Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

June 1 st 2005 A European Roadmap for Research Infrastructures Workshop Future needs for Research Infrastructures in Energy A view by ESFRI presentation.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "June 1 st 2005 A European Roadmap for Research Infrastructures Workshop Future needs for Research Infrastructures in Energy A view by ESFRI presentation."— Presentation transcript:

1 June 1 st 2005 A European Roadmap for Research Infrastructures Workshop Future needs for Research Infrastructures in Energy A view by ESFRI presentation by Bart Laethem (member PSE steering group)

2 2 WHAT IS ESFRI? The European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) is a forum which brings together representatives of the 25 EU Member States, appointed by Ministers in charge of research ESFRI is not a lobby-group for more large facilities or not

3 3 OVERALL AIM Requirement for “European View” to inform Member States and the European Commission on the matrix of research infrastructure opportunities => better decisions by (group of ) Member states + EU Several Member States are producing national roadmaps with differing degrees of robustness Example from USA: Department of Energy (DOE) has published a twenty-year vision for large infrastructures

4 4 ESFRI AMBITIONS To provide an overview of the needs for RI of pan-European interest in different fields of science and technology To prepare the European Roadmap with the objective of regular updates as different areas mature. The making of the Roadmap will be an ongoing process. To act then as an incubator for international negotiations about concrete research infrastructure projects with pan-European interest

5 5 Benefits of European Roadmap Identify those infrastructures to be provided or upgraded in order to meet the need of European researchers to conduct leading edge research Providing a focus for long term budgetary planning by funding actors Preventing over-provision of facilities in particular areas Basis for strategic prioritisation by Member States and European Commission: useful tool for decision makers Identifying and nucleating research to European research communities

6 6 An ESFRI Approach Member States (MS) should share a current national roadmap and process on a yearly basis All opportunities should be identified although at different stages of maturity Outputs from existing “formal” groups should not be duplicated (however such groups need to contribute but do not set roadmap outcomes) ESFRI should, in its incubator role, not prioritise and not decide on location, but should give MS and EC an idea of maturity and intern’l impact Negotiations and decisions about plans and location will take place later, outside ESFRI

7 7 ESFRI organigram ESFRI Chair: John Wood Steering Group-BMS Chair: Ruth Barrington (+21 Representatives ) Steering Group-SSH Chair: Bjorn Henrichsen (+23 Representatives) Steering Group-PSE Chair: John Wood (+ 19 Representatives) ESFRI Secretariat (EC) Hervé Pero (Executive Secretary) Executive Board Vice Chair: N.N. e-IRG : Chair: P. Aerts (+40 Representatives) Expert Groups-BMS (3) Expert Groups-SSH (2) Expert Groups-PSE (10)

8 8 Working method ESFRI is advised by 3 Steering Groups that cover:  Physical Sciences and Engineering (PSE) Chair : John Wood (UK)  Biological and Medical Sciences (BMS) Chair : Ruth Barrington (IE)  Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) Chair : Bjorn Henrichsen (NO) Cross cutting infrastructure (e.g. libraries and synchrotrons) are allocated to one lead steering group that must consult other relevant groups as appropriate

9 9 Working method Role of Steering Groups  Assess current national roadmaps (e.g. UK, Germany) and other relevant analyses (e.g. from ESF)  Identify existing formal groups (e.g. NuPECC – Long Range Plan 2004)  Identify gaps and create Expert Working Groups to follow strict stage gate guidelines to produce evidence and advice that follow transparent processes  The results of the work of the Steering groups will be presented as an advice to ESFRI

10 10 Working method Members of Steering Groups  The members of Steering Groups are composed only by ESFRI Members  Chairs are selected from members of ESFRI and provide reports to ESFRI meetings  Member States and European Commission are represented by only one representative in each Steering Group

11 11 Working method Role of the Expert Groups  To consult with the key players in the area in order to determine their best estimate of the future need in that area  Identify those projects which will best serve those future needs, or exceptionally, suggest projects that would do so  Deliver to the steering Group a report detailing the RI requirement of the area within their remit. Any RI included in the report must meet the ESFRI Stage gate criteria

