1
Chikyu IODP Board #3 meeting 30 – 31 March 2015
Miyoshi Memorial Auditorium JAMSTEC Yokohama Institute for Earth Sciences (YES)
Draft Agenda ver. 1.6
Day-1 Monday, 30 March 2015
0900-0905 1. Welcome Remarks (Hotta)
0905-0915 2. Introductions and Logistics (Kuramoto/Eguchi)
0915-0925 3. Approval of Agenda (Chair - Kimura)
0925-0930 4. Introduce New CIB Members (Yamada)
0930-0940 5. Approval of Last Meeting Minutes (Chair - Kimura)
0940-0950 6. CIB Decisions since Last Meeting (Chair - Kimura)
0950-1000 7. CIB Action Item Status (Chair - Kimura)
Coffee Break
1030-1130 8. Chikyu Operation/status Update (TBN) Current Status NanTroSEIZE Update
NanTroSEIZE PCT reports CDEX C0002 Task Force update C0010 Observatory (Exp. 365 Summary)
1130-1145 9. Chikyu 5year inspection and refurbishment plan (Kyo) Shipyard and Sea Trial Schedule Major Work Items
1145-1200 10. Chikyu Membership Status (Kuramoto) Update since the last meeting
LUNCH 1330-1445 11. Other FB, IODP Forum, and Agency Activities
JR Facility Board (Humphris) ECORD Facility Board (Gohl) IODP Forum (Becker) MEXT (Kimura) NSF (Janecek) ECORD (Camoin) ANZIC (Heap)
1445-1500 12. Chikyu Safety Review Committee Report Chikyu Safety Review Sub-committee Update (Naganawa) Chikyu Safety Review Update (Matsuda)
Coffee Break
2
1530-1700 13. JR Advisory Panels Report/Proposal Overview Science Support Office (Given) Science Evaluation Panel (Mallinson) 1700-1730 14. Chikyu Scientific Highlight (NanTroSEIZE) 1800- Reception Day-2 Tuesday, 31 March 2015 0900-0930 15. Chikyu Long-term Ops models (Kuramoto) Outlook for the Future Operation Windows Potentials for New External Funding Sources 0930-1030 16. Chikyu Proposals (update and discussion) (Chair - Kimura) Chikyu Project Update (CRISP, IBM) New Proposals from SEP 865-Full: Nankai Trough T Limit 871-Pre: Lord Howe Rise Crustal Evolution 876-Pre: Bend-Fault Serpentinization CIB Workshop
Coffee Break 1100-1115 17. Mantle Drilling Working Group (Chair - Kimura) Draft Terms of Reference 1115-1130 18. Usage of Membership Fee (ECORD and ANZIC) (Kuramoto)
LUNCH
1300-1430 19. Chikyu Facility Procedures, Guidelines and Policies (Chair - Kimura) Chikyu Staffing Procedures Chikyu Onboard Measurements Guidelines Chikyu 3rd Party Tools and Instruments Policy Chikyu 2nd Post Expedition Meeting Guidelines IODP Proposal Confidentiality Policy IODP Site Survey Data Confidentiality Policy Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing: Implications for IODP 1430-1500 20. KCC report (Kinoshita)
Coffee Break 1530-1545 21. Outreach Activities (10th anniversary activities) (Omata) 1545-1600 22. Review of Consensus Statements and Action Items 1600-1615 23. Next CIB meeting 1615-1630 24. Any Other Business
Adjourn meeting
CIB positions to be openCIB positions to be open
• Chair (one)Chair (one)• US member (one)( )• Japanese member (one)
All two‐year term
CIB nomination committeeCIB nomination committee• Ryo Matsumoto; Professor, Meiji UniversityRyo Matsumoto; Professor, Meiji University
• Hiroshi Nishi; Professor Tohoku University• Hiroshi Nishi; Professor, Tohoku University
G t h F h G P f D ETH Z i h• Gretchen Fruh‐Green; Professor, Dr., ETH Zurich
• John Jaeger; Associate Professor, University of Florida
• Yasuhiro Yamada (Chair); Director, Ocean Drilling Science Center, JAMSTEC
Nomination processNomination process
• Dec. 15; Open call to the community• Jan. 31; End call, 6 applicants receivedJan. 31; End call, 6 applicants received• Feb. 1; start discussions• Mar.; consensus
New CIB Chair and membersYoshiyuki Tatsumi(Chair) Bernardus Adrianus(Ben) van
der PluijmJames J. Mori
Kobe university, Japan University of Michigan‐Ann Arbor Kyoto University
2 year‐term 2 year‐term 2 year‐term
Evolution of the solid Earth based on analysis of
Structual Geology, Tectonophysics, Tentonics.
