proposed redevelopment of the Pirbright Laboratory, part of the section on
Major renewals, refurbishments and investments in Research Council Institutes

Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils
www.cclrc.ac.uk
Responsible for the sections on Synchrotron radiation, Neutron scattering and High-powered
lasers

Economic and Social Research Council
www.esrc.ac.uk

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
www.epsrc.ac.uk
Responsible for the sections on Radioactive particle beam facilities, Fusion facilities and
Computing Infrastructure.

Medical Research Council
www.mrc.ac.uk
Responsible for the proposed redevelopment of the Laboratory of Molecular Biology and the
Research Complex for Diamond, both part of the section on Major renewals, refurbishments and
investments in Research Council Institutes

Natural Environment Research Council
www.nerc.ac.uk
Responsible for the section on Ocean Research Vessels and for the proposed replacement of the
Halley Research Station, part of the section on Major renewals, refurbishments and investments
in Research Council Institutes.

Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council
www.pparc.ac.uk
Responsible for the sections on Particle accelerators for particle physics and Astronomy & solar
system science facilities
RCUK Secretariat
Information: info@rcuk.ac.uk
www.rcuk.ac.uk

								
To top