12 12 Working method Expert Groups: who?  Chaired by a member of the related Steering Group  Members are proposed by MS and EC  Members are selected on the basis of their expertise and on the need to provide a breadth of expertise  Attempts should be made to redress biases by appointing members with known contrasting points of view  Members must declare any conflicts of interest but such conflicts will not necessarily bar them for participating in the Expert Group  Expert Groups should consist of no more members than is necessary to provide an overview of the area (up to 8 but only exceptionally more than 9).

13 13 Criteria for entering the roadmap (1) Must be a major infrastructure for that particular scientific community Must be a multi-user facility with its own research programme Must be of pan-European interest Must support a Research programme agreed by the appropriate community Must be Technologically feasible Require multi-annual funding In case of maturing proposals these must have:  Science case  Technical case  Business case  These cases must be at the European level

14 14 Projects must be accompanied by statements of  Their relevance to other existing and developing international facilities  Their estimated construction, operating and decommissioning costs  Their envisaged management structure  Their impact on human capacity and training  Their potential contribution to other socio-economic objectives  Whether there could be mechanisms for Member States to join at the start of the project or during its operation Criteria for entering the roadmap (2)

15 15 Embryonic Ideas Immature areas (embryonic ideas) should be identified early and will be tracked via an opportunities list that is updated on a regular basis Each steering group will agree on the basis of recommendations by the Expert Groups when an opportunity (embryonic idea) enters the stage gate process

16 16 Physical Science and Engineering (PSE) Steering Group: 1st list of opportunities Facility for Antiproton and Ion Research (FAIR) Facility for intense secondary beams of unstable isotopes (SPIRAL II) European deep-sea neutrino telescope (KM3NeT) Extremely Large Telescope (ELT) – for optical astronomy Pan-European Research Infrastructure for Nano-Structures (PRINS) European Spallation Source (ESS) – neutron source European XFEL – for hard X rays IRUVX FELs Network – from infrared to soft X rays ESRF upgrade – synchrotron High Performance Computer for Europe (HPCEUR) Marine vessel for coastal research – essentially Baltic Sea Research Icebreaker Aurora Borealis European Multidisciplinary Seafloor Observatory (EMSO)

17 17 Physical Science and Engineering (PSE) Steering Group: 1 st expert groups  Astronomy Astroparticles: Janusz Ziolkowski (PL), Elena Righi Steele (EU)  Computing Data Treatment: Heikki Mannila (FI), Lorenza Saracco (EU)  Environmental Monitoring: Bart Laethem (BE), Andrea Tilche (EU), Gerburg Larsen (EU)  Soft and Hard X-Ray: Henry Hutchinson (UK)  Free-Electron Laser: Lars Börjesson (SE)  High Power Laser: Francois Gounand (FR), Christian Kurrer (EU)  Large Neutron Infrastr.: Carlo Rizutto (IT), Stefano Fontana (EU)  Material Testing: Joergen K. Kjems (DK) Simon Webster (EU)  Nanosciences: Miran Ceh (SI), Panayotis Moschopoulos (EU)  Nuclear Physics: Rainer Koepke (DE), Daniel Pasini (EU)

18 18 ESFRI and needs for new infrastructures in Energy? Needs not yet identified by ESFRI This workshop can be a first step in a identification process, resulting in the identification of:  Mature projects => ESFRI stage gate process  Embryonic ideas => start maturing process using e.g. appropriate FP instruments of the Research Infrastructures Action (coordination actions, integrated Infrastructure Initiatives-I3)

19 19 Contact persons within ESFRI John Wood  Bart Laethem   Tel. +32/ ESFRI-secretariat  ESFRI website 


Download ppt "June 1 st 2005 A European Roadmap for Research Infrastructures Workshop Future needs for Research Infrastructures in Energy A view by ESFRI presentation."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google