Fourth Generation Light Source for UVA Blaine Norum Department of Physics 3 May, May 2011

Takeaway Messages 1) DOE has approved CD-0 (Mission Need) for NGLS at $1-1.5B based on strong science case. 2) Document is not yet released so we don’t know if it is site specific to LBNL (very unlikely, but who knows). No firm schedule or funding identified yet. 3) JLab will have the largest WBS element, a 2.5 GeV superconducting linac and maybe cryogenics and FEL physics (regardless of site). 4) Virginia has potential to compete for this but it would require a major effort ($3M) over next 3 years to mount realistic challenge to LBNL. 5) We need: Strong regional political support, commitment to build significant user base at universities, donation of site, well-vetted system design 3 May 2011

DOE BES Science Grand Challenges Directing Matter and Energy; 5 Challenges for Science & the Imagination 1. How do we control materials processes at the level of the electrons? Pump-probe time dependent dynamics 2. How do we design and perfect atom- and energy-efficient synthesis of new forms of matter with tailored properties? PLD, photo-chemistry, XRS 3. How do remarkable properties of matter emerge from the complex correlations of atomic and electronic constituents and how can we control these properties? Pump-probe time dependent dynamics, XRS 4. How can we master energy and information on the nanoscale to create new technologies with capabilities rivaling those of living things? Pump-probe time dependent dynamics, XRS 5. How do we characterize and control matter away -- especially very far away -- from equilibrium? Non-linear dynamics, ultra-bright sources 3 May 2011

Scientific Community Support 3 May 2011

On-going Research & Development United States – LBNL, Cornell, Wisconsin, BNL, JLAB UK – Daresbury Japan – KEK Germany – DESY 3 May 2011

Next Generation Light Source (NGLS) – a new class of X-ray laser Array of (ultimately 10) configurable FEL beamlines 100 kHz CW pulse rate Capability of one FEL having MHz rate Independent control Each FEL configured for experimental requirements Beam transport and switching ~2 GeV CW superconducting linac Laser systems, timing & synchronization Low-emittance, MHz bunch rate photo-gun ≤ 1 nC ≤1 mm-mrad Injector Laser heater Bunch compressor Upgrade potential

Current Status CD-0 “Mission Need” has been approved CD-0 not site-specific but LBNL expects it Independent cost review has been performed: $1 – $1.5B JLAB will lead design, development, prototyping of accelerator and related devices 3 May 2011

Scope of Project Construction Budget B$ Ops Budget - ~15% of CB ~ M$/yr Personnel ~ Users ~ at any time Footprint ~ 100 acres, ~70 flat for machine Expansion ~ acres would be attractive 3 May 2011

Historical context In ’80’s, MIT (Bates) center of electronuclear physics, expected next generation facility – JLAB (VA) In ’90’s, MIT (FBML) center of high magnetic field research, expected next generation facility – FSU In ’00’s, Argonne (ATLAS) center of heavy ion research, expected next generation facility - MSU 3 May 2011

Our strengths Construction: 1.labor costs 2/3 of Bay area 2.Geology & geography advantageous 3.Proximity to JLAB Operations: 1.Labor costs 20% lower → M$/yr 2.Electricity ½ Bay area → M$/yr 3.Charlottesville/Albemarle attractive and affordable 3 May 2011

Our Strengths (cont.) Political 1.No light sources in Southeast; 4 in Bay area 3 May 2011

Our Strengths (cont.) 2.Virginia not bankrupt – state supported and continues to support JLAB; can be expected to support NGLS. Michigan state support crucial to MSU getting the 500 M$ Facility for Rare Isotope Beams 3 May 2011

LBNL Strengths R & D underway at 2-3 M$/yr Center of activity Already a DOE funded laboratory UC Berkeley has strong record The same strengths MIT had! 3 May 2011

Path Forward Strong commitment from UVA - ~3 M$ over roughly three years – ~ 1 M$ for JLAB site specific R&D – ~ 1 M$ for workshops, travel, consultants, etc. – ~ 1 M$ to hire 2 mid-career prominent X-ray users * Site including inducements * Faculty positions connected to facility * Only required if facility at UVA 3 May 2011

Constraints JLAB support absolutely required Anxious to collaborate but operated by JSA (SURA & CSC) → must support any SURA sponsored proposal; Virginia proposal has edge due to continued state support of JLAB VTech “interested”; C. Steger chairs SURA CoP 3 May 2011

Strategy Timely commitment to project Garner local then state support Present comprehensive proposal to SURA Prepare for a very intense few years! 3 May 2011

Conclusions Tremendous opportunity for UVA, Charlottesville/Albemarle, Virginia – UVA will be major international research center – C/A will have new jobs in clean industry – Virginia will enhance reputation as dynamic Return on investment significant if successful Risks nontrivial but managable 3 May 2011