Important LinksNational Security OperationsRead a 3-page excerpt [PDF:69kb] buried in the appendices of the proposal which refutes a lot the comments by proponents which gloss over the National Security Operations which would occur at DUSEL. A U.S. DEEP UNDERGROUND SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING LABORATORY This is definitely informative. Highly recommended reading for anyone interested in the DUSEL, whether for or against, especially without knowing enough of what would actually be done in the lab, or the selection process. Read at least pages 10 to 15 and page 1 to get an idea of how the scientists intend to study what science and what site or sites would be appropriate. See also page 20 (pg. 35 in Acrobat pages), which has the chart listing "hazardous materials" to be used in a DUSEL lab (anywhere!) and pages 27 to 33 (end) which give a "Summary". This link gives the best, very clear and very concise history and listing of aims and how they fit in with NSF and DOE (Department of Energy) interests and involvements. It also gives some idea of issues not resolved, abilities not yet achieved, some controversies or unresolved issues, within the physics communities, of whether the most useful for particular experiments would be smaller labs, multiple labs, or one common large DUSEL area. Also whether smaller or largest possible detectors are most useful. (If it is a large detector, either pure water or liquid, super-cooled argon are favored and it states the detector would need to be "larger than 50 kilotons". 100 kilotons and 500 kilotons have been mentioned elsewhere. Homestake and Henderson plans include spaces that are described in some places as "30 stories tall" for a "megadetector" or UNO detector. ) There are many unresolved issues, including the structural safety of caverns dug out to enormous sizes and other design issues. Interesting that the length of time a deep lab would be used, as mentioned in the recent Boulder, CO meeting of scientists, is 20 years, not 40 years as postulated by the UW group. To simplify in one explanation: They need an accelerator that can send a beam of protons a distance greater than 1000 kilometers, but it appears that the power needed may not be developed as yet for a "longer baseline" requiring a one megawatt proton driver (1 MW proton power). In the processes, the protons "decay" to produce neutrinos (and other particles). Other events are also of interest. Increasing the power and length of a neutrino beam is one objective, and differentiating activities of the neutrinos in changing from one type to another is a study interest. One difficulty is in ruling out other outside influences on the neutrinos, including cosmic rays, and source of the neutrinos being received. Three foot thick walls of lead are postulated in some designs for shielding and "interaction" versus specialized "bouncing" . (Simplified, non-technical terminology in quotes.) There are other sources, like the Oak Ridge Lab presentation for the Berkeley meeting, for the extensive geo/bio sciences and their interests in storage, deep underground, radioactive materials and sequestering CO2, studying movement of ground water, and simulating earthquakes, studying methods of efficient mining, drilling 6000 feet deeper than the caverns, or to the core of the earth. The geo/biologists are interested in deep earth microbe investigation and "exploitation" . This website represents a science and engineering communities' effort to develop a single, community-wide, interdisciplinary response to the first solicitation from the NSF for site-independent proposals... http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/inpac/DUSEL/ INDIVIDUAL DUSEL SITES
|