Earthquake seismology with studies about the earthquake y
petrological and geochemicalcharacteristics of arc and hotspot magmas, high‐
i t d
qsource processes from waveform analyses and tectonic structures using tomographic
th dpressure experiments, and modeling.
methods.
Chikyu Current Status
Shin’ichi KuramotoShin ichi Kuramoto
Agenda 8
Chikyu Current Schedule4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3
JFY2014
non‐IODPCommercial‐1
R&M R&Mnon‐IODPScience
2015 non‐IODPCommercial‐2
R&M non‐IODPScience
IODPScience
1) Chikyu is off India for a commercial operation which started from early February and will finish bythe end of August 2015.
2) 5 years large maintenance inspections and certifications are required by low in2) 5 years large maintenance, inspections and certifications are required by low inSeptember through October.
3) Significant engineering works required from safety point of view in November to mid‐January (replace DCIS, UWTV, etc).
4) Non‐IODP science operation in mid‐January to late‐March 2016 will going to the Okinawa Troughby using a SIP fund.
Agenda 8
*SIP: Cross‐Ministerial Strategic Innovation Promotion Program
5) IODP science operation (NanTroSEIZE C0010 Obs.) in late‐March to April 2016.
C0002 Task Force Update
Operations DepartmentOperations DepartmentIkuo Sawada
Agenda 8Agenda 8
Task Force UpdateExp348 Cause of Hole Instability• Steep Formation • Invasion of Drilling Fluid into bedding planes
d ( i h i i l)
Exp338/ 348 Result
• Improper mud property (High viscosity, pH Control)• Vibration of bottom hole assembly
Countermeasures• Expandable Casing Technology(2sections)+ Conventional Casing(2 Sections)
13‐3/8"2010m
Sidetrack
SidetrackPlug back 2006m
pa dab e Cas g ec o ogy( sect o s) Co e t o a Cas g( Sect o s)– Increase number of casing section– Past Record for deepwater wells (2008~2012 : 142wells , Success ratio 97%)
• Improvement of Mud Property– Re‐design of mud property (Glycol contents, pH Control etc..)
11‐3/4"L 2923m
Plug back 2330m
Plug back 3058m
Sidetrack
– Add Seal/Plugging Agent – Improve Cutting transport capability
• Update proper mud density while drilling operation.– Use Geo‐mechanics software– Conduct Extended Leak Off Test
9‐3/8"LinerExpandable CSG
Expandable CSGConduct Extended Leak Off Test
• Precise monitoring real time LWD/MWD Data• Use special stabilizers to mitigate vibration of drill string• Continuous circulation system• Establish Onshore Back‐up Team including service contractor specialists.
7"Liner 4700m
Mega‐splay
Issues• Unknown formation structure/formation pressure
– Unable to set proper Mud weight prior to drilling– Collapse/Burst of Expandable Casing– Unknown open hole condition during disconnecting BOP (10~14days)
6" Hole 5200m
Agenda 8
Unknown open hole condition during disconnecting BOP.(10 14days)– Non Stop Driller will not be available while coring operation
• Complicated casing design/operation procedure
Operation Guideline(1)1. Recover Corrosion Cap2. Run and land BOP3. Run 12‐1/4" Bit (Slick BHA) and drill out cement
inside 13‐3/8" CSG(3405 – 3505mBRT)4. Continue to run to top of 11‐3/4"Liner
@3883.8mBRT5 Temperature Survey inside 11 3/4"Liner w/Drill
Plug back 2006m
5. Temperature Survey inside 11‐3/4 Liner w/Drill String
6. Run 10‐5/8" (Slick BHA) and drill out shoe.7. Conduct ELOT
13‐3/8"2010m
8. Run scraper 9. Run CBL/UCI 10. Walk Away VSP
Plug back 2330m
Sidetrack
y11. If both Poor Bonding and leak off pressure result
are acceptable, set Whipstock and sidetrack. * If not acceptable, spot cement in the open hole and sidetrack from just below 11‐3/8" shoe.
