Transcript DOE Office of High Energy Physics Report to the

Department of Energy
Office of Science
DOE Office of High Energy Physics
Report to the
Astronomy and Astrophysics Advisory Committee
Dennis Kovar
Acting Associate Director for the
Office of High Energy Physics,
Office of Science, DOE
February 11, 2008
1
Department of Energy
DOE Office of
High Energy Physics (HEP)
Office of Science
The mission of the High Energy Physics (HEP) program is to understand how our universe
works at its most fundamental level.
• We do this by discovering the most elementary constituents of matter and energy, probing the
interactions between them, and exploring the basic nature of space and time itself.
• To enable these discoveries, HEP supports theoretical and experimental research in both
elementary particle physics and fundamental accelerator science and other supporting
technology.
Includes the understanding of the connections between
the physics of elementary particles and the physics
that determines the structure of the universe, leading
to the investigation of very high energy cosmic
acceleration mechanisms
DOE HEP Office provides 90% of the federal
support for High Energy Physics research and
coordinates with NSF, NASA and international
efforts
2
Department of Energy
The Scientific Opportunities of HEP
Office of Science
The [National Academy EPP 2010] committee arrived at three strong conclusions regarding
Both particle physics and the U.S. role in this global scientific and technological enterprise:
 “Particle physics plays an essential role in the broader enterprise of the physical sciences.
 It inspires U.S. students, attracts talent from around the world, and drives critical intellectual
and technological advances in other fields.”
 “Although setting priorities is essential, it also is critical to maintain a diverse portfolio of
activities in particle physics, from theory to accelerator R&D to the construction and support of
new experimental facilities.
 The committee believes that accelerators will remain an essential component of the program,
since some critical scientific questions cannot be explored in any other manner.”
 “The field of elementary particle physics is entering an era of unprecedented potential. New
experimental facilities, including accelerators, space-based experiments, underground laboratories,
and critical precision measurements of various kinds, offer a variety of ways to explore the hidden
nature of matter, energy, space, and time.
 The availability of technologies that can explore directly an energy regime known as the
Terascale is especially exciting.” ……
The results of the committee’s analysis have led to its chief recommendation:
 “The United States should remain globally competitive in elementary particle physics by
playing a leading role in the worldwide effort to aggressively study Terascale physics.” 3
Department of Energy
The Status of HEP
Office of Science
 HEP is at an extraordinary productive and exciting period
 with significant discoveries anticipated at the energy frontier and in particle
astrophysics and neutrino science.
 The FY 2008 Omnibus Bill funding has resulted in significant loss of
 HEP scientific productivity and workforce, and;
 U.S. credibility as an interagency/international partner
 Planning is addressing the EPP 2010 priorities:
 exploration of the Terascale at the LHC;
 investment in R&D for an international linear collider, and;
 expansion of the program in astrophysics and internationalization of a staged
program in neutrino physics.
 Current circumstances are challenging for the U.S. program:
 the imminent closing of U.S. HEP facilities;
 the recognition that the earliest possible start for the ILC will be in the middle of the
next decade, and;
 the budget uncertainties for HEP (all of Science).
4
Department of Energy
DOE Office of
High Energy Physics (HEP)
Office of Science
DOE HEP supports:
 Operations of User Facilities (Tevatron, NuMi, B-Factory)
 Fabrication and operations of experiments
 Researchers and students (6 National Laboratories and >100 universities)
 R&D for next generation accelerators and instrumentation
DOE HEP Program
Accelerator-based physics
• Proton based:
Fermilab Tevatron (energy frontier) – planned to end operations in FY 2009
-- Currently reviewing possibility of running in FY 2010
Future: CERN LHC
(energy frontier) – to start in FY 2009
Fermilab NuMi
(neutrino studies)
 Electron based: SLAC B-Factory
(test of standard model) – terminates in FY 2008
Non-accelerator physics
 Atmospheric, solar, reactor neutrinos (SuperK, KamLAND, SNO, Daya Bay, etc.)
 Particle Astrophysics/Cosmology
(GLAST, Auger, VERITAS, SDSS, CDMS-II, AMS, etc.)
