1 / 53

Jeffrey Wilkes U. of Washington, Seattle Particle Astrophysics Seminar 13 Jan 2006

DUSEL (U.S. Deep Underground Science and Engineering Lab) at the Henderson Mine (Colorado): Progress and Plans. Jeffrey Wilkes U. of Washington, Seattle Particle Astrophysics Seminar 13 Jan 2006. Henderson Underground Science and Engineering Project. http://nngroup.physics.sunysb.edu/husep/.

emelda
Download Presentation

Jeffrey Wilkes U. of Washington, Seattle Particle Astrophysics Seminar 13 Jan 2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. DUSEL(U.S. Deep Underground Science and Engineering Lab)at theHenderson Mine (Colorado):Progress and Plans Jeffrey WilkesU. of Washington, Seattle Particle Astrophysics Seminar 13 Jan 2006 Henderson Underground Science and Engineering Project http://nngroup.physics.sunysb.edu/husep/

  2. Outline • The DUSEL process • Prehistory • Recent history • Next steps • DUSEL @ Henderson Mine (Colorado) • HUSEP organization • Henderson mine • HUSEP proposal progress and plans

  3. DUSEL: Deep Underground Science and Engineering Lab • A long-standing dream in USA! e.g., see • Initiative by US National Science Foundation (NSF) • Create a new national lab for underground science • Supports research on physics, geology, biology (life in extreme environment), mine/tunnel engineering • Now pursuing the 2nd (recent) attempt to do this! • 2003: Bahcall and Haxton led “NUSEL” process • Conclusion: Homestake mine is best site • But: many expressed concerns about selection process • South Dakota government failed to act promptly – mine was sold to company in Canada, closed, and allowed to flood! • Estimated cost to restore = $50 million (low estimate) PROPOSAL FOR A NATIONAL UNDERGROUND SCIENCE FACILITY.By Alfred K. Mann (Pennsylvania U.), Presented at Workshop on Science Underground, Los Alamos, N. Mex., Sep 27 - Oct 1, 1982. Published in AIP Conf.Proc.96:16-36,1983

  4. Current DUSEL initiative • 2003: Mike Turner becomes head of Physical Sciences at NSF • Strong support for making underground lab a reality • To allow SNOlab to compete, drop the word “national” • Deep Underground Science and Engineering Lab: DUSEL • Defines a multi-step plan for producing consensus and progress on site selection and science goals NSF PA 03-03 - June 26, 2003Noted Astrophysicist Michael S. Turner to Head NSF'S Mathematical and Physical Sciences Directorate The National Science Foundation (NSF) has named celebrated astrophysicist Michael S. Turner of the University of Chicago as Assistant Director for Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS). He will head a $1 billion directorate that supports research in mathematics, physics, chemistry, materials and astronomy, as well as multidisciplinary programs and education.

  5. U.S. DUSEL process now • Solicitation 1 (2004): Define requirements for potential underground experiments in physics, geosciences, biology, & engineering • 14 working groups established • Meetings and workshops (too many!): final report due soon (!) • Solicitation 2 (2005): Different sites respond: conceptual designs for DUSEL • Proposals from sites in Washington (Icicle Creek), Minnesota (Soudan), California (San Jacinto), and several others • Two finalists: Homestake Mine (SD) and Henderson Mine (CO) • Funding of 0.5M$ each provided to prepare next proposal • final choice of site in late 2006 ? • Solicitation 3 (2006): submit construction proposals Work on S-2 is going on NOW!

  6. DUSEL Candidates: first round (2004) Icicle Creek (Wash) Soudan (Minn) Sudbury (Canada) Homestake (S.D.) Henderson (Colo) Kimballton (Virginia) San Jacinto (Calif) WIPP (N.M.)

  7. DUSEL Candidates: July, 2005 Homestake Henderson

  8. Henderson Underground Science/Engineering Project • HUSEP = Colorado site’s team

  9. Henderson Mine (near Denver, Colorado USA) • Advantages of Henderson Mine as DUSEL site: • Easily accessible; near expressway, roads kept clear in winter • Near major urban/industrial area and airline hub • < 1.5 hr drive from Denver International Airport • Nearby research infrastructure, institutes and universities: • U. Colorado, NIST, Colo. State U., Denver U., USAFA, Colorado College, Aspen Center for Physics • Direct flights to cities around the world • Working molybdenum mine; 150M$ modernization completed in 2000 • High-speed data lines in mine • Latest mine safety features 10 miles Airport Henderson Mine Denver Echo Lake (JW’s thesis) ~60 miles Aspen Colorado Springs