11‐3/4"L 2923m
Plug back 3058m
Expandable CSGj /
12. Take spot cores in vertical section.13. Drill 10‐5/8" hole to XXXXm and open the hole to
12‐1/4"
Agenda 8
14. Run and set Expandable Casing (9‐5/8" x 11‐3/4")Mega‐splay fault ±5200m
Operation Guideline (2)15. Drill out cement and conduct ELOT.16. Drill 9‐1/2"hole to XXXXm (Spot cores)17. Open the hole to 11‐3/8"18. Run and set 9‐3/8" Liner (9‐5/8" Tie‐back if
necessary) 19. Drill out cement and conduct ELOT.20 D ill 8 1/2"h l XXXX (S )13 3/8"2010m
Sidetrack
20. Drill 8‐1/2"hole to XXXXm (Spot cores)21. Open the hole to 9‐1/2"22. Run and set Expandable CSG (7‐5/8" x 9‐3/8")23 Drill out cement and LOT
13‐3/8 2010m
Plug back 2330m
Sidetrack
23. Drill out cement and LOT24. Drill 7‐1/2"hole to 4700m(Spot Cores)25. Open the hole to 8‐1/2"26 Run and set 7" Liner
11‐3/4"L 2923m
Plug back 3058m
26. Run and set 7 Liner27. Drill out cement and conduct ELOT28. Nudge the hole and drill 6" hole to XXXXm to
identify Mega‐splay Fault
Expandable CSG
Expandable CSG
9‐3/8"Liner
y g p y29. Plug back the hole30. Drill 6" vertical hole to deflect the original hole.31. Take core to Mega‐splay Fault.Mega‐splay fault ±5200m
7"Liner 4700m
Agenda 8
32. Wireline Logging33. Plug back and suspend the hole.
g p y
Expandable Casing(1)Expandable Casing(1)
Agenda 8
Expandable Casing (2) • Clarification in progress.
– Preparation (Properties of special tool, subs, etc..)– Detail running procedure– Emergency countermeasure– Cementing
• Detailed calculation for casing strength/hydraulics in progress– Limitation of mud weight– Limitation of setting depthLimitation of setting depth– Appropriate circulation pressure
• Selection of Liner Hanger (Special size 9‐3/8")
Agenda 8Run Launcher Run inner string
inside Exp CSG.Monitor pressure/Hook Load during Expansion
Run Anchor HangerMake up Exp CSG
I ti ti D illi Fl id P tiInvestigating Drilling Fluid PropertiesNo. Task Progress
(1) Re‐design of Rheology<Target> MW=1.36sg, Minimize PV value, Maintain pH < 10.5Select Sealant additives and PPG 0% or 3%
Not commenced
(2) Alternative sweeps instead of high viscosity sweeps Done , BAROLIFTU d i i i(3) Reduce glycol, reduce/eliminate lubricants, test cloud point Under investigating
(4) Use citric acid to treat out cement contamination Available in domestic(5) Use Particle Plugging Test to select proper sealant In progress,
Under consideration for composition. Need renewing the laboratory equipmentlaboratory equipment
(6) Erosion Test and Immersion Test with low and high pH drilling fluids
Done,pH10.5 mud is more effective for preventing dispersion/erosion than pH12.5
Product name<Supplier>
POROSEAL<Mi SWACO>
STEEL SEEL50<Halliburton Baroid>
Astex‐S<Telnite>
Graphite
Sealant
Classification Latex Graphite(Resilience up to 120%) Soltex
Particle size < 10micron 50micron 70‐300micronDensity 1.02 1.75 1.2 ‐ 1.5
Agenda 8
No Stop Driller(Continuous Circulation System)
Standard Continuous
(Continuous Circulation System)
ポンプ
Pump
Standard Procedure
Continuous Circulation System
ポ
Agenda 8
6" Wireline Core Service6 Wireline Core Service• NOV Slimhole Express(Wireline Coring System)
Barrel Size 5‐1/4" x 3"
Hole Diameter 6"
Core Diameter 3" (Drill String ID more than 4.00")
Outer Tube OD : 5.25 ID : 4.375"
Connection VS Slimhole
Length 9m, 18m or 27m
Make up Torque 8000 ft‐lbs