Theory
 Elementary Particle Theory
 Major Computing efforts: (simulations, data management, etc.)
Technology R&D
 R&D for accelerator & detector technologies
 R&D for International Linear Collider (ILC)
5
Today’s Major Tools:
U.S. HEP Accelerator Experiments
Tevatron at Fermilab
Neutrinos @ MINOS
Department of Energy
Office of Science
B-factory at SLAC
6
Department of Energy
Tomorrow’s Major Tools
at the Energy Frontier
Office of Science
CMS@CERN
Large Hadron Collider (LHC)@CERN
7
ATLAS@CERN
Department of Energy
FY 2008 Appropriations
Office of Science
• Funding for DOE Office Science (SC) increased by 4.6% compared to FY 2007
• This included “earmarks” so funding going to peer-review SC program +2.5%
• There were winners and losers
• Computing/biological/environmental – increased from request
• High energy/nuclear physics/basic energy science – decreased from request
• Funding was reduced for the ITER project (fusion energy sciences (FES))
• High Energy was only one (except for FES/ITER) that decreased from FY 2007
• Overall DOE SC funding was reduced by $503M (-11%) from FY 2008 President’s Request
• Does not support President’s American Competitive Initiative (ACI) - amount
• Is at great variance with President’s FY 2009 Request that support ACI - priorities
• DOE SC HEP funding is last few years has fluctuated
• FY 2008 funding is a -8.4% (-$63M) reduction from FY 2007
• FY 2008 funding is a 12.5% (-93M) reduction from FY 2008 Request
• Looking back to FY 2005 – HEP program has lost the operating funds of the B-Factory
8
Department of Energy
Office of Science
Office of Science
FY 2008 Appropriation
(dollars in thousands)
FY 2005
Enacted
Approp.*
FY 2006
Enacted
Approp.*
FY 2007
Enacted
Approp.*
FY 2008
Request
FY 2008
Enacted
Approp.*
FY 2008 Enacted Approp. vs.
FY 2007 Enacted
FY 2008 Request
Approp.
Basic Energy Sciences……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
1100805 1134557 1250250 1498497 1269902 +19,652
+1.6% -228,595
-15.3%
Advanced Scientific Computing Res.……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
231649
234684
283415
340198
351173 +67,758
+23.9% +10,975
+3.2%
Biological & Environmental Research……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
500503
451131
483495
531897
544397 +60,902
+12.6% +12,500
+2.4%
High Energy Physics………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
733622
716694
751786
782238
688317
-63,469
-8.4%
-93,921
-12.0%
Nuclear Physics……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
403320
367034
422766
471319
432726
+9,960
+2.4%
-38,593
-8.2%
Fusion Energy Sciences……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
272754
287644
318950
427850
286548
-32,402
-10.2% -141,302
-33.0%
Science Laboratory Infrastructure…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
41902
41684
41986
78956
64861 +22,875
+54.5%
-14,095
-17.9%
SC Program Direction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
154031
159118
166469
184934
177779 +11,310
+6.8%
-7,155
-3.9%
Workforce Development……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
7571
7120
7952
11000
8044
+92
+1.2%
-2,956
-26.9%
Safeguards & Security………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
72773
73630
75830
76592
75946
+116
+0.2%
-646
-0.8%
SBIR/STTR (SC)……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
0
0
0
0
0
——
——
——
——
Subtotal, SC………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
3518930 3473296 3802899 4403481 3899693 +96,794
+2.5% -503,788
-11.4%
Approp. versus FY 2006
9.5%
12.3%
Request versus FY 2006
26.8%
Congressional Directed Projects**………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
91608
128700
0
0
123623 +123,623
—— +123,623
——
Subtotal, SC………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
3610538 3601996 3802899 4403481 4023316 +220,417
+5.8% -380,165
-8.6%
Coralville, IA project rescission……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
0
0
0
0
-44569
-44,569
——
-44,569
——
Security charge to reimbursable cust.……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
-5605
-5605
-5605
-5605
-5605
——
——
——
——
General reduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
0
0
0
0
0
——
——
