1. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 1 DUSEL Site Independent (S1) study Bernard Sadoulet Dept. of Physics /LBNL UC Berkeley UC Institute for Nuclear and Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology (INPAC) Bernard Sadoulet, UC Berkeley, Astrophysics/Cosmology Eugene Beier, U. of Pennsylvania, Particle Physics Charles Fairhurst, U. of Minnesota, geology/engineering Tullis Onstott, Princeton, geomicrobiology Hamish Robertson, U. Washington, Nuclear Physics James Tiedje, Michigan State, microbiology The frontier is at depth S1 context DUSEL: a multidisciplinary enterprise Findings: Compulsory science Example in Physics: Dark Matter Example in Biology: Dark Life Recommendations Comparison with other strategies

2. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 2 Site Independent Study (S1) Mission from the NSF 1)to organize a dialog inside the community about a multidisciplinary, Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory in the U.S.. 2) to discover whether there is a compelling scientific justification for such a laboratory, cutting across our many disciplines 3) If there is, to specify the infrastructure requirements for such a laboratory that will address the needs of a broad cross section of science over the next 20-30 years and complement other facilities worldwide. Deliverables (in coming weeks) High Level Report directed at generalists (government+funding agencies) in the style of "Quantum Universe.” PIs+ Judy Jackson, H. Murayama, B. McPherson, C. Laughton, E. Arscott Web-based technical synthesis directed at scientific community Justifications and support the main report. External review started Main difficulty: community incredibly busy!

3. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 3 Findings

4. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 4 Ground Truth Frontier Science and Engineering Deep Underground Neutrino picture of the Sun Geo-microbes Why deep? Size of cavity vs depth Undergraduates in South Africa mine Large Block Geo Experiment Coupled Processes

5. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 5 Scientific Motivation Extraordinary increase of interest in underground science and engineering 3 Fundamental Questions that uniquely require a deep laboratory What is the universe made of? What is the nature of dark matter? What happened to the antimatter? What are neutrinos telling us? Particle/Nuclear Physics : Neutrinos, Proton decay Astrophysics : Dark Matter, Solar/Supernovae neutrinos How deeply in the earth does life extend? What makes life successful at extreme depth and temperature? What can life underground teach us about how life evolved on earth and about life on other planets? Biology: Extremophiles, new energy sources, evolution, new form of life? Geomicrobiology : Role in rock/fracture behavior, biomass, role in life appearance/survival How rock mass strength depends on length and time scales? Can we understand slippage mechanisms in high stress environment, in conditions as close as possible to tectonic faults/earthquakes? Earth Sciences : Mechanisms behind the constant earth evolution Engineering : rock mechanics at large scales, interplay with hydrology/thermal/chemistry/biology

6. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 6 Other Motivations Exciting potential for cross disciplinary synergies Pushing the rock mechanics envelope physicists needs for large span cavities at great depth “Transparent earth” Improvement of standard methods + new technologies Neutrino tomography of the earth? Sensors, low radioactivity, education etc… Relevance to Society Underground construction : the new frontier (urban, mining,fuel storage) Resource extraction: Critical need for recovery efficiency improvement Water resources: Environmental stewardship Remediation (e.g. with micro-organisms) Waste isolation and carbon dioxide sequestration. Risk prevention and safety Making progress in understanding rock failure in structures and earthquakes National security Ultra sensitive detection methods based on radioactivity Training next generation of scientists and engineers + public outreach: better understanding of science

7. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 7 Perspective Recent visit to Washington NSF, DOE (HEP, Nuclear, Bio,Geo), USGS, House Science Committee, OMB/OSTP Broad interest in the science that DUSEL will enable! Pointed questions in Science Committee, OMB/OSTP Distinguish between “Critical” and “Important” e.g. priorities of the field (NRC reports, consensus in community) Try to answer: Is it primarily a physics facility with interesting applications in other fields? Does it comes in the three sets of fields close to the top priority? Our current answer (but we need your help) Clearly critical in Physics: NRC EPP2010 adds to the argument! DUSEL may not yet have risen to the top of the priorities of Bio/GeoBio and Earth Sciences/Engineering but is clearly aligned with some of the fundamental questions of the fields is likely to become a critical component of the needed infrastructure Great potential of interdisciplinary synergy

8. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 8 A Physics Example Dark Matter

9. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 9 e.g. Dark Matter A central puzzle of cosmology What is the nature of ≈ 25% of stuff in the universe? Generic Class Weakly Interactive Massive Particles WIMPs The solutions of the dark matter problem and the hierarchy of forces in nature may be related e.g. supersymmetry or additional dimensions Push three frontiers Astrophysical observations from ground and space Deep underground: Recognize WIMP interactions (nuclear recoils≠radioactivity) Colliders

10. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 10 DAMA 10 -45 cm 2 10 -47 cm 2 10 -46 cm 2 2 10 -44 cm 2 An Example: WIMPs Current expt goals 2 10 -44 cm 2 Next step:10 -45 cm 2 Requires depth ≥ Gran Sasso 25-100kg World-best limit today ≈ 1.6 10 -43 cm 2 @ 100 GeV/c 2 Expected Science Ultimate 10 -47 cm 2 10 tons ≈ No background!

11. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 11 Frontier WIMP searches need depth 10 -47 cm 2 needs 6000mwe Shallow+ active neutron veto? e.g. 90% efficiency at Soudan would be OK for SCDMS 25kg 10 -45 cm 2 But: Risky No safety margin No path to future SCDMS collaboration wants to go deep =SNOLab because of time scale SCDMS 25kg 10 -45 cm 2 10 -46 cm 2 10 -47 cm 2 Raw neutron rates With good passive shield µ veto Rejection of multiples WIMP Rate M WIMP =100GeV/c 2 Mei, Hime astro-ph0512125 Soudan Sudbury Gran Sasso Threshold

12. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 12 Deep Biology Dark Life Of course, I am not a biologist…

13. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 13 Major Questions for Fundamental Biology Extremophiles Limits of life Different from hot vents: in some case, may have no access to photosynthesis products. How do they manage to survive? Dependent upon geochemically generated energy sources? ("geogas": H2, CH4, etc.) ≠ photosynthesis How do such systems function, their members interact to sustain the livelihood? What can we learn on evolution and genome dynamics? Underground microbes may have been isolated from the surface gene pool for very long periods of time (up to 10 8 yrs). How different are they? Are there primitive life niches in the subsurface? How do they evolve with very low population density, extremely low metabolism rate and high longevity? Is there dark life as we don't know it? Do unique biochemistry, e.g. non-nucleic acid based, and molecular signatures exist in isolated subsurface niches?

14. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 14 Major Biological Questions for Earth Science How does the interplay between biology and geology shape the subsurface? Role of microbes in coupled processes (HTMCB: hydro-thermo-mechanical- chemical-biological) How deeply does life extend into the Earth? What are the lower limits of life in the biosphere? temperature barrier influence of pressure lack of water energy restrictions How large is the subsurface biomass? may be the most extensive on earth but samples so far are too few. What is the role of subsurface in life Did life on the earth's surface come from underground? Has the subsurface acted as refuge during extinctions. What "signs of subsurface life" should we search for on Mars and other planets?

15. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 15 Major Questions for Bioengineering New biological material Already the subsurface is a source for high temperature enzymes A reservoir for unexpected and biotechnologically useful molecules? new pharmaceuticals, processes for biochemical and chiral-specific synthesis Use of biological techniques for Environmental remediation Improvement of resource recovery Remote mining More generally essential to understand at the fundamental level HTMCB Migration phenomena in waste storage Control of biological population in hydrocarbon storage

16. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 16 Why a Deep Underground Facility? Contamination issues Drilling: difficult to control injection of fluid (positive pressure) Horizontal sampling: negative pressure Importance of pristine environment Tracers have to be used for every injected liquid Drilling far from disturbed regions (e.g. flooded) 4 Dimensions Systematic study over large volume (sampling during construction) Depth, rock dependence. Long term (very low metabolic rate, evolution) ≠ mine In situ observation Not only in water but on fracture surfaces We do not know how to cultivate them (nutrients?, conditions) Deep drilling program much less expensive once the facility has been built Initial diameter of drill/ energy required (currently <500m) Go to >120°C ; ≈ 15 000ft

17. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 17 Findings (Continued)

18. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 18 The Frontier is at Large Depth! Physics Neutron and activation of materials Neutrinoless double beta decay Dark Matter Neutral current/ elastic scattering solar neutrino Neutron active shielding (300MeV) is difficult and risky Rejection of cosmogenic activity is challenging Biology DUSEL = aseptic environment at depth Study microbes in situ (at constant pressure, microbial activity at low respiration rate ) Deep campus: Platform to drill deeper -> 12000ft (120°C) Earth science/ Engineering Get closer to conditions of earthquakes Scale/stress Complementary to other facilities ≈ 500 m New ideas In each of the fields: e.g. related to dark energy Synergy

19. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 19 Motivations for a National Facility Although Science is international in nature U.S. scientists and engineers managed to play a pioneering role without a dedicated U.S. deep underground laboratory There is no substitute for a premier national facility with unique characteristics Push frontier science Strategic advantage for U.S. scientists and engineers in the : Rapid exploration of new ideas, and unexpected phenomena Full exploitation of existing national assets, such as accelerators. Maximization of the program's impact on our society U.S. one of the only G8 nations without national facility

20. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 20 Science Underground DUSEL Proposed DUSEL 2007-2012 SD support

21. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 21 Chronic Oversubscription Worldwide Historically True! Only exception: currently Gran Sasso as ICARUS won’t be expanded above 600 tons Increase in the community Importance/interest of the science: neutrinos, cosmology Shift from accelerator based experiments Fast progress at boundaries between fields Need for New Underground Facilities

22. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 22 Growth Example of WIMP searches (preliminary) SNOLab presumably SCDMS 25kg and Picasso -> > 2015 DUSEL next generation 150kg-1 ton (at least 1) Need to start building infrastructure while SNOLab busy Number of Physicists World USA Europe Japan Goodman & Witten Effect of Gran Sasso Number of technologies

23. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 23 Need for New Underground Facilities Chronic Oversubscription Increase in the community (Physics) Importance/interest of the science: neutrinos, cosmology Shift from accelerator based experiments Fast progress at boundaries between fields R&D Fabrication Operation R&D Upgrade Operation Infrastructure 10-20 yrs Life cycle of experiments Getting longer Next generation Next Generation R&D Overlap between running of previous generation and construction of next For important questions, need for several experiments Decrease risk: several technologies => R&D at nearly full scale Dependence on target: e.g matrix element for 2ß, A 2 for WIMPs But budgetary constraints ≠ sum of all dreams We expect similar increase in Biology, Earth Science, Engineering

24. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 24 Recommendations

25. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 25 Recommendations (Draft) The U.S. should 1.Seize the opportunity to strengthen its underground science and engineering program Scientific/Engineering frontier Societal return on investment 2.Initiate immediately the construction of DUSEL (≥2009) A premier facility with unique characteristics able to attract the best projects worlwide Depth (>6000 m.w.e.≈ 6000ft -> 12000 ft biologists) Long term access (≥ 30 years) Easiness of access 24h/day 365 days/yr Highly desirable: Small trailer or ISO 1/2 container (2.4 x 6.1 x2.6 m 3 ) Dust, radon control, low vibration, electromagnetic noise Local technical support, information infrastructure Access to pristine rock Evolutionary: Additional cavities ( e.g. Proton Decay/ Neutrino long base line) Proactive Safety Capability to address unconventional requirements (e.g. challenging safety issues: large cryogenic liquid experiment, fracture motion experiments) Unique combination with accelerators (L≥1000km) Multidisciplinary synergies, intellectual atmosphere.

26. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 26 Recommendations (Draft) 3. Concurrently establish a National Institute for Underground Science and Engineering (NIU) Triple mission: Support technically and scientifically the U.S. research institutions engaged in underground science and engineering Not only design and operate DUSEL but also: Technical support Long term R&D (instrumentation, low background, new approaches) Theory, workshops -> vibrant interdisciplinary intellectual vitality Focus the national underground effort (critical mass, excellence) + coordinate it with other national initiatives (accelerators, Earth Scope, SecureEarth) and other underground labs nationally and internationally ( e.g. SNOLab, Kamioka, Gran Sasso/Modane) Maximize societal benefits Interagency, multidisciplinary collaborations Involvement of industry Education of the next generation of scientists and engineers A better general understanding of frontier science by the public

27. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 27 Initial Program (Draft) 4 phases 1)Before the excavation Physics: R&D and low background counting facility. Earth Sciences/Engineering: Full characterization of the site with a number of instrumented bore holes and imaging. Biology: Use of bore holes for sampling 2)During excavation Earth Sciences/Engineering: Monitoring of rock motion, modification of stress during construction Tests of imaging methods Biology: sampling ahead 3)First suite of experiments See next two slides 4)Design potential extensions in the first ten years

28. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 28 Initial Suite of Experiments (Draft) Deep Campus Biology observatory Deep Biology Drilling Geo/Eng 3 Medium block experiments Dark Matter Double beta Exp. 3 TBD Solar neutrino 2 test/small expt areas Central services Offices etc. Possible extensions large hall e.g for TPC

29. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 29 Initial Suite of Experiments (Draft) Intermediate levels -Low background counting -Underground fabrication facilities, Ge & Cu refining -Potentially: Low vibration facilities for Atomic Molecular and Optical Gravitational research -Outreach module -Nuclear Astrophysics Accelerator -SN burst detectors Geo/Eng -Intermediate level block experiments coordinated to lower level -Fracture motion experiment: Far from rest of of laboratory! -Intermediate biology observatories (coordinated to lower level) -Potential expansions: Megaton neutrino/proton decay

30. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 30 The Right Strategy?

31. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 31 Can we afford DUSEL? MREFC line Covers Facility + NSF contribution to first suite of experiments (NSF-DOE working group) =Line item Strategy is to involve Geo/Bio/Eng to secure place in MRE queue  Initially bring new resources to all communities Long term costs Cost of operation will be eventually borne in part by the fields National Institute: a question of priority to underground research Facility operation and safety: potentially important discriminant Water pumping, hoist operation, maintenance Easiness of access Installation (e.g. 100-200 man-yrs of SNO, small experiments) Emergency interventions, maintenance was context of horizontal /vertical access debate Impact on future projects: Although multidisciplinary, MRE would be seen as Physics possibly impacting other NSF initiatives But: different scale from ILC enabling possible extensions e.g. Proton Decay/Long Baseline neutrino detector

32. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 32 Comparison with Other Strategies Expansion of SNOLab Limits of cooperation of INCO Not everything needs to be deep Not suitable for multidisciplinary enterprise Strong reduction of benefits to U.S. A shallow site + SNOLab + subsequent deepening e.g. Soudan (existing v beam) + SNOLab Pioneer tunnel (already dug) + SNOLab 2000 m.w.e. indeed suitable for a number of experiments (automatic in most facility) But attempting to perform frontier experiments at lower depth with shielding because of lack of space is risky (when given the choice teams choose depth) only a temporary stop-gap Lack of space may inhibit rapid exploration of new ideas A subsequent extension is not well adapted to MREFC structure Sequential approach delays a frontier facility

33. B.Sadoulet DUSEL Henderson 5/4/06 33 Conclusions Frontier Science: we need the depth (and ≥30 yrs access) DUSEL well justified from a global multidisciplinary perspective (NSF) Widens the underground frontier Home for the most important experiments foreseen in Physics Interesting frontier for biology Alignment with fundamental questions of earth science, critical data for engineering Flexible space for new unexpected ideas Multidisciplinary intellectual atmosphere, e.g. neutrino tomography! National Institute for Underground Science and Engineering: Technical support Long term R&D (instrumentation, low background) Focus and coordination Involvement of other sectors and education/outreach Significant chance to obtain necessary resources ≠ incremental approaches MREFC costs are initially not borne by community But beware of large operating costs Time scale is long: start now!