1 / 29

European Regional Director’s Report

European Regional Director’s Report. Brian Foster (Oxford & GDE) EC Face-to-face KEK 5/09/08. Overview in Europe. “Black December” was significant shock to the system. Situation in UK for a while looked terminal, and is still very bad.

misu
Download Presentation

European Regional Director’s Report

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. European Regional Director’s Report Brian Foster (Oxford & GDE) EC Face-to-face KEK 5/09/08

  2. Overview in Europe • “Black December” was significant shock to the system. Situation in UK for a while looked terminal, and is still very bad. • Elsewhere in Europe, no obvious reaction to US/UK perturbations; generally investment maintained or – e.g. Spain – increasing. • EU funding new projects in Framework 7 which are taking over and expanding from old EuroTeV and CARE. Global Design Effort

  3. ILC in EU • Framework 6 projects were the first in which particle physics obtained major resources from EU. • CARE and EuroTeV were the main vehicles; CARE mostly generic, EuroTeV mostly ILC with some CLIC • Extremely successful, now coming to close. Final EuroTeV scientific meeting last week in Uppsala – many very impressive results. Project will end in December. • Framework 7 projects (2008 -~ 2012) now taking over. Global Design Effort

  4. ILC in EU • EUCARD, successor of CARE, contains very substantial admixture of ILC work, in close coordination with CLIC, which has very substantial synergies. Reduction of scope from 15 Meuro EU request to 10 Meuro awarded currently ongoing. Largest cuts recommended by reviewers in SC part. Typical reduction in EU contribution to parts of project with strong LC interest ~ 25%. • EUCARD kick-off meeting 2-5/12/08 in CERN. Global Design Effort

  5. ILC in EU • HiGrade is “Preparatory Phase” project intended for projects on the ESFRI Road Map. • EU starting documents received – eventually after long hold-up related to financial status of DESY– start backdated to Feb 1st. Site selection, governance & outreach is ~ 50% of effort; remainder in SCRF and cavity production on back of XFEL. • “Kick-off” meeting took place at DESY on August 29th. Very brief but useful meeting of governance WG. Global Design Effort

  6. ILC in EU Global Design Effort

  7. ILC in EU Global Design Effort

  8. ILC in EU Global Design Effort

  9. HiGrade Governance WG • BF (chair); Members: J-P Delahaye, E. Elsen, F. Richard, S. Stapnes (Sec. CERN Council Strategy Group), A. Wagner, G. Wormser. • R. Petronzio yet to reply. • Intention is to add and/or co-opt members as required Global Design Effort

  10. HiGrade Outreach WG • BF convenor • European Outreach Group – reps from UK, France, Germany, Italy. Needs to be reformulated and reenergized. • B. Warmbein and P. Royole-Degieux the active agents – but already saturated with current GDE work. Global Design Effort

  11. HiGrade Siting WG • DESY convenor – W. Bialowons. • Very oriented towards technical C&S issues, shallow site etc. • Clear political dimension to siting – needs good connection to governance etc. Similar questions vis-à-vis ILCSC siting group. Global Design Effort

  12. Dubna GDE meeting, 06/08 • The GDE met inDubna in June for a meeting that was advertised as concentrating on Conventional Facilities & Siting. More than 70 attended. • Substantial discussion of advantages of shallow site – the Dubna proposal still uses a tunnel-boring machine rather than cut&cover but benefits from isolated & unpopulated nature of the site. Global Design Effort

  13. Global Design Effort

  14. Dubna GDE meeting, 06/08 Global Design Effort

  15. Dubna GDE meeting, 06/08 • Premeetings with the GSPI engineers before the meeting to discuss exploratory engineering study. Global Design Effort

  16. Dubna GDE meeting, 06/08 • Agreement on ~ $100K engineering study to be conducted by GSPI, partly funded through EU HiGrade project – which started in February. Hope is that Dubna and other Russian institutes will become EU associates in the project. • GSPI calculate that moving the service tunnel to surface will save ~ 10% of TOTAL civil construction cost. Global Design Effort

  17. ILC in UK • Confusing! Initial intemperate statements from STFC CE have faded away. Very critical report from Parliamentary watchdog on events surrounded ILC and of CE personally. Government response to that report contains following about ILC: “Although, (sic) it is true STFC has chosen not to ramp-up investment in the current International Linear Collider project, STFC will continue to participate in developing global strategies for future Linear Colliders and continues to honour its commitments to the common development fund.” Global Design Effort

  18. ILC in UK • Nevertheless, there has, and will be, very significant pain caused by the fact that ILC investment has been cut by factor 4. These cus now being implemented are will probably be complete by Xmas. I have been working with J. Womersely to rescue whatever possible from LCABD wreckage. Agreement reached on ongoing (3-year) programme at around £1M/year. Safeguards leading management roles in GDE + engineering and small R&D and travel/cons. Global Design Effort

