Developing STFC’s Science and Technology strategy

1. Developing STFC’s Science and Technology strategy John Womersley Director, Science and Technology Strategy November 2007

2. Outline • Introduction to STFC’s Science Strategy processes • UK Large facilities roadmap and consultation • Technology Strategy and Gateway Centres • Comprehensive Spending Review 2007

3. Who are we? • The Council was created on April 1, 2007 • It is responsible for • fundamental research in particle physics, nuclear physics, astronomy, space • major UK facilities for the physical and life sciences • synchrotrons, light sources, lasers, neutrons • national laboratories at RAL, Daresbury, UKATC • international science projects • CERN, ESO, ESA, ILL, ESRF… • Over 2000 staff and an annual budget of over £700M

4. The Science we Address Some examples • Why is there a universe? • What is the origin of mass? • Was there ever life on Mars? • How are the chemical elements created? • How can we design better treatments for cancer? • How do cells work? • How can we create new materials to store energy?

5. Origins understanding our place in the universe Futures solutions for society and the planet Competencies technology and facilities Collaboration universities, industry, other nations

6. World Class Science Fund the best research, working for the UK as a whole Adventurousnot “solid” Doing new thingsnot doing the same thing with smaller errors Influencing a projectnot tagging along Focused on excellencenot make sure we are doing a bit of everything

7. Science strategy We are currently engaged in the process of • Identifying and prioritising the scientific opportunities likely to arise within the next fifteen years or so, understanding the scientific potential, the competitive context, the technologies required for their success and an estimate of the cost • Prioritising short to medium-term investment projects in the context of funds available • Carrying out a programmatic review of current projects and programmes

8. The strategy must • Provide the guidebook for the council’s detailed investment plan Which means it must • Connect with our research communities and the other research councils • Be clearly communicated and explained to staff and stakeholders • Be an international strategy • Be a people strategy, nurturing our core competencies and skills • Integrate both science and technology • Connect with plans for to develop the Harwell and Daresbury sites as science and innovation campuses

9. In tres partes divisa est… Facilities In-house expertise Science Strategy Team Science Committees Peer Review

10. Committees and peer review Council Science Board Science Committees PPAN1 PALS2 AGP PPRP … ASTAB GrantsPanels PPGP Projects PeerReview Panel(s) Accelerator Science and Technology Advisory Board NPGP 1 Particle Physics, Astronomy and Nuclear Physics 2 Physical and Life Sciences

11. STFC Science Board • Professor Sir Peter Knight, Imperial College (chair) • Professor Jenny Thomas, UCL (deputy chair) • Professor Gabriel Aeppli, London Centre for Nanotechnology • Professor John Ellis, CERN • Professor Monica Grady, Open University • Professor Matt Grifffin, University of Cardiff • Professor Douglas Kell, University of Manchester • Professor Tony Ryan, University of Sheffield

12. PPAN science committee • Professor Walter Gear, Cardiff (chair) • Dr. Jordan Nash, IC/CERN (deputy chair) • Dr. David Barnes, Aberystwyth • Dr. Iain Bertram, Lancaster • Professor Michael Bode, LJMU • Professor Jonathan Butterworth, UCL • Professor Yvonne Elsworth, Birmingham • Professor Brian Fulton, York • Professor Ruth Gregory, Durham • Professor Sheila Rowan, Glasgow

13. PALS science committee • Professor Tim Wess, Cardiff (chair) • Professor Chick Wilson, Glasgow (deputy Chair) • Dr. Katherine Brown, Imperial College • Professor Carole Goble, Manchester • Professor Michael Gunn, Birmingham • Professor Ken McKendrick, Herriott-Watt • Professor Steven Rose, Imperial College • Professor Phil Withers, Manchester • Professor Paul Attfield, Edinburgh • (vacancy)

