From the Ground Up: Balancing the NSF Astronomy Program

Transcription

1 From the Ground Up: Balancing the NSF Astronomy Program Report of AST Senior Review Committee Roger Blandford KIPAC, Stanford

2 Members Tom Ayres - Colorado Don Backer - UCB Roger Blandford - Stanford John Carlstrom - Chicago Karl Gebhardt - U Texas, Austin Lynne Hillenbrand - Caltech Craig Hogan - U Wash John Huchra - Harvard Elizabeth Lada - U Florida Malcolm Longair - Cambridge Pat Looney - Brookhaven Bruce Partridge - Haverford Vera Rubin - Carnegie DTM

3 Senior Review Balance support of existing facilities against ambitious proposed program Recommended in decadal survey Charge State principles Do not revisit future program Do not cut grants Expect flat budget Target $30M savings Context of larger national, international programs Report by April 06!

4 Input Prior reports, AANM, Q2C, PoU Observatory submissions + follow up 2 meetings with observatory managements 7 town meetings >200 s etc; many foreign Observatory metrics Greatest hits, papers, citations, students Admin, operating budgets, cost per FTE.. NSF staff Attentive to process Respectful of independence 4 face to face meetings; many telecons, s 5 anonymous readers

5 Conventions AST= OIR + RMS + Solar + Theory = Grants + Gemini + NOAO + NAIC + NRAO + NSO + Ind + Tech Rounded $M(2006) => total budget, # FTEs will be constant Function costs Admin, sci, inst, dev, const, ops Burdened costs Ops + share of admin, sci, inst Base Program Must be preserved Transition Program Reductions and changes in preparation for future program

6 Optimize science Principles Maximize output for investment Optimize workforce Observatory staff, training, efficiency Public dividend Maintain E/PO, communicate scientific methodology Bridging artificial divisions Ph/Ay, ast/solar, OIR/RMS, indep/federal, individuals/facilities, ground/space, big/small science Engaging university community Align goals for research/education Astronomy without borders Pursue cooperation, collaboration when advantageous

7 Federal vs Independent Observatories Federal Observatories OIR: Gemini, NOAO RMS: NAIC, NRAO Solar: NSO Long tradition of private philanthropy in optical astronomy Sequence of world-leading telescopes Yerkes, Lick, Mt Wilson, Mt. Palomar, Keck, Magellan Historical tensions between astronomers with and without access Expensive to operate and upgrade Alleviated by NSF purchase of community time to pay for instruments Moore, Carnegie leading way to next generation telescopes Complex interaction with NSF through AURA

8 Big vs small science Historically small telescopes survey and big telescopes study in spectroscopic detail Specially instrumented small telescopes making many of the most interesting discoveries today Exoplanets, Sloan Survey, dwarf planets, brown dwarfs, supernovae, microlensing, GRBs NOAO telescopes have contributed less of the science.

9 Current Program 65% increase in 20yr Similar proportions Observatories 60% 2006 ($191M) Indep 6% NSO 5% NRAO 27% Tech 9% NAIC 5% Grants 26% NOAO 13% Gemini 9%

10 Observatories Outstanding science Professional, dedicated staff; human infrastructure Avoid irreparable harm OIR culture NOAO =<4m; Gemini 2 x 8m Keck 2 x 10m, Magellan 2 x 6.5m, HET 9m, MMT 6.5 m. ESO 4 x 8m, Subaru 8m Many small, mid-sized telescopes RMS culture NRAO, NAIC run world-leading telescopes UROs are founts of technical innovation; students Solar culture Many telescopes quite old Organized, cohesive; national plus independent; space

11 Operations Challenge Recognized in AANM, inconsistently applied Rules of Thumb from AANM Annual Operations/Capital Cost=0.07 = 0.17(Gemini), = 0.12(GBT), = 0.04(VLA) Annual Upgrading/Capital Cost=0.03 = 0.05(Gemini, proposed) Annual Science/Capital Cost =0.03(0.05), large(moderate) Closure costs may be high Arecibo, KPNO Optimistic aspirations for future projects ALMA, ATST, GSMT Lessons learned in cost reviews

12 ALMA 50 element mm/submm interferometer High site in Chile Highest AST priority to construct and operate efficiently MREFC $500M (half share) After 2011, $30M operations +upgrade 0.06 x capital cost Interferometers cheaper to operate? International projects more expensive? No provision for science Not sole reason for SR!

13 Future Program Advanced Technology Solar Telescope ($195M - international - USAF) MREFC 2009?; Complete by 2014? Giant Segmented Mirror Telescope GMT($500M?), TMT($750M?) Large Survey Telescope LSST($300M? + DOE), PS-4($60M? USAF) Square Kilometer Array Australia, South Africa ($1000M?) 2019? Cost of operating all of these and existing facilities outstrips any credible federal budget

14 Recommendations for current OIR program Gemini International agreement through 2012 NOAO Provide access to optimized suite of high performance telescopes from 1-10m Deferred maintenance CTIO, KPNO Balance determined competitively, not by quota Savings from admin, science, instrumentation Support of GSMT, LST matched to federal plan Technology AODP, ATI, TSIP

15 Recommendations for current RMS program ALMA Plan economic and efficient operations now Arecibo External support beyond 2011 (AST <$4M) or closure GBT Operate with increased efficiency? NRAO admin and science staff Savings? URO + ATI ~level funding, competed VLA EVLA completed in 2010, level funding VLBA Seek external support beyond 2011 (AST <$3M) or close

16 Recommendation for current solar astronomy program On ATST construction timescale, Close solar facilities at Kitt Peak, Sac Pk One HQ Move SOLIS Close GONG++ one year after SDO ~constant solar astronomy budget, staffing

17 General Findings Scientific promise tremendous Compelling case for greater AST/NSF budget Realistic life cycle planning essential Operating, using, upgrading, closing Strategic Challenge Implementation plans for ATST, GSMT, LST, SKA Many partners Reactive stance inadequate for major projects Coherent National Astronomy Enterprise OIR commission of leading stakeholders NOAO leadership? International collaboration? Future Reviews Consideration for next decadal survey 5yr intervals thereafter

18 Summary No simple tally because: Cost reviews to study details Contingencies Termination costs Current vs future program ambiguity International obligations Substantial changes proposed

19 Summary OIR Gemini minimum program $1M saving; new instrument program, renewal? NOAO downsize to support base program Decrease $13M partial budget Small, mid-size telescope investment determined competitively RMS Arecibo - share or close $6M or $10M saving VLBA - share or close $3M or $6M saving Increase efficiency of GBT, NRAO admin, science Decrease $22M partial budget Solar Close most facilities on ATST, SDO schedule $10M saving tied to growth of ATST