NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Contract No. EAR-0126428. The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
International Standard Book Number (ISBN) 0-309-07644-7
Additional copies of this report are available from:
National Academy Press
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Box 285 Washington, DC 20055 800–624–6242 202–334–3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area) http://www.nap.edu
Cover: Both images (SRTM image of fault-bounded Antelope Valley, CA, with Landsat overlay; and fully-lit composite hemisphere image showing North America) are non-copyrighted, courtesy of National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Copyright 2001 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
National Academy of Sciences
National Academy of Engineering
Institute of Medicine
National Research Council
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm.A.Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I.Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce Alberts and Dr. Wm.A.Wulf are chairman and vice-chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
COMMITTEE ON THE REVIEW OF EARTHSCOPE SCIENCE OBJECTIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING
GEORGE M.HORNBERGER, Chair,
University of Virginia, Charlottesville
ARTHUR R.GREEN,
ExxonMobil Exploration Company, Houston, Texas
SUSAN E.HUMPHRIS,
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts
JAMES A.JACKSON,
Cambridge University, Cambridge, United Kingdom
ELDRIDGE M.MOORES,
University of California, Davis
BARRY E.PARSONS,
University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
ROBIN P.RIDDIHOUGH,
Natural Resources Canada (emeritus), Ottawa, Canada
KARL K.TUREKIAN,
Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
National Research Council Staff
DAVID A.FEARY, Study Director (until 9/2001)
JENNIFER T.ESTEP, Administrative Associate
SHANNON L.RUDDY, Project Assistant
BOARD ON EARTH SCIENCES AND RESOURCES
RAYMOND JEANLOZ, Chair,
University of California, Berkeley
JOHN J.AMORUSO,
Amoruso Petroleum Company, Houston, Texas
PAUL B.BARTON, JR.,
U.S. Geological Survey (emeritus), Reston, Virginia
DAVID L.DILCHER,
University of Florida, Gainesville
BARBARA L.DUTROW,
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge
ADAM M.DZIEWONSKI,
Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts
WILLIAM L.GRAF,
Arizona State University, Tempe
GEORGE M.HORNBERGER,
University of Virginia, Charlottesville
SUSAN W.KIEFFER,
S.W.Kieffer Science Consulting, Inc., Bolton, Ontario, Canada
DIANNE R.NIELSON,
Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Salt Lake City
JONATHAN G.PRICE,
Nevada Bureau of Mines & Geology, Reno
BILLIE L.TURNER II,
Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts
National Research Council Staff
ANTHONY R.DE SOUZA, Director
TAMARA L.DICKINSON, Senior Program Officer
DAVID A.FEARY, Senior Program Officer
ANNE M.LINN, Senior Program Officer
PAUL CUTLER, Program Officer
LISA M.VANDEMARK, Program Officer
KRISTEN L.KRAPF, Research Associate
KERI H.MOORE, Research Associate
MONICA LIPSCOMB, Research Assistant
JENNIFER T.ESTEP, Administrative Associate
VERNA J.BOWEN, Administrative Assistant
YVONNE FORSBERGH, Senior Project Assistant
KAREN IMHOF, Senior Project Assistant
SHANNON L.RUDDY, Project Assistant
TERESIA K.WILMORE, Project Assistant
WINFIELD SWANSON, Editor
Preface
The Committee on the Review of EarthScope Science Objectives and Implementation Planning had the task of reviewing aspects of a very complex project plan in a very short time. Furthermore, because the members of the committee were selected to avoid any perceived conflict arising from direct scientific association with EarthScope, many members had to learn the details of EarthScope starting from a base of relatively general knowledge about the initiative. Nevertheless, the committee did collectively incorporate detailed knowledge concerning the technical aspects of the various components of the EarthScope initiative, and also had experience with large and expensive NSF projects and broad overview perspectives on earth science research. The advantages attending appointment of a committee with such a broad earth science perspective far outweighed any perceived disadvantage from the absence of EarthScope “insiders” as members, who could possibly reveal some problem areas in the details of the planning that might be missed by “outsiders.”
The committee’s specific task was to review the scientific objectives and implementation planning of three components of the EarthScope initiative (see Box ES1 for complete statement of task), rather than to conduct a detailed technical review of the initiative. The committee approached its evaluation with a critical and skeptical view. Members came to the committee meeting in August 2001 after having read a wealth of material on the proposed initiative, and initially were concerned that the plans had seemed to evolve in a way that may not have been optimal for advancing earth science. The committee members certainly were prepared to highlight any fundamental weaknesses that were identified. Conversely, the committee did not think it would be useful to identify minor shortcomings or implementation details that may not have been documented or presented in the material put before the committee—it was clear that the more detailed aspects of the science and implementation plans were continuing to evolve. The committee deter-
mined that its most constructive role would be to offer overall “high-level” comments and advice.
The report contains five chapters. Chapter 1, the introduction, sets the context for the proposed EarthScope initiative and briefly describes the basic components of the project. Chapters 2 to 4 cover the major topics the committee was asked to address: Chapter 2 discusses the components of EarthScope in relation to the science questions to be addressed; Chapter 3 discusses the two implementation and management components—EarthScope as a scientific facility and EarthScope as a scientific endeavor; and Chapter 4 discusses the broad range of appropriate partnerships that will be engaged in the EarthScope initiative. The final chapter (Chapter 5) presents summary observations and the committee’s recommendations.
The committee would like to acknowledge the many members of the earth science community who, at short notice, briefed the committee or provided other input. As chair of the committee, I thank the members of the committee for their hard work in a short time and for their good-natured interactions that allowed the report to be completed expeditiously. Finally, I thank David Feary, Jennifer Estep, and Shannon Ruddy for sharing ideas and for all the logistical support.
George M.Hornberger
Chair
Acknowledgments
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
William R.Dickinson, Department of Geosciences (emeritus), University of Arizona, Tucson
Brian L.N.Kennett, Research School of Earth Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra
Alan Levander, Department of Geology and Geophysics, Rice University, Houston, Texas
Bruce D.Marsh, Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
Raymond A.Price, Department of Geological Sciences and Geological Engineering (emeritus), Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Donald L.Turcotte, Department of Geological Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Marcia K.McNutt, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute.
Appointed by the National Research Council, the coordinator was responsible for ensuring that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.