——
——
Use of prior year balances…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
-5062
0
0
0
0
——
——
——
——
Total, SC………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
3599871 3596391 3797294 4397876 3973142 +175,848
+4.6% -424,734
-9.7%
* The enacted appropriation column reflects the original appropriation amount before the SBIR/STTR reprogramming and appropriation transfer and
9
other approved reprogrammings. It includes enacted rescissions, whether the rescission was part of the original appropriations bill or enacted subsequently
Department of Energy
The DOE HEP Budget in FY 2008
Office of Science
• FY 2008 Omnibus Bill provides $63M less than FY 2007 (-8.5%)
• Language specifies:
• no funding for NOvA
• ILC R&D and SRF infrastructure funding capped at ~1/4 requested
• Large fraction of this reduction supported people
• Fermilab and SLAC (because of ILC/SRF funding) impacted most severely
• Magnitude of reduction and occurring ¼ through the Fiscal Year limited options
• One cannot layoff people immediately (takes time and there are severance costs)
• Layoffs alone could not meet the bottomline (nor does it make sense)
• Needed to look at large non-salary costs (i.e.; facility operations)
• But even with significant layoffs – each facilities could run<1/2 planned weeks
• Decision had to be made quickly – delay in layoffs – decreases running weeks
• Came to choice of running the Fermilab or B-Factory
• Operation of the Tevatron in FY 2008 was judged more important
• Scientific priority
• Preserves options for the future U.S. program
10
Department of Energy
The DOE HEP Program in FY 2008
Office of Science
HEP Plan for FY 2008:
• Core Research at approximately FY2007 level of effort
• Tevatron and LHC programs supported
• Projects (except NOvA) go forward on planned profiles
• Other (non-ILC and SRF) technology R&D continues as planned
11
Department of Energy
FY 2009 Budget Request
Office of Science
Office of Science
FY 2009 Budget Request to Congress
(dollars in thousands)
FY 2007
Approp.
FY 2008
Approp.
FY 2009
Request to
Congress
FY 2009 Request to
Congress vs. FY 2008
Approp.
Basic Energy Sciences…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
1,221,380 1,269,902
1,568,160 +298,258
+23.5%
Advanced Scientific Computing Research……………………………………………………………………………………………………
275,734
351,173
368,820
+17,647
+5.0%
Biological and Environmental Research………………………………………………………………………………………………………
480,104
544,397
568,540
+24,143
+4.4%
High Energy Physics……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
732,434
689,331
804,960 +115,629
+16.8%
Nuclear Physics…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
412,330
432,726
510,080
+77,354
+17.9%
Fusion Energy Sciences…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
311,664
286,548
493,050 +206,502
+72.1%
Science Laboratories Infrastructure……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
41,986
66,861
110,260
+43,399
+64.9%
Science Program Direction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
166,469
177,779
203,913
+26,134
+14.7%
Workforce Dev. for Teachers & Scientists……………………………………………………………………………………………………
7,952
8,044
13,583
+5,539
+68.9%
Safeguards and Security (gross)………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
75,830
75,946
80,603
+4,657
+6.1%
SBIR/STTR (SC funding)………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
86,936
——
——
——
——
Subtotal, Office of Science……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
3,812,819 3,902,707
4,721,969 +819,262
+21.0%
Adjustments*………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
23,794
70,435
——
-70,435
——
Total, Office of Science………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
3,836,613 3,973,142
4,721,969 +748,827
+18.8%
* Adjustments include SBIR/STTR funding transferred from other DOE offices (FY 2007 only), a charge to reimbursable customers for their share of safeguards and
security costs (FY 2007 and FY 2008), Congressionally-directed projects and a rescission of a prior year Congressionally-directed project (FY 2008 only), and offsets
for the use of prior year balances to fund current year activities (FY 2007 and FY 2008).