Yield Torque 13 440 ft lbsYield Torque 13,440 ft‐lbs
Tensile Yield 285,185 lbs
RPM 30 ‐ 150
Agenda 8* Special Drill Pipe has to be used inside 6" hole & 7" Liner
Mitigate Drill String VibrationMitigate Drill String Vibration• V‐Stab® ‐ Asymmetric Vibration Damping Tool (NOV)
Agenda 8
C0010 Observatory Exp365 Summary
Ikuo Sawadauo Sa ada
Agenda 8Agenda 8
C10 Operation Plan
Agenda 8
C10 Operation PeriodC10 Operation PeriodTotal Operation days 30 daysTotal Operation days 30 days
1 Transit, Set Transponders, Retrieve Corrosion Cap 3 days
2 Retrieve Casing Packer w/Genius Plug 5 days2 Retrieve Casing Packer w/Genius Plug 5 days
3 Drill 8‐1/2”hole w/ 9‐7/8”underreamer* LWD will not be run.
3.5 days
4 Run 9‐5/8”Casing Scraper. 3.5 days
5 Set Completion String 10 days
6 Recover Transponder, Transit 2 days
7 Contingency 3 days
Agenda 8
Planned Completion SchematicPlanned Completion SchematicAssumption: Sensor BTM @ 850mbsf
WD: 3904.0mBRT
Sensor BTM @ 850mbsf
13‐3/8”CSG68ppf HC110 TSH Wedge 521
Liner Top @4404mBRT
Swellable Packer @4545.9mBRT(641.9mbsf)Perforation
@4562.6‐4581mBRT(658 6 677 0 b f) 12 1/4”OH
17‐1/2”OHpp g
& 68ppf N‐80 ER& 68ppf L‐80 BTC (Combination)@4454mBRT (550mbsf)
(500mbsf)
(658.6‐677.0mbsf)
Est. TOC in Annulus @4647.7mBRT(743.7mbsf)
42.4m
9 5/8”Shoe
8‐1/2”[email protected](815 7 b f)
[email protected](719.7mbsf)
12‐1/4 OH
Sensors9‐5/8 [email protected](813.7mbsf)
(815.7mbsf)
[email protected]‐4754.0mBRT(834.7‐850.0mbsf)
20.7m
150m
Sensors Seismometer Strain Gauge Tiltmeter
CMT Port @4774mBRT(870.0mbsf)
Protect Zone50m
BTM Bull Nose @4784mBRT(880 0mbsf)
20m
t ete Temperature Gauge Pressure Gauge
(US provides)
Agenda 8
9‐7/8” Open [email protected](919.4mbsf)
8‐1/2”[email protected](925.4mbsf)
50m @4784mBRT(880.0mbsf)40m
p )
Guide Roller C l ti G id R ll
Newly Developed Handing EquipmentGuide Roller Completion Guide Roller
Packer installation Working Sheave
platform Platform for Flatpack
Agenda 8
Chikyu 5 year inspection andChikyu 5 year inspection and refurbishment planp
Technology DepartmentNori KYONori KYO
Agenda 9Agenda 9
ScheduleSchedule
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan
Shipyard maintenance@MHI Yokohama
Dry dock Wharf@MHI, Yokohama
Wharf repair work@Shimizu port DCIS
Shake down cruise
BOP R&M@MHI, Yokohama Loading Assemble / Stack up / Function testR&M (‐ 2014Sep)
@Singapore, ,
Riser R&M*@MHI, Yokohama
T i R&M
Loading
Tensioner R&M@MHI, Yokohama Maintenance Test
*Riser R&M is planned in May – August, 2014
Agenda 9Agenda 9
Major Work Items (1/3)Major Work Items (1/3)• Class NK / ABS required inspections & maintenancesC ass / S equ ed spect o s & a te a ces
– 6,600 V high voltage instruments– Navigation instruments, Radio– Dynamic Positioning Systemy g y– Explosion proof instruments– Water tight door/hatch– Azimuth thruster– Ship construction– Main generator– Mooring gear– Ballast tank– Life boat– Crane
El– Elevator– Derrick– CMC
Tra elin blo k
Agenda 9Agenda 9
– Traveling block
Major Work Items (2/3)Major Work Items (2/3)• 5 year certification works
– Mud circulation facilities– Pipe handling facilities– Power swivel– Draw worksDraw works– Riser– Tensioner
BOP– BOP
Agenda 9Agenda 9
Major Work Items (3/3)Major Work Items (3/3)• Replacement of deterioration instruments