14. Links to communities • An essential component • Role was played in the past by PPARC’s advisory panels, with varying degree of success • PPAN and PALS committees have been charged to come up with proposed mechanisms • Will try to make use of existing professional societies and user groups where appropriate • Please feel you can talk to us or to the committee members

15. Saying no • Resources are limited • We will need to say “no” to good science • This is a real shame • but we can’t borrow (or print) money And if we’re going to say “no” • Best to say “no” sooner • Best to say “no” to whole projects

16. Proteins or protons? • How to compare projects in very different areas? • Viki Weisskopf’s diagram [Physics Today, May 1967] • Good proposals lie at (or beyond) the boundary • Goal is to push the boundary upwards and to the right Intrinsic interest or Science Impact Longer term payoff 1 2 4 3 External impact Short term payoff

17. Letter to The Times, August 27, 2007 Sir, Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, says “the best science more and more depends on international collaborations. No single nation can stand alone successfully in its science policy.” (letters, August, 23). I couldn’t agree more. What I would disagree with is his assertion that UK policymakers are being driven by “short-term political concerns”. The Government fully recognises the importance of international collaboration on scientific research. In fact, recent figures show that nearly 40 per cent of UK scientific output over the past five years involved international collaboration – a 50 per cent increase compared with the previous five years. Britain has a proud tradition of excellence in science and we must ensure that continues. We need to be world class at both basic research and translating the outcomes of that research. However, there should be no suggestion that basic research will suffer as a result of the drive to achieve the more effective use of research for Britain. That the Government has doubled science spending in real terms in the last decade serves as testament to our commitment to scientific research. JOHN DENHAM Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills

18. STFC criteria • Scientific impact and timeliness • Does it offer the potential for breakthroughs in its area? • Economic impact • Societal impact • Education, outreach, training/skills, public policy priorities • Level of UK leadership or UK impact • Breadth of community served • Risk • Match with the views of other research councils and communities • Coherence and synergy across programme • does it enhance and/or exploit existing facilities or subscriptions • does it exploit our unique capabilities and/or skills base • match to DSIC/HSIC campus developments • The European context, ESFRI… • The global context, US, India/China…

19. Large Facilities Roadmap • Update on 2005 roadmap • To include any projects that we may wish to fund through the Large Facilities Capital Fund (as before) • But also to include major projects funded through the Council’s base level of support, subscriptions etc.  A broad view of research infrastructures

20. STFC Projects Diamond phase 3 Materials Innovation Institute Sapphire ISIS TS2 phase 3

21. STFC Projects 4GLS ESRF upgrade Hartree Centre Computational Science

22. STFC Projects HIPER ELI Future neutron sources: ESS/MW neutron source ILL 20/20 upgrade DIPOLE laser

23. STFC Projects European ELT Next generation Gravitational wave observatory FAIR SKA

24. STFC Projects International Linear Collider LHC upgrades Underground science Neutrinos, dark matter Neutrino factory

25. XFEL • Project “launched” on 5th June • This means DESY is now authorised to spend • XFEL GmbH to be set up by end of year • Our goal is to maximise our in-kind contributions within the £30M already allocated in LFCF • Pixel detector, streak camera…

26. FAIR • FAIR “start event” on November 7th • We have committed £10M from NP programme and have bid to LFCF for additional funds • FAIR GmbH to be set up by middle of 2008

27. How did we get this list? Drawn from • ESFRI roadmap • Roadmaps of the European particle physics, astronomy and particle astrophysics communities • PPARC and CCLRC roadmaps • Facility user communities, UK nuclear physics community

28. Community input • Roadmap consultation period started early November • The roadmap and invitation for input are at http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/resinfra/lfroadmap.htm • Comments are solicited both on the projects in the draft roadmap and those that the community might wish to see added • Deadline is mid January, but sooner is better

29. Large Facilities Capital Fund • UK government funding mechanism for large capital-intensive facilities • £100M/year • Research councils are to agree their priorities and present them to government by end of year • Financial flexibility is limited until ~ 2010, but the CSR07 settlement mentions the possibility of significant increase in the fund if the quality of projects merits it