12
Department of Energy
DOE HEP Request for FY 2009
Office of Science
President’s Request for FY2009:
– HEP Budget is $805.0M
– This is an +17% increase from FY2008 appropriation
– Puts HEP program back on track of American Competitiveness Initiative that
doubles physical sciences funding over 10 years
There are a number of significant program shifts:
– Some are driven by FY2008 reductions
• Reduced and re-focused ILC R&D program
• NOvA profile delayed one year
– Others reflect the evolution of HEP strategic plan in the LHC era
• B-Factory run completed
– begin ramp-down and D&D. Data analysis will continue for a few years
• Tevatron running full-out
– either discovery or significant limits on New Physics in advance of LHC
• U.S. researchers in leading roles at LHC
• Joint Dark Energy Mission R&D ramping up
– to complete conceptual design and select a mission concept
13
Department of Energy
DOE HEP Strategic Plan
Office of Science
A central challenge for the U.S. and international HEP community is defining
and executing a robust and balanced scientific program that includes a collider
at the energy frontier.
The ILC is widely viewed as that collider, but:
– It is a complex, challenging, multi-billion $ investment
– It requires international commitments
– The ILC physics case and some design parameters will depend on results from
the LHC that will probably not be available for at least a few years
Therefore in FY 2009, we propose to:
– Continue support for a U.S. role in the global ILC R&D effort, but focused on
areas where the U.S. is the acknowledged leader
– Maintain a balanced scientific program that will preserve options for U.S.
leadership in targeted areas, both in the LHC era and whatever comes next
14
Department of Energy
DOE HEP Technology R&D Plan
Office of Science
The overall strategy for accelerator technology R&D has both near- and long-term
components to provide options for the U.S. program over the next decade:
– Short-term R&D focused on development of a high intensity proton source for an
enhanced scientific program in neutrinos and rare decays at Fermilab
– Mid-term R&D directed at developing superconducting RF (SRF) technology and
infrastructure, for both the HEP program and wider scientific applications of SRF
accelerators
– The focused ILC R&D program (as discussed above)
– Long-term R&D directed at advanced accelerator technologies that hold the promise
of transformational change. A new test facility for Advanced Accelerator R&D
concepts is included in the FY2009 President’s Request.
15
Department of Energy
FY 2009
Office of Science
We are at a pivot point, I believe, in the U.S. not only for HEP, but for DOE SC programs and
the physical sciences
• There is support for research and development – but there is a debate about how much should go
for short-term, mid-term and long-term (basic) research
• The Administration is strongly supporting long-term basic research
• The FY 2009 Budget Request provides funding for doubling funding for physical sciences
• SC Budget increases by +21 % (HEP increases by +16.8%)
• There is the expectation that Congress will not pass a funding bill until President leaves
• So expectation of a Continuing Resolution (funding at previous year level) for 6 months
• For HEP in the U.S. - it can go in a couple of directions
• The US community has to develop a compelling realistic vision for the a U.S. program then they need to support it
• I believe that this is essential if we are to change the direction of the U.S. program that was
implied in the FY 2008 Omnibus Bill.
• This will not be possible unless it is part of a coordinated international plan
16
Department of Energy
Scientific Directions – HEPAP (P5)
Office of Science
To obtain input to develop this plan, DOE and NSF have asked the HEP advisory
committee (HEPAP) for prioritized scientific recommendations that are consistent
with current budgetary guidance.
HEPAP has been engaged to develop a 10-plan consistent with four budget scenarios:
•
•
•
•
Constant effort at the FY 2008 (Omnibus) funding level
Constant effort at the FY 2007 funding level
Doubling of funding starting in FY 2007
Additional funding above the previous level, in priority order, associated with
specific activities needed to mount a leadership program that addresses the scientific
opportunities identified in the National Academy (“EPP2010”) report.
Preliminary Comments – March 15, 2008
Final Report – May, 2008
17
Department of Energy
The Plan for HEP
Office of Science
 The goal must be a world-class, vigorous, and productive program, which
 recognizes the internationalization of particle physics,
 incorporates recent and likely budget realities, and
 ensures the vitality of the field for the next 10-20 years
 A plan for U.S. HEP must be developed that is supported by
 the scientific community, the Administration, Congress and the public.