– DCIS(Drilling Control Instrumentation System)– IAS (Integrated Automation System)– LaboratoryLaboratory– Intake exhaust facilities– Air conditioning facilities– Pump
Agenda 9Agenda 9
R&DR&D• Ultra deep water Drill Pipe: Fatigue test and analysis, model test for stick‐slip/whirl/VIV
• Turbine Driven Coring System(TDCS): On‐land coring test using experimental prototypeu b e e Co g Syste ( CS): O a d co g test us g e pe e ta p ototype
• Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic (CFRP) Riser: Tensile/fatigue/collapse test, evaluation for 4,000 m application
• Long Term Borehole Monitoring System (LTBMS): Preparation for high temperature lifeLong Term Borehole Monitoring System (LTBMS): Preparation for high temperature life test on borehole telemetry, On‐land test for deployment tool of C6 LTBMS
• High Voltage Pulse Drilling: Feasibility study• Chikyu Under Water TV Camera system ROV (CU ROV): Performance test at flow tank• Chikyu Under Water TV Camera system ROV (CU‐ROV): Performance test at flow tank
Agenda 9Agenda 9
C t d j th f l b difi tiConcepts and major themes for lab modifications:
1 O ti i f D Ri D illi1. Optimize for Deep Riser Drilling1.1 Efficient treatment for Cuttings1.2 Deep Drilling Samples (Lithified and igneous rocks)p g p ( g )1.3 Deep Drilling Samples (Limit of Life)
2 More Flexibility in Lab Operation2. More Flexibility in Lab Operation2.1 Simple Path of Samples2.2 Efficient Layout in Each Area2.3 Spare Space for layout customization and Third Party Tool in
each Expedition
3. Safe and Comfortable Work Environment
Agenda 9
New Design for Lab Layoutg y
1.1 Efficient treatment for Cuttings Space for Cuttings Treatment in Core Processing Deck Large Sink for Cuttings Washing and Wet Sieving Separate Sample Flow Route from Core Sample Separate Sample Flow Route from Core Sample
1.2 Deep Drilling Samples (Lithified and Igneous Rock) Space for Core Sampling Room
1.3 Deep Drilling Samples (Limit of Life)1.3 Deep Drilling Samples (Limit of Life) New Equipment: Cell Alive System Table KOACH R d d D t f Ai C diti i S t Reduced Dust from Air Conditioning System
Agenda 9
New Design for Lab Layout2 1 Simple Path of Samples2.1 Simple Path of Samples Separate Work Space for Working and Archive
Halves Simplified Sample Flow Path for Powdered
Solid Samples (New X‐ray Lab for XRD XRF)(New X ray Lab for XRD, XRF)
2.2 Efficient Layout in Each Area f b h b New Layout for PP Lab, Geochemistry Lab New GC Lab New Gas pipes New Gas pipes More Monitors to display Drill Floor Operation
and Real‐time Data
2.3 Spare Space for layout customization and Third Party Tool in Each Expedition
Agenda 9
y p Additional desks in Library Spare space in each Lab
Chikyu Membership StatusChikyu Membership Status
• Current Members– ECORD (USD1M/yr)( /y )– ANZIC (USD0.3M/yr)
U d ti ti• Under negotiation– Taiwan (received LOI on March 2014)– China (planning next meeting through MEXT)– Malaysia Myanmar Vietnam IndonesiaMalaysia, Myanmar, Vietnam, Indonesia,Philippines (talking)
Agenda 10
JOIDESResolutionFacilityBoardReport
SusanE.HumphrisWoodsHoleOceanographicInstitution
Chikyu IODPBoard:30‐31March2015,Yokohama,Japan
Role of JOIDES Resolution Facility BoardRoleofJOIDESResolutionFacilityBoard
• Determine the operations schedule of the JOIDES Resolution
• Approve the JOIDES Resolution Annual Program Plan