  19. ILC in UK • Not so easy for detector collabs. – LCFI and CALICE. Hope to be able to continue “generic” aspects. Discussions with various organs at STFC continue. • We have agreed that UK institutions will sign EoIs, LoIs, whatever…. • I signed the ILCSC MoU for ILC activities inside GDE as Spokesperson for the LCUK Collaboration. Global Design Effort

  20. ILC in France • Host state of CERN means that strategic stance very strongly influenced by attitude of CERN and its future. • Resolution of funding source for French XFEL involvement means that French attitude to ILC now more positive, in context of above…. • BF visit to IN2P3 under discussion for some months awaiting suitable date. Global Design Effort

  21. ILC in Spain • One of few European countries where R&D budget is strongly increasing, reaction to long-term, ~50 years, underinvestment. • History of strong involvement in SC quads, including full cryomodule design, through CIEMAT in Madrid. • Also strong involvement in other regional centres such as Barcelona and Valencia. • GDE visit by PMs and EC members around FALC meeting in Madrid in Jan. 09. Global Design Effort

  22. ILC in Italy • Historically strong involvement through INFN and Frascati, particularly in the Damping Ring area, and in Milan in development of SCRF, and cooperation with KEK. • Steady and constant level of resources, despite distractions such as SuperB initiatives. • Planned visit to Frascati/INFN headquarters in conjunction with FALC/Spain visit. Global Design Effort

  23. ILC in Germany • Driven through DESY, world leader in SCRF for decades. • Small dedicated involvement in GDE, but high level and very effective. • Enormous synergy with XFEL project, on which several projects, specifically HiGrade, are based. • As XFEL agreements finally put in place, political opportunities begin to re-emerge to discuss ILC with BMBF. Global Design Effort

  24. ILC-CLIC synergy • Cooperation ongoing before “Black December”. Global Design Effort

  25. ILC-CLIC synergy • Regular phone meetings of convenors. • Context of collaboration is to concentrate on those areas from which both ILC & CLIC will benefit. • Regular meetings between BF/NW/J-PD. Global Design Effort

  26. ILC-CLIC synergy • Trying to agree guidelines for mutual official comparative statements: •     The CLIC / ILC Collaboration agree to work together, within the framework of the Collaboration, to outline comparative statements to be used in presenting their respective projects. The Collaboration members agree to limit statements made about each other's projects to specifically agreed upon statements such as those listed here below   • Project design   The CLIC and ILC projects both plan to release design  documents in the coming years. The CLIC Conceptual Design Report is to be published in 2010. If the CLIC technology is demonstrated to be feasible, a CLIC Technical Design will then be launched for publication in a CLIC TDR by 2015. The ILC TDR will be published in 2012. The design reports are intended to summarize the R&D and project planning at that time and will serve as indicators of project readiness. The ILC TDR is intended to be submitted to governments and associated funding agencies in order to seek project approval. Global Design Effort

  27. ILC-CLIC synergy •  Test facilities and system tests   The CLIC and ILC projects both have test facilities either in operation or under construction for the purpose of demonstrating the performance of key technical components or to allow system engineering and industrialization. For each project, R&D priorities and schedules have been defined and it is anticipated that milestones and progress will be reviewed and reported on by members of the community. The Xfel project, with the same technical basis as the ILC and 7% of the energy of one of the ILC linacs, is a large scale system test and demonstration of the industrialization of the ILC linac technology.The Cern- based CTF3 project will be a demonstration of the two beam technology.   The collaborations agree that, at this moment, the ILC technology is more mature and less risky than that of CLIC. However, there are plans to demonstrate, by 2010, the feasibilty of CLIC technology, which offers the prospect of higher energy than can be afforded with ILC,  and to reduce the technology risk in the future. Both collaborations consider it essential to continue to develop both technologies for the foreseeable future. • Costing    Project planners from the CLIC and ILC projects are developing common templates and tools with the intention of enabling the development of similarly-structured project planning and costing documents for each of the two projects. The two collaborations agree to make no public statements about the comparative cost numbers of the two machines until these project-planning and costing documents are complete. Global Design Effort

  28. ILC-CLIC synergy • Substantial GDE presence at next CLIC Collaboration meeting, 14-17.10, just before Paris PAC meeting. • CERN Strategy group beginning to discuss input into ESFRI roadmap and preparations for updated European pp Roadmap. • This will clearly involve discussions involving ILC and CLIC. • Incoming DG will potentially change tone and strategy of CERN interaction. • Next 6 months will be crucial period.   Global Design Effort

  29. Europe summary • Recovery since “Black December” • Everywhere outside UK, “steady as she goes”. No reaction to US/UK perturbations; generally investment maintained or – e.g. Spain – increasing. New EU-funded programmes starting up. • Still however no sign of any appetite in European governments for early decision on, or proactive involvement with, ILC. Global Design Effort

More Related