30. UK Light Source Review • International review committee to give strategic advice on future provision of light sources and high power lasers • Murray Gibson (ANL, Chair), Jerry Hastings (SLAC), Yves Petroff, Wolfgang Sandner (Max Born Inst.) • Met in London July 17-18 • Presentations from broad spectrum of the user community and from project proponents • Diamond and Sapphire • CLF and upgrade plans • XFEL and FLASH • ESRF and upgrade plans • 4GLS, ERLP and SRS • Thoughtful committee, very useful discussions

31. Recommendations • In the Panel’s view in many respects the UK is in excellent shape: • a strong record in light source science; • a strong diverse research community • many innovative accelerator and detector concepts; • Diamond is demonstrating enormous potential; • The Panel expressed very serious reservations about the 4GLS and Sapphire projects as currently proposed • However the Panel clearly stated that if we harness our expertise in the field there is a real opportunity for the UK to develop a world-class facility and to propel us to European leadership

32. Next Steps • We are not putting forward either 4GLS or Sapphire projects to the Large Facilities Capital Fund; instead, we are “pressing the reset button” • We are instituting a new project to deliver a proposal for a Next Light Source • Project needs to be focused on the key science drivers: start by identifying these science drivers and how to address them, in conjunction with the community • We want a proposal ready for consideration by late summer 2009 • We are taking this forward within a new Photon Sciences Department in STFC

33. Technology strategy

34. STFC’s facilities and science programmes drive the development of cutting edge technologies Sensors and instrumentation Advanced materials Computing Engineering and space technology STFC’s capabilities enabletechnology development by industry and HEI researchers Imaging Simulation and modelling Access to facilities Campuses as focal points for collaboration with industry and HEI’s STFC and Technology

35. STFC spends > £20M per year on technology development Generates > £100M per year in industrial technology spending We plan to work with the Technology Strategy Board • to strengthen ties to industry • to apply our technology base to major challenges

36. Strong relevance Some relevance * TSB technology theme areas Applications of STFC’s capabilities

37. Technology Partnerships/Innovation platforms Imaging Centre Hartree Centre Materials Design Institute Detector systemscentre New Technology Gateway centres on campuses Applications of STFC’s capabilities Space technology centre Work with TSB - e.g. Innovation Platforms programme Expand technology partnerships programme

38. Technology Gateway Centres • Joint Institute for Materials Design – integrating materials innovation with advanced characterization • Imaging Solutions Centre – transforming “facilities access” into “solutions access” • Detector Systems Centre - delivering advanced detector technology • Hartree Centre – a step-change in simulation and modelling capabilities for strategic research • Space centre – a new space centre for the UK • Serve as focal points for collaboration, linking laboratories, universities and industry • Technology Strategy Board, other RC’s and RDA’s

39. Accelerators • Accelerator technology is a key enabler across a large fraction of our research • Particle and nuclear physics • Synchrotrons and free electron light sources • Neutron sources • Cockcroft and John Adams Institutes • Accelerator Science and Technology Advisory Board • set up by CCLRC, will continue to advise STFC • International membership, chair Steve Myers (CERN) • Gives advice on strategic direction • Meeting in October 2007 and early 2008

40. Comprehensive Spending Review 2007

41. 2007 Spending Review • The comprehensive spending review settlement presented in October contains an increase for full economic cost and support for the costs associated with the closure of the SRS, otherwise it represented an essentially flat cash allocation. • While the October settlement will enable the Council to pursue much of our planned programme, the costs of running the STFC will increase not just with inflation but also due to the increased costs of operating some new major facilities.  The consequence is that with other minor adjustments the STFC is looking at a deficit of about £80m in its existing programme over the CSR period.