• Approve the IODP Science Support Office Annual Program Plan
• Provide oversight of the JOIDES Resolution Facility’s advisory panelso de o e s g o e O S eso u o ac y s ad so y pa e s‐‐Maintaincommunicationswith,andreceivefeedbackfrom,otherFBsregardingtheeffectivenessoftheadvisorypanelsinmeetingtheirneeds
• Develop and monitor policies for data collection, pre‐ and post‐cruisepublications, and core curation associated with the JOIDES Resolution
Meetings: March and August 201323‐24 April 2014
Next Meeting: 12‐13 May 2015
JR FacilityExpeditionStatusExpeditions Completed Since Last EFB Meeting:30 March–30 May 2014: 350: Izu‐Bonin Mariana: Rear‐arc30 May–30 July 2014: 351: Izu‐Bonin Mariana: Arc Origins
ExpeditionsCompletedSinceLastEFBMeeting:
30 May 30 July 2014: 351: Izu Bonin Mariana: Arc Origins30 July–29 September 2014: 352: Izu‐Bonin Mariana: Forearc29 November 2014–29 January 2015: 353: Indian Monsoon29 January–31 March 2015: 354: Bengal Fan
Expeditions Scheduled:ExpeditionsScheduled:31 March–31 May 2015: 355: Arabian Sea Monsoon CPP*31 July–30 September 2015: 356: Indonesian Throughflow30 September–30 November 2015: 359: Maldives Monsoon30 November 2015–30 January 2016: 360: Indian Ridge Moho30 January 31 March 2016 361 South African Climates &30 January–31 March 2016: 361: South African Climates &
Agulhas Current Density Profile APL31 July–30 September 2016: 362: Sumatra Seismogenic Zone
* Not included in the base budget; dependent on external funding source
30 September–30 November 2016: 363: Western Pacific Warm Pool
Long Term JOIDES ResolutionLong‐TermJOIDESResolutionCruiseTrack
In 2014 the JRFB reaffirmed that based on current andIn 2014, the JRFB reaffirmed that, based on current and
anticipated proposal pressure, the JOIDES Resolution will follow a
path from the western and southwestern Pacific Ocean, through
the Southern Ocean and into the Atlantic Ocean for opportunitiesthe Southern Ocean, and into the Atlantic Ocean for opportunities
for drilling there starting in 2018 and 2019.
This will be revisited/updated at the May 2015 JRFB meeting.
JOIDESResolutionFacilityBoardMembershipSusan Humphris, Chair WHOI, USA (Extended to 9/30/2015)James Allan National Science Foundation, USARyo Anma University of Tsukuba, JapanB.K. Bansal Ministry of Earth Science, IndiaGilbert Camoin European Management Agency, CEREGE, FranceGilbert Camoin European Management Agency, CEREGE, FranceManoel Cardoso Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nivel
(CAPES), BrazilB d Cl JR I l i O i i T A&M U i i USABrad Clement JR Implementing Organization, Texas A&M University, USAMike Coffin Australia‐New Zealand IODP ConsortiumGil Young Kim Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM), g ( ),
Republic of KoreaAnthony Koppers Oregon State University, USAHeiko Pälike University of Bremen GermanyHeiko Pälike University of Bremen, GermanyChristina Ravelo U. California, Santa Cruz, USAAndrew Roberts Australian National University, AustraliaQing Sun Ministry of Science and Technology, China
Items for CIB AttentionItemsforCIBAttention
db k di h ff i f h d i l i i• Feedback regarding the effectiveness of the advisory panels in meeting the needs of the Chikyu IODP Board
• Proposal and site survey confidentiality policies – clarifications regardinghandling of proprietary