 The scientific community’s role is critically important:
 The community, through HEPAP and P5, is developing the science-driven plan.
 To assist with the realization of this plan, the just released FY2009 Budget Request maintains
future options for HEP. The plan will be used to articulate the case for the FY 2010 Budget
Request.
 The community needs to make the case of the science and benefits to the nation to Congress
and the public.
18
Department of Energy
FY 2009 HEP Budget
Office of Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2007
Actual
FY 2008
Appropriation
FY 2009
Request
vs FY 2008
High Energy Physics
Proton Accelerator-Based Physics
343,633
368, 825
419,577
+ 14 %
Electron Accelerator-Based Physics
101,284
65,594
48,772
- 25 %
Non-Accelerator Physics
60,655
74,199
86,482
+ 17 %
Theoretical Physics
59,955
60,234
63,036
+5%
186,259a
120,479
187,093
+0%
751,786a
689,331b
804,960
+17 %
(51,300)
(19,817)
(--)
Advanced Technology R&D
Total, High Energy Physics
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
(SLAC) Linac Operations (non-add)
The SLAC linear accelerator (linac) supports operations of the B-factory (funded by HEP) and will also support operations of the Linac Coherent
Light Source (currently under construction and funded by Basic Energy Sciences (BES)). With the completion of B-factory operations in FY 2008, SC
has been transitioning funding of the SLAC linac from HEP to BES, with FY 2008 representing the third and final year of joint funding with BES.
aTotal includes $19,352,000 transferred to SBIR and STTR programs.
b includes an approved reprogramming of prior year balances of $1,014,000
19
Department of Energy
FY 2009 HEP Budget Cross-Cut
Office of Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2007
Actual
FY 2008
Appropriation
(January AFP)
FY 2009
Request
vs FY 2008
High Energy Physics
Core Research (incl. Accel. Science)
280,768
282,075
294,497
+4 %
88,602
50,784
84,476
+66 %
290,958
283,602
286,115
+1 %
Completed and Planned Projects
13,550
17,440
66,700
+382 %
R&D Initiatives (ILC, JDEM)
48,082
24,431
45,030
+84 %
Infrastructure
10,474
12,532
7,754
- 38 %
19,352a
17,653
20,388
+ 15 %
751,786a
689,331b
804,960
+ 17 %
Technology R&D (non-ILC)
Facility Operations
SBIR/STTR
Total, High Energy Physics
aTotal includes $19,352,000 transferred to SBIR and STTR programs.
b includes an approved reprogramming of prior year balances of $1,014,000
20
Department of Energy
Current MIE Projects
Office of Science
Neutrinos
(EQU costs ONLY; Dollars in Thousands)
Total
Project
Cost (TPC)
Total
Estimated
Cost (TEC)
Prior
Year
Appropriations
Large Hadron Collider–CMS
Detector, CERN
147,050
71,789
70,539
1,250
—
—
FY 2007
NuMI Off-axis Neutrino Appearance
(NOvA) Detector, Fermilab
270,000
TBD
—
500
—
7,000
FY 2014
16,800
10,700
—
—
5,000
4,900
FY 2010
32,000 34,000
TBD
—
500
3,960
13,000
FY 2012
4,680
2,980
—
—
1,980
1,000
FY 2009
5,0007,000
TBD
—
—
—
500
FY 2012
24,100 26,700
TBD
—
—
3,610
7,500
FY 2011
15,00019,000
TBD
—
—
—
8,000
FY 2013
Main Injector Experiment v-A
(MINERvA), Fermilab
Reactor Neutrino Detector, Daya
Bay, China
Accel
Particle-Astro
Tokai-to-Kamioka (T2K) Near
Detector, Tokai, Japan
Cryogenic Dark Matter Survey, 25kg
Detector, SNOLab, Canada
Dark Energy Survey, Cerro-Tololo
Inter-American Observatory, Chile
Advanced Accelerator R&D Test
Facility, TBD
FY
2007
FY
2008
FY
2009
Completion
Date
NOTE: Except for CMS, MINERvA, and T2K, all TPCs are preliminary estimates (projects have not yet been baselined)
21
Department of Energy
Dark Matter Searches
Office of Science
Cryogenic Dark Matter Search (CDMS-II)
• Direct detection of dark matter with ultracold Ge in
Soudan Mine in Minnesota
• Data-taking: Full ops with 5 towers (~5kg active mass)
started in 2006 & continuing in 2008.