42. Delivery Plan • The Science and Technology Facilities Council’s Delivery Plan for the period 2008/9 to 2011/12 is now available online at http://www.scitech.ac.uk/About/Strat/Council/STFC_DelPlan.aspx • Detailed implementation plans will be developed with the advice of our science advisory structure and in consultation with national stakeholders and our international partners. • A Town Meeting for the research community is being held on Thursday to present the delivery plan.

43. We will aim to… • provide access to world-class facilities and infrastructure to sustain the UK’s scientific competitiveness, and provide key underpinning technologies and expertise • support a healthy and vibrant university community • continue to engage with European and global partners • contribute to increased economic impact particularly through the development of the Science and Innovation Campuses Our Delivery Plan describes how we will move forward on this strategy over the next three years – a period in which • a number of major new facilities are coming on line - Diamond, the LHC and ISIS Target Station 2; • Priorities for large facilities in the UK and Europe need to be developed • The Science and Innovation Campuses will be realised

44. What this requires • We must live within our means, while delivering the core programme and maintaining the financial flexibility to pursue high priority planned programmes and new opportunities • We will implement • a substantial programme of organisational restructuring • withdrawals or cutbacks on planned programmes and facilities • Some programmes will be able to bid back for funding, in competition with new opportunities within any financial flexibility we can generate, but some opportunities will be lost. • constrain our investment in exploitation grants.

45. Particle Physics, Particle Astrophysics and Nuclear Physics • Exploiting the LHC is the highest priority • large investments to date • transformative physics potential • The agreed uplift in the CERN subscription will be funded from the PP grants line • We will cease investment in the International Linear Collider • We do not see a practicable path towards the realisation of this facility, as currently conceived, on a reasonable timescale. • Set targets for reduction in spend in remainder of the PP, PA and NP programmes, based on programmatic review

46. Astronomy • Focus on exploitation of ESO facilities as highest priority • VLT’s + ALMA • R&D for E-ELT and SKA • Withdraw from future investment in the twin 8-metre Gemini telescopes • work with our international partners to try to retain access to Gemini North. • continue to invest in the JCMT to exploit SCUBA 2 • finalise plans for the rundown of our investment in the ING telescopes in the Canaries • cease support for ground-based solar-terrestrial physics facilities. • Set targets for reduction in spend in remainder of programme, based on programmatic review

47. Space Science and Exploration • Focus on exploiting membership of ESA as highest priority • Maintain current level of investment in Aurora programme • Complete construction of UK instruments for the Herschel telescope (launch 2008) and the James Webb Space Telescope (2013) • Subject to programmatic review, reduce post-launch support for existing missions

48. Major facilities • Continue to support Diamond, ISIS and the CLF • Ability to further enhance these facilities will depend on availability of resources • Rundown of SRS at Daresbury, as planned • Develop proposal for next generation light source by 2009, as already announced • Develop plans for substantial restructuring • need to ensure that our in-house effort complements the national skill base in universities and industry and is focussed on the delivery of core operations and technology • we have set efficiency targets and will work with public and private partners in the Harwell and Daresbury Campuses and at the ATC to develop new business models for operation and infrastructure support of each of our laboratories.

49. Campuses • Develop the Daresbury and Harwell Science and Innovation Campuses • at Daresbury focus on creating a national capability in computational science and in accelerator and detector R&D for next generation facilities • at Harwell a broader emphasis but the core will be centred on the major facilities (Diamond, ISIS, CLF) and on technological capabilities in space systems, imaging and sensors • Establish five technology gateway centres as focal points for collaboration, as described earlier • Joint Institute for Materials Design, Imaging Solutions Centre, Detector Systems Centre, Hartree Centre, Space Centre

50. I know you will not be happy Please • Don’t shoot the messenger  • Efforts are underway to ameliorate the situation • When the wagons are circled, please remember to shoot outwards: • stay focused on the big picture • talk about the impact on science as a whole • use particular fields or projects as examples