  10. Aspen Vail Continental Divide Eisenhower Tunnel Henderson Mine Mt. Evans/Echo Lake US-40 Interstate-70 Denver Idaho Springs

  11. Henderson Mine - Overview • Owned by Climax Molybdenum Co. • Subsidiary of Phelps Dodge • Operating since 1970’s • $500 million initial investment • One of 10 biggest hard rock mines in the world • High grade molybdenum (“moly”) • 15-20 year remaining ore • Major modernization 1999 (“Henderson 2000”) • $150 million additional capital investment • Reduced rock removal costs • Enthusiastic and cooperative partners • pro bono contributions • geology consultants for core logging etc. • many tours for scientists, students, politicians… • long term planning a high priority • would like to be a “poster child” for sustainable re-use

  12. Henderson Mine: Schematic cross-sectional view

  13. Moly Ore Unusual new moly seam found 2005

  14. Henderson Mine • Huge elevator/hoist for vertical access • 8.5 m diameter shaft with with two hoisting compartments • Elevator: 7m long X 2.5m wide X 4m tall, 50 tons capacity • Can carry a ship container • Or 200 people… • Now: operations are at levels >1000m deep, minimum overburden ~3000 mwe • Can go deeper…

  15. Elevator and office space Main elevator Scale unit: 1 Tom Kirk = 2m Surface buildings [Thanx to R. Wilson for photos]

  16. Henderson Mine parameters • Excavation Capacity: ~40,000 - 50,000 ton/day • Actual operation: ~20,000 - 30,000 ton/day • under-utilized capacity • 15km tunnel with high speed conveyor and train track • Conveyor belt: 50kton/day max capacity, 20kton/day normal operation • Electric power station: 2 x 30 MW • Rock disposal site (approved) with huge capacity • Large office buildings and warehouses • Anticipated mine closing in 10~20 years • Mine Co. and local politicians see underground science as way of retaining employment, revitalizing local economy, etc • Local residents are supportive: most are miners!

  17. Excellent DUSEL Site asl=above sea level US units: 1' = 0.3m Red Mtn. 12,300' asl Harrison Mtn. 25 km conveyer belts DUSEL (to surface) (mining area) 7500' asl Colo. School of Mines = engineering university near Denver core sample DUSEL cavity? Access drifts and ventilation shafts 6750' asl (4200 mwe)

  18. Henderson: Big toys for big boys (and girls) ! 10 ton underground loader. 80 ton side-dump truck.

  19. Jumbo Boom Drill

  20. Mining @ Henderson: how to make tunnels cheaply Basic drilling cycle for drill and blast tunneling: • Survey and setup • Drilling • Charging • Blasting • Ventilation • Scaling • Mucking • Scaling • Bolting 3 2 1 4 5 9 7 8 6

  21. Gigantic Rock Handling/Removal System • 80 ton trucks dump rock at crusher. • 17 km underground conveyors belts remove rock. • 7 km surface conveyor to mill site. • 40~50 kton/day capacity • Cheapest excavation cost: ~ $60/ton 1 2 3

  22. Conveyer belts total 25 km Ore conveyer tunnel can give horizontal access after mining is finished

  23. Existing Core Drilling Library • 606 holes totaling 474,000 ft (90 miles) core drilled at the Henderson site (mostly in Red Mountain) • With cost for core drilling ~ $50/ft  $23,700,000 investment • Henderson management will make core and logs available for DUSEL • An unprecedented level of information to support the development of the DUSEL geoscience program

  24. Last year: core sample from DUSEL area • Universities and Colorado government funded exploratory core drill into the proposed DUSEL site • 750 m long, inclination of 26 degrees, right through proposed Central Campus area • Results = good news: • ‘Extremely competent’ porphyry (granite) • Very hard with a high percentage of quartz. • Expected to have high compressive strength • ‘No evidence of mineralization’ • No Mo: company won’t want to mine here! • No problem foreseen for constructing DUSEL core path

