Europes top tier next generation neutron source

1
ESS an overview.

• Europes top tier next generation neutron source

2
Overview

• The science case
• The technology case
• A mature and cost-effective project
• The socio-economic case
• The European neutron landscape 2015 potential
  and cost-effective investment options
• The political case (Megascience, ERA for currrent
  and new generations of scientists)
• Timeline and political actions undertaken
• Urgent short-term steps

3
The science case process

• As of 95/96 100 scientists involved through
  workshops, conferences, working groups.
• ESF involved Autrans conference ESF-ESS joint
  publication 2001 science case SG ESF at Bonn
  2002
• Document published and presented in Bonn 2002
  Volume II ESS project

4
Science case overview disciplines

• Providing new knowledge in many areas
• Polymers and soft matter
• Biology and biotechnology
• Amorphous and disordered materials
• Solid state physics
• Chemistry and chemical structure
• Engineering and material science
• Earth and environmental sciences
• Liquids
• Particle physics
• Neutron scattering based computer simulation
  movies

5
Science case overview European missions

• Magneto-electronics
• Magnetic neural networks
• Holographic laser discs
• Drug discovery
• Enzymes in food production
• Unveiling ancient technologies
• Methane clathrates energy resource and marine
  hazard
• Templating of nanostructures
• Nanomaterials for transport and traffic

6
Light, neutrons, NMR, Microscopy . to tackle
complexity complementarity
7
Science case some new highlights

• Methane-water clathrates 7x more natural gas
  than in sedimentary rocks getting it out without
  danger for natural disasters requires structural
  and dynamical studies far beyond current neutron
  sources
• Glass transition one of major problems of solid
  state physics (P.W. Anderson) cf. Bob Cywinski
• Bacterial or viral infection through specific
  pathways of protein- protein and protein-nucleic
  acid interactions (host cell and pathogen).
  Genomics, proteomics, interactomics tell us about
  interactions. Biological function structural
  organisation and structural fluctuations. ESS
  will allow
• active site level atomic structure,
• structure of large protein assemblies,
• molecular dynamics of components and assemblies
  in ps and ns timescales,
• on reasonable sample volumes and using in-site
  intracellular studies by in-vivo deuterium
  labelling in complex protein-protein,
  protein-nucleic acid and protein-membrane systems.

8
Technology case

• All major European neutron labs and many
  universities collaborated from 1993 till end 2003
  to produce ESS design 1.3 GeV linac producing
  100kJ pulses on a 5 MW Short Pulse liquid Hg
  Target Station, and 300kJ pulses on a 5 MW Long
  Pulse liquid Hg Target Station.
• Feasibility of MW spallation sources
  demonstrated basis for SNS
• Full range of options 2 TSs, 1 TS, stages, power
  upgradeability of LP TS
• Technical Advisory Committee (US, Japan, CERN,
  DESY etc) very credible design, 5 MW liquid Hg
  TS challenge, but confident eventually solvable

9
Quality

• Quality
• Source
• Instruments (incuding manipulation)
• Infrastructure
• Computing power
• But source cannot be made up for, all others
• can in a number of years

10
ESFRI N WG Comparison
11
The ESS to be built

• SNS 10 () years ESS 5x SNS in many
  areas
• Maintain network of sources
• Cost-effectiveness dictates eventually as many
  instruments as possible
• Start in as complementary a mode as possible
• So we opt for
• Start with 5 MW LP upgradeable to/with
• 10 -15 MW
• 40 instruments (1 TS or 2 TSs, to be decided
  later)
• Low power dedicated TSs (to be decided later)
• As many ancillary and science facilities as
  affordable
• Ready to operate in industry-mode too access
  mode (financial, time), IP arrangements,
  demonstration experiments, standardised
  procedures, etc.)
• Costs 1.0 B2000 investment 80 M2000 /y
  operating. Needs of course updating in first
  coming phase current prices, energy costs,
  steel, upgradeability (for detailed costing see
  Annex)

12
Mature, cost-effective design

• Mature a decision today is technically fully
  warranted!
• Ion source for 5 MW LP exists
• Linac SNS commissioned 08-05 beyond specs
  others as well
• No compression ring
• Liquid Hg Target risks at most at level SNS,
  most likely less
• Instruments Spin-echo, SANS unproblematic ToF
  instruments experience on reactors successful
  experiment with running Lujan as LP source
• Cost-effective
• initial configuration is by far the best you can
  get for the price
• Upgradeability warrants ESS will be with further
  relatively small investments best facility for
  next 40 years or so.

13
Socio-economic case

• Macro-economic argument 1 additional RD
  expenditure 0.17 increase in Total Factor
  Productivity/GDP (OECD, EU).
• Network effects ESS impacts major industries.
  Argument additional new firms in areas of
  regional specialisation
• Marked positive effect on regional and European
  pool of talent. Brain gain instead of brain drain
• Additional effects for whole field of material
  technology industries as a consequence of
  systematic European investments in synchrotrons,
  neutrons, microscopy, NMR etc.
• Money value for firms of solving big (, , )
  problems integrated approach to malaria or TB,
  enhanced oil extraction, .Japanese justification
  for JSNS

14
Where is Europe in 2015? (missed a few smaller
ones)
?
?
?
?
?

• Lost/ to be lost since 2000
• Risø
• Studsvik
• FZ Jülich
• Geesthacht

?
15
Potential and cost-effective investment options

• Criteria
• Performance in light of competition
• Costs
• Impact on European user community
• Simultaneous or sequential affordability
• Three categories
• lt 50 M 50 MltCostslt 200 or 250 M gt 250 M.
• Current options
• ILL to continue (category 1 and 2)
• ESS, ISIS 1 MW, Spanish 250 kW (?) source
  (category 3). For all Performance comparisons
  made by ESFRI N WG (performance scales). Cost
  comparisons for ESS and ISIS 1 MW (for detaild
  costing see Annex)

16
Political case

• Apart from the science and socio-economic case
  (resting ultimately on the importance of ESS for
  the whole of materials science, technology and
  industries and services) there is a simple
  political case
• OECD ministers endorsed Megascience Forum global
  neutron strategy in 1999 US, Japan complete SNS
  and JSNS. Europe invests in ISIS and ILL, phases
  out reactors more rapidly than foreseen. Decision
  on ESS still pending.
• Lisbon/Barcelona Europe at very least needs to
  maintain lead in one of its cutting edge areas
• Attracting next generation of scientists requires
  network of facilities, but also world leading top
  tier facility in network

17
Timeline and political actions undertaken

• Late 06
• acceptance science case preliminary baseline
  range,
• decision (20-30M) to complete detailed
  engineering design including detailed costing and
  optimisation upgradeability
• Detailed negotiations End 06- Mid 08
• Go-ahead, performance baseline End 08
• Start construction 09
• First neutrons 2016/7 First user operations
  2018/9

18
Short-term actions

• No need for feasibility studies or RD any
  mature design by definition does not need these
• ESF evaluation to have a common reference for all
  governments. But quick procedure needed can
  build on ESFs earlier involvement.
• Programme (jointly for neutrons and neutrino
  targets) to maintain target experience for ESS,
  future neutrino factory and other projects
  (including fusion!) urgently needed.

19
ANNEX ESFRI Neutron WG 2003 construction costs
in 2000
20
ANNEX ESFRI Neutron WG 2003 operational costs
in 2000