CHART Workshop 2009: Week 4 Summary
Filed under: CHART Weekly Summaries,Discovery,US Science Support Program
Dear Colleagues:
The CHART workshop ends this Friday, March 6th, and there are still many in the community who have not participated. It is not too late to become involved, and we especially encourage you to contribute in this final week.
There has been a lot of good discussion on strategies and new directions for IODP, but we also are challenged with deciding how to organize and express the scientific goals of the new science plan for drilling beyond 2013. In this final week of CHART, we would like your suggestions: Should the new science plan for post-2013 drilling be organized differently than the current IODP plan (the IODP Initial Science Plan)? Should there still be themes and initiatives? If so, what should they be? If not, what other structure might be better?
Please go to the “Strategies” board, and look for a new question posted by Andy Fisher called “How should the _new_ IODP Science Plan be organized?”. We look forward to an energetic discussion.
We thank all of you who have participated so far and hope that you continue to contribute as the workshop comes to a close.
With thanks,
Christina Ravelo
On behalf of the CHART steering committee
———————
CHART Week 4 Highlights:
Emerging Fields and Cross-Cutting Disciplines: New topics have been posted on detailed geothermal studies, atmospheric-oceanic interactions and biogeochemical cycles, and permafrost gas hydrates. There was also further support for CO2 mitigation, ocean acidification, polar studies, global drilling partnerships, surface-rock geochemical cycles, geohazards, future warming, and ocean-lithosphere cycling. Are there ways to develop overarching themes or initiatives based on any combination of these topics? Post your ideas and help create a coherent U.S. statement for INVEST.
Solid Earth Cycles and Geodynamics: There has been continued discussion about large igneous provinces (LIPs), including a proposed partnership with the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program to link hotspot trails and LIPs. Discussion is also focused on research about the structure of the oceanic crust, including associated technical challenges of such studies and models of seismic stratigraphy. Regarding seismogenic zones, there was emphasis on the need to follow through with what has already been started. New topics such as triple junction systems and subduction initiation were posted. Should these or other themes be developed for the new science plan?
Environmental Change, Processes and Effects: Over the past week, participants have posted numerous new topics, including intriguing new perspectives on studying how Milankovitch forcing produces different responses in time and space, the importance of ultra-high resolution records, the need to better understand fluid flow as a transfer mechanism, and the need to better understand gas hydrates as carbon storage capacitors. Along with previously emphasized polar climate studies, participants also discussed sea-level estimates during critical intervals and the need for improved efforts to integrate drilling project with paleoclimate modeling. Are these the most important topics, or are there others?
Deep Biosphere and Sub-seafloor Ocean: There is continued productive discussion on observatories, microbiology within IODP, technological needs, and the sub-seafloor ocean. New ideas include: a wish list of technology for microbiology and observatories to foster development of non-existent technologies, include IODP activities in microbiology talks and microbiology meetings, overcome the technological challenges to drill in young ocean crust for studying fluid flow and geobiology, extend the lessons from Expedition 301 to other areas to track fluids at crustal scale from recharge to discharge. Can a link be established between onshore and ocean hydrogeology?
Strategies: There remains consensus that IODP needs to remain open to new ideas and improved proposals, but there is also strong support for following through on earlier commitments. Balancing these objectives is made even more challenging with a reduced drilling schedule. Several participants have noted the importance of supporting site survey and technical developments for highly ranked projects. There was vigorous discussion about the importance of education and outreach in helping to define and/or enhance broader impacts for IODP. Although opinions vary, a majority of participants would like to see IODP do more extensive work in these areas. A new question open this week is to address what the structure of the new science plan for post-2013 drilling might look like.
General Discussion Board: This board has seen renewed activity as participants of IODP expeditions have been providing their viewpoints on the past successes of IODP and on the aspects that have not worked so well. Individual perspectives on how IODP has succeeded in the past, and how it has fallen short, are invaluable. We know that many of you have strong opinions about this. If you haven’t already done so, please post your comments and suggestions.