• New results on exclusion limits on dark matter cross
section will be out soon.
.
Axion Dark Matter Search (ADMX) experiment
 at Lawrence Livermore Lab in CA
 Data taking planned in 2008
CDMS-25kg upgrade
 R&D in FY2008; fabrication starts in FY2009
 Deploy in SNOLab by 2012
Evaluating technologies for future as recommended by
DMSAG
CDMS detector
22
Department of Energy
Dark Energy
Office of Science
Experiments
Operating experiments (Stage II):
 Supernova Cosmology Project, Nearby Supernova Factory, SDSS-II
Providing R&D funds for large-scale experiments (Stage IV):
 Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST)
• Collaboration proposing that DOE fund the camera construction, led by SLAC
 JDEM – next generation space-based experiment
• Continue R&D for SNAP concept, led by LBNL
• FY07 R&D funding for DESTINY and ADEPT
Grants Program
In 2007, DOE/HEP supported R&D in key areas identified by the “Dark Energy
Task Force report”
 Received 32 Dark Energy R&D proposals
• Partially funded 21 – projects include theory, ground and space ($3M total)
In 2008, DOE/HEP again plans to provide “generic” dark energy support
 Deadline for proposals was 12/18/07
• Received 70 proposals requesting ~ $15.2M involving 198 researchers
23
Department of Energy
Dark Energy - JDEM
Office of Science

Both BEPAC and the FY 2008 Omnibus Bill gave guidance that DOE and
NASA should work together on JDEM.

DOE, NASA and OSTP have been meeting regularly to lay out the plan
for a mission
 Our target is:
• Announcement of Opportunity in 2008
• Selection in 2009
• Launch in the middle of the next decade
24
Department of Energy
Dark Energy Survey (DES)
Office of Science
DES is a Stage III experiment that will provide multiple
methods to study dark energy
 DOE is fabricating the DECam camera to be installed
on the Blanco 4m telescope in Chile
 Collaboration with NSF, UK, Spain, Brazil
 Joint DOE/NSF review held January 2008: DECam
ready for baselining.
 Long-lead procurements beginning in 2008; operations
in 2012.
DECam
Camera
25
Department of Energy
Gamma-ray Astrophysics - Space
Office of Science
Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope (GLAST)
 High-energy (~20-200 GeV) gamma rays using
HEP detector technology
 Collaboration on the primary instrument, the Large
Area Telescope (LAT), between NASA, DOE,
France, Italy, Japan, Sweden
 Jan 2006 – LAT instrument fabrication complete
 Currently undergoing final environmental testing at
NRL & will ship to Kennedy Space Center in March
 Renaming contest on the www
 May 16, 2008 - GLAST launch scheduled
LAT Detector during assembly
26
Department of Energy
Cosmic Ray Astrophysics
Office of Science
Pierre Auger Observatory – Argentina
 Scientific goal is to observe, understand and
characterize the very highest energy cosmic rays.
 Collaboration with NSF and 17 other countries
 Installed over 3000 km2 site
• All fluorescence telescopes are operating
• 1570 (out of 1600) surface Cherenkov
detectors deployed
 Collaboration is working on R&D for AugerSouth upgrades & an Auger-North design report
Nov. 2007 results:
Sources of highest energy cosmic rays are most
likely active galactic nuclei !
Fluorescence telescope
27
Department of Energy
Future Prospects
Office of Science
Proposals for next-generation tools are starting to come in, or are expected soon:
 AGIS
 Auger North
 HAWC
 BOSS/SDSS-III
 + more
An important part of DOE/HEP P5 process and evaluation will be asking how various
proposals and directions impact our mission:
 “understand how our universe works at its most fundamental level”
28