  25. Additional Site Characterization • 2,500 feet long core drilling into proposed “Central Campus” under Harrison Mountain • $180,000 project financed primarily by universities • Geological logging • Good golly, no moly (nor gold) • rock is a rhyolite or aplite porphry: very hard with a high percentage of quartz; RQD is high, 70 – 100, little evidence of mineralization • only a few small fractured zones (not near the laboratory area); no major fault zones • Other observations • very little water during drilling, about 1.5 gpm • potential for rock-bursts when mining due to hardness/strength, but no greater than experienced at Henderson in the past • no unusual levels or types of radioisotopes • review of extensive statutory radon monitoring records indicates levels similar to Gran Sasso

  26. Planned 2nd Core Drilling – Jan ‘06 Drill-hole 02(planned) Drill-hole 01

  27. DUSEL @ Henderson: preliminary concept • Assume total project cost approx. $300M • Initially assume $200M for infrastructure and $100M for experiments • needs to be optimized • NSF accounting includes operations • Science goals must be diverse and multi-disciplinary • must include: physics, geology, biology, engineering and low counting • Staged approach that allows scientific experiments to be carried out concurrent with the construction • Upper campus + experiments (within a year) • Central campus + experiments (within three years) • Lower campus + experiments (within five years) • Geo/bio Outposts + experiments • Optimize value of the operating mine infrastructure

  28. Elevator to surface buildings @ Elev. 10,500 ft Upper Campus 1 Elev. 8100 ft = 2500 mwe) • Large area accessible ASAP • 2800 m2 former machine shop at Upper Campus 1 • Deeper access after new tunnels are drilled Upper Campus 2 Elev. 7700 ft = 3100 mwe) Existing tunnels Peak of Harrison Mountain @ Elev. 12,300 ft Central Campus Elev. 6750 ft (4200 mwe) EarthLab/ Geoscience Area Midway Campus Elev. 5825 ft (5100 mwe) Internal Shaft Lower Campus Elev. 4900 ft (6000 mwe)

  29. Experimental areas • Upper campus • Old company machine shop (32k ft2 area) at UC-1 level (8100’ asl, 2500 mwe ) can be ready for experiments within a few months, at cost of 100K$ • Slightly deeper UC-2 (7700’ asl, 3100 mwe) also possible quickly • Central Campus • 6750’ asl, 4200 mwe overburden • Accessed by new ramps from existing shaft area, ~2 years • Several large, multipurpose rooms (~20x20x100 m3) • Natural location for megaton-scale proton decay/neutrino detector UNO (not part of official DUSEL scope) • Possible: Midway Campus at bend in access tunnels • 5800’ asl, 5100 mwe overburden • Lower Campus • 4900’ asl, 6000 mwe overburden • In ~5 years: several rooms sized ~20x20x50 m3 • For projects requiring lowest background • double-beta decay, dark matter, solar neutrinos • Second core drill in planning stage, to confirm geology

  30. Sharing Infrastructure • Simultaneous operation of the Henderson mining activities with DUSEL will have distinct advantages compared to other potential sites • Cost effective construction and operations management • Cost-sharing of facilities (CMC goal – revenue neutral) • Safety conscious industrial partner • But… there will also be coordination challenges • Henderson has • hired consultants to investigate business model, including interoperation of mine + lab • Visited Kamioka and Gran Sasso, Creighton Mine (SNOLab) • SNOLab, Homestake & Morton Salt Mine/IMB existence proof of successful shared infrastructure

  31. Safety, Environment, Permitting • An excellent well-established safety record • Company works hard to develop a “safety culture” • Each meeting begins with a “safety share” • NSF has stressed the very high importance of safety at DUSEL • Henderson has excellent record of environmental and local-community sensitivity • Company recognizes and highly values this asset • No new permits required for DUSEL excavation • DUSEL = only a few % of current operations permits • No rock needs to leave company property • Great benefits compared to proposed green field sites

  32. Public Support • Great support at all levels of government, including county commissioners, town mayors, mine employees and local schools • Community outreach with public interest articles, web sites, press releases and continued presentations to local groups by local community leaders and HUSEP scientists etc. • The Arapaho Project Inc.: an offshoot of county commissioners formed a non-profit to promote Henderson at all levels • Oct. 05 “Media Day” attracted 4 TV stations plus several print media • No environmental issues with community • Mining has been part of local culture for 150 years • Existing operations

  33. Arapahoe Project (Clear Creek County development) website http://www.thearapahoproject.net/

  34. Regional political support lined up • State money is tight (CO version of Prop 13) but… • $$ from state agencies towards core drillings • Governor has established a commission of state agency directors to investigate ways to help (chaired by Lt. Gov.) • Will try to secure promise of funds for surface campus buildings

  35. Surface Campus 80,000 ft2 800,000 ft2 180,000 ft2 160,000 ft2

  36. National and International Cooperation • SNOLab: Current expansion will provide a deep site in near future • Will work with SNOLab management to develop scenarios for inter-laboratory cooperation in scheduling experiments at the two sites • David Sinclair on Int’l HUSEP Advisory Committee • Concept of a multi-site North American lab • Multiple sites may be needed to address conflicting physics/geoscience/microbiology interest • Asia and European Labs • HUSEP advisers from Kamioka, Gran Sasso, Modane (Frejus)

  37. Education and Outreach • High priority for NSF • SALTA/CROP (U. Nebraska/Lincoln; U. Washington/Seattle) • first experiment at Henderson; cosmic ray measurements underground by high school students • Little Shop of Physics (Jones, CSU) • reaches 15,000 students and 200 teachers each year • NSF’s REU-funded Biogeochemical Education Experience in South Africa (Sue Pfiffner, U. Tenn) • Combination of physics, geoscience, and microbiology maps well onto K-12 curriculum requirements • Teacher workshops to get their input • Underground science information – posters, brochures • Visitor Center planning

  38. First results from Henderson! • Rates at Henderson surface (10,337 ft) = 2.5 x rates at Lincoln, NE (1189 ft) • 4 locations: depths of 2800-3900 ft • Raw rates in muon telescopes drop from 10 Hz (surface rate) → 1 Hz → 0.5 Hz → 0.3 Hz

  39. Science at DUSEL/Henderson • Science committees formed (8/05) and topical workshops held • October 21, 2005: • Biology at Henderson • November 18-19, 2005: • Physics at Henderson • Geoscience at Henderson • DUSEL Engineering/infrastructure at Henderson • Education and Outreach (Science Teacher Workshops) • Next steps: • Review and refine S1 report contents • Develop ‘envelope’ of maximal infrastructure requirements for potential projects and work with engineering team to make sure S2 plan for DUSEL@Henderson covers needs

  40. Hydro/bio-geologic Environment • Intrusive rocks with very low primary permeability • Ground water restricted to discrete zones of high flow • Water is being mined - treated and sold to nearby towns • Henderson 2000 project experience: • Inflows 10’s of gpms rather than 100’s or 1000’s of gpms • Max inflows of 30-40 gpm from any specific structure • Water handled by excavation of periodic sumps during mining of ramps downward • Water generally warm to hot on lower levels, ~120 degrees F • Biogeologic conditions have not been studied extensively, but… • Geologic environment contains: • Warm to Hot water • Sulfide Mineralization • Similar environments in mine waste dumps are known to host sulfide-consuming bacteria

  41. HUSEP Bioscience (Jeff Mitten, CU Biologist and Bioscience Committee Chair) • Core drilling produces water samples from deep rock • Ancient water, anoxic for thousands of years, meets oxygen in the shaft, and oxides of minerals precipitate • Check for microbes and compare to samples from other deep sites around the world • Already under way!

  42. Research plans during S2 core drilling (first samples already in hand) • Introduce both solute and particulate tracers, as individual spikes to the drilling fluid immediate before drilling each core • Tracers will be quantified in the liquid surrounding the core, in the core parings, and in the interior of the core (the final sample for geomicrobiology). • Quantification will be by fluorescence microscopy. • Particulate tracers, which serve as surrogate contaminant microbes, will be 1.0-µm latex, carboxylated beads, which will be added in concentrated form in a sterile Whirl-Pak bag in the core shoe. • The bag will break on contact with the formation, thereby coating the exterior of the core in tracer. • Solute tracer will also be used to quantify contamination by dissolved components in the drilling fluid.

  43. A. D. C. B. Davidson and Onstott, Princeton Univ.

  44. Henderson Geoscience Ore Geology, Isotopic Tracers, and Geochronology • Ore geology : Two of the hottest topics • Magmatic to hydrothermal transitionHow are metals transferred from silicate melt to a vapor-rich medium that breaks through the lithostatic load? • How long does it take to create a major porphyry-style ore body? Duration issues . . . What is age and evolution of mineralization at ore body scale and in the context of the magmatic-tectonic history in a region? • Comparative Geochronology: Re-Os dating of molybdenite • determine the age of ore mineralization • compare with crystallization ages for magmatic stocks using U-Pb dating of zircon and other suitable accessory minerals • compare with cooling ages (uplift rates) for the Henderson magmatic-hydrothermal system using 40Ar/39Ar chronology of micas (muscovite and biotite) and potassium feldspar • Timing and duration, plus cooling history of the entire magmatic-hydrothermal system

  45. Physics Committee • DUSEL @ Henderson Physics Workshop took place Nov 18-19, 2005 at CSU, Ft. Collins, Colorado See http://ale.physics.sunysb.edu/husep and click on “Conferences and Workshops” • HUSEP Physics Committee (J.W. = Chair) Working groups: • Neutrino mass (solar, 0νββ) and mixing (atm ν, LBL) • Cecilia Lunardini, UW; Walter Toki, CSU • Dark matter/nuclear physics • Dan Akerib, Case; Harry Nelson, UCSB, Les Rosenberg, LLNL/UW • Nucleon decay • Maury Goodman, ANL; Tony Mann, Tufts • Astrophysics • Alec Habig, U.Mn/Duluth, Tom Weiler, Vanderbilt

  46. Dan Akerib (Case), co-chair Frank Avignone (South Carolina), John Beacom (Ohio State), Alessandro Bettini (INFN/Padova), Jim Cochran (Iowa State), Steven R. Elliott (LANL), Enrique Fernandez (Barcelona), Maury Goodman (ANL), Alec T. Habig (U.Minn/Duluth), Karsten Heeger (LBL), Chang-Kee Jung (Stony Brook), Tony Mann (Tufts), Kai Martens (Utah), William Louis (LANL), Cecilia Lunardini (INT/UWash), Clark McGrew (Stony Brook) Bob McKeown (CalTech), Harry Nelson (UCSB), Peter Paul (BNL) Andreas Piepke (Alabama), Soren Prell (Iowa State), Eli Rosenberg (Iowa State), Leslie Rosenberg (LLNL), David Sinclair (Carleton), Walter Toki (CSU), Tom Weiler (Vanderbilt), Michael Wiescher (Notre Dame), Jeffrey Wilkes (UWash), Chair Robert Wilson (CSU), Chiaki Yanagisawa (Stony Brook), Eric D. Zimmerman (CU), co-chair HUSEP Physics Committee membership

  47. Physics at Henderson DUSEL (15')Dan Akerib, Case Western Reserve Geoscience at Henderson DUSEL (15')Judy Hannah, CSU  Outreach and Education at Henderson DUSEL (15')Dan Claes, U. Nebraska - Lincoln DUSEL Requirements Document Status (10')Bernard Sadoulet, University of California, Berkeley Status of current neutrino beam projects (30') Clark McGrew, Stony Brook Future proposed neutrino beam projects and how are measurements affected by site dependent factors (30') Milind Diwan, Brookhaven National Laboratory Open discussion of related infrastructure issues: Review of S1 interim report and new items  (30') Walter Toki, Colorado State Prospects for detecting supernova neutrinos (30')  Louie Strigari, Univ. of California, Irvine Xenon and related extrapolations (15')  Hanguo Wang, Univ. of California, Los Angeles Phase transition detectors & related extrapolations (15')Andrew Sonnenschein, Fermi National Accelerator Lab. Low Background Issues (15') Tom Borak, Colorado State Henderson DUSEL Conceptual Design (30') Mark Kuchta, Colorado School of Mines General Infrastructure Requirements - Discussion (45') Panel: Mark Kuchta, Chip DeWolfe, Lee Petersen (CNA) atmospheric neutrino experiments and how are measurements affected by site dependent factors  (30')Alec Habig, U Minnesota Physics of atmospheric neutrinos: perspectives for the future  (30')  S. Palomares Ruiz, Vanderbilt U. Exotic neutrino properties (new interactions, neutrino magnetic moment, sterile states, etc.)  (30')Alexander Friedland, Los Alamos National Laboratory Low Background Counting  (30')Prisca Cushman, U Minnesota Simulating Radiation Backgrounds(20')  - tbc Jonathan Ormes and Ze'ev  Shayer, Denver U. Snow-pack Measurements from Underground (15')   Judah Levine/John Wahr, U. Colorado Some of the talks and discussions at the November Workshop 50 attendees

  48. Potential physics occupants • S1 team has collected info on many potential DUSEL occupants from the physics community • We’ll refine and expand this info base and use it to determine maximal demands on infrastructure

More Related