National Academies Press: OpenBook
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×

Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the

NEW WORLDS, NEW HORIZONS
DECADAL SURVEY

Panel on Implementing Recommendations from New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey
Board on Physics and Astronomy
Space Studies Board
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
                          OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

Washington, D.C.

www.nap.edu

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine

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. Ralph J. Cicerone 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. Charles M. Vest 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. Harvey V. Fineberg 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. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.

www.national-academies.org

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×

PANEL ON IMPLEMENTING RECOMMENDATIONS FROM NEW WORLDS, NEW HORIZONS DECADAL SURVEY

ADAM S. BURROWS, Princeton University, Co-Chair

CHARLES F. KENNEL, Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego, Co-Chair

ALAN DRESSLER, Observatories of the Carnegie Institution for Science

DEBRA M. ELMEGREEN, Vassar College

FIONA A. HARRISON, California Institute of Technology

LYNNE HILLENBRAND, California Institute of Technology

STEVEN M. RITZ, University of California, Santa Cruz

A. THOMAS YOUNG, Lockheed Martin Corporation (retired)

Staff

DONALD C. SHAPERO, Director, Board on Physics and Astronomy (BPA)

MICHAEL H. MOLONEY, Director, Space Studies Board (SSB)

DAVID B. LANG, Study Director and Program Officer, BPA

CARYN J. KNUTSEN, Associate Program Officer, BPA

TERI THOROWGOOD, Administrative Coordinator, BPA

BETH DOLAN, Financial Associate, BPA

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×

BOARD ON PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

ADAM S. BURROWS, Princeton University, Chair

PHILIP H. BUCKSBAUM, Stanford University, Vice Chair

RICCARDO BETTI, University of Rochester

JAMES DRAKE, University of Maryland

JAMES EISENSTEIN, California Institute of Technology

DEBRA M. ELMEGREEN, Vassar College

PAUL FLEURY, Yale University

PETER F. GREEN, University of Michigan

LAURA H. GREENE, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

MARTHA P. HAYNES, Cornell University

JOSEPH HEZIR, EOP Group, Inc.

MARK B. KETCHEN, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center

JOSEPH LYKKEN, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

PIERRE MEYSTRE, University of Arizona

HOMER A. NEAL, University of Michigan

MONICA OLVERA de la CRUZ, Northwestern University

JOSE N. ONUCHIC, University of California, San Diego

LISA RANDALL, Harvard University

MICHAEL S. TURNER, University of Chicago

MICHAEL C.F. WIESCHER, University of Notre Dame

Staff

DONALD C. SHAPERO, Director

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×

SPACE STUDIES BOARD

CHARLES F. KENNEL, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, Chair

JOHN KLINEBERG, Space Systems/Loral (retired), Vice Chair

MARK R. ABBOTT, Oregon State University

STEVEN J. BATTEL, Battel Engineering

YVONNE C. BRILL, Aerospace Consultant

ELIZABETH R. CANTWELL, Oak Ridge National Laboratory

ANDREW B. CHRISTENSEN, Dixie State College and Aerospace Corporation

ALAN DRESSLER, Observatories of the Carnegie Institution

JACK D. FELLOWS, University Corporation for Atmospheric Research

HEIDI B. HAMMEL, Space Science Institute

FIONA A. HARRISON, California Institute of Technology

ANTHONY C. JANETOS, University of Maryland

JOAN JOHNSON-FREESE, Naval War College

ROBERT P. LIN, University of California, Berkeley

MOLLY K. MACAULEY, Resources for the Future

JOHN F. MUSTARD, Brown University

ROBERT T. PAPPALARDO, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology

JAMES PAWELCZYK, Pennsylvania State University

MARCIA J. RIEKE, University of Arizona

DAVID N. SPERGEL, Princeton University

WARREN M. WASHINGTON, National Center for Atmospheric Research

CLIFFORD M. WILL, Washington University

THOMAS H. ZURBUCHEN, University of Michigan

Staff

MICHAEL H. MOLONEY, Director

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×

Preface

The National Research Council (NRC) Panel on Implementing Recommendations from New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey was requested by the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to address the following:

With the overall goal of ensuring that the scientific priorities of New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics (“the decadal survey program”) be pursued in as effective and timely a manner as possible, the NRC will organize a workshop that will feature invited presentations and discussion, to consider the implications of the following points:

1. The changes in the current budgetary and programmatic outlook for NASA’s astrophysics program from the scenarios outlined in the decadal survey report.

2. The current status of NASA’s implementation of the Wide-Field IR Survey Telescope (WFIRST) recommendation.

3. The current status of the ESA-Euclid mission, including any discussions of U.S. partnership in the mission.

4. The possible synergies and complementarities between the proposed NASA-WFIRST and ESA-Euclid science goals.

In the context of the implications of these items and through a short report following the workshop, the panel will describe several strategic options for pursuing the science priorities of the decadal survey program. For each option the panel will outline the associated pros and cons from the perspective of achieving the decadal science goals in a timely manner.

The assembled panel comprised former members of the Committee for Decadal Survey of Astronomy and Astrophysics and other individuals involved in relevant aspects of the 2010 decadal survey process. All had an intimate knowledge of the survey itself and the rationales behind the strategy and various recommendations incorporated in the integrated plan outlined in the recently released report of the survey, New Worlds, New Horizons (NWNH). The panel invited to the open session of a meeting held on November 7, 2010, stakeholders from both Europe and the United States and from the relevant agencies (NASA, the European Space Agency, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, and OSTP) and the scientific community (see Appendix A). On short notice, these individuals graciously agreed to attend (either in person or remotely) and (1) made presentations in response to questions prepared in advance by the panel and the NRC, (2) answered additional questions from the panel members, and (3) provided their own candid observations on relevant matters.

Having organized its workshop and considered the issues outlined in the charge, the panel concluded that its role was to review and assess the possibility of U.S. participation in ESA’s dark energy project Euclid in light of the strategy developed as a result of the Astro2010 survey process and recommended in NWNH. Specifically, the charge, as interpreted by the panel, was to investigate the potential impact of both (1) U.S. participation in the ESA Euclid project and (2) the current budgetary situation at NASA with respect to the prospects for realizing NWNH priorities. In particular, the panel interpreted its charge to be to assess whether a NASA commitment in the upcoming fiscal year 2012 budget request to participate in the Euclid project at a level of approximately 20 percent of Euclid’s costs would be consistent with achieving the priorities, goals, and recommendations articulated in NWNH and with pursuing the science strategy therein. The panel also investigated what impact such participation, as well as the current budgetary situation, might have on the prospects for the timely realization of the Wide-

Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×

Field Infrared Survey Telescope (WFIRST) recommended by NWNH.

During the panel’s deliberations, the report of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) Independent Cost Review Panel (ICRP) was made public. The ICRP reported that the JWST can be launched no earlier than the fourth quarter of 2015 and at a minimum additional expense of $1.4 billion.1 As of the time the present panel’s report was completed, it had still not been made clear how or whether the JWST cost and schedule overrun would be addressed. This panel’s report should thus be read in the context of this new development and uncertainty, which nevertheless also serves to highlight the timely nature of this panel’s conclusions.

In its deliberations, the panel made use not only of the testimony before it by external participants (see Appendixes A and B), but also of the decadal survey report NWNH itself. NWNH was the primary resource used by the panel in arriving at its conclusions, and the panel was careful not to contradict NWNH, either on particulars or on strategy, as it dissected the issues and pursued its charge.

Adam S. Burrows, Co-Chair

Charles F. Kennel, Co-Chair

Panel on Implementing Recommendations from

New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey

______________

1 J. Casani et al., James Webb Space Telescope Independent Comprehensive Review Panel: Final Report, October 29, 2010 (publicly released on November 10, 2010).

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×

Acknowledgment of Reviewers

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 Report Review Committee of the National Research Council (NRC). 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:

Roger D. Blandford, Stanford University,

Martha P. Haynes, Cornell University,

Robert C. Kennicutt, Jr., University of Cambridge,

Jonathan I. Lunine, University of Arizona and University of Rome Tor Vergata,

Christopher McKee, University of California, Berkeley,

Marcia J. Rieke, University of Arizona,

Paul L. Schechter, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,

David N. Spergel, Princeton University,

Scott D. Tremaine, Institute for Advanced Study, and

Michael S. Turner, University of Chicago.

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 William Press, University of Texas at Austin. Appointed by the NRC, he was responsible for making certain 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 panel and the institution.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×
Page R1
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×
Page R2
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×
Page R3
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×
Page R4
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×
Page R5
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×
Page R6
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×
Page R7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×
Page R8
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×
Page R9
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×
Page R10
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×
Page R11
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2012. Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13045.
×
Page R12
Next: Executive Summary »
Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The 2010 Astronomy and Astrophysics Decadal Survey report, New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics (NWNH), outlines a scientifically exciting and programmatically integrated plan for both ground- and space-based astronomy and astrophysics in the 2012-2021 decade. However, late in the survey process, the budgetary outlook shifted downward considerably from the guidance that NASA had provided to the decadal survey. And since August 2010--when NWNH was released--the projections of funds available for new NASA Astrophysics initiatives has decreased even further because of the recently reported delay in the launch of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) to no earlier than the fourth quarter of 2015 and the associated additional costs of at least $1.4 billion. These developments jeopardize the implementation of the carefully designed program of activities proposed in NWNH. In response to these circumstances, NASA has proposed that the United States consider a commitment to the European Space Agency (ESA) Euclid mission at a level of approximately 20 percent. This participation would be undertaken in addition to initiating the planning for the survey's highest-ranked, space-based, large-scale mission, the Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope (WFIRST).

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) requested that the National Research Council (NRC) convene a panel to consider whether NASA's Euclid proposal is consistent with achieving the priorities, goals, and recommendations, and with pursuing the science strategy, articulated in NWNH. The panel also investigated what impact such participation might have on the prospects for the timely realization of the WFIRST mission and other activities recommended by NWNH in view of the projected budgetary situation. The panel convened a workshop on November 7, 2010. The workshop presentations identified several tradeoffs among options: funding goals less likely versus more likely to be achieved in a time of restricted budgets; narrower versus broader scientific goals; and U.S.-only versus U.S.-ESA collaboration. The panel captured these tradeoffs in considering four primary options: Option A: Launch of WFIRST in the Decade 2012-2021; Option B: A Joint WFIRST/Euclid Mission; Option C: Commitment by NASA of 20 percent Investment in Euclid prior to the M-class decision; or Option D: No U.S. Financing of an Infrared Survey Mission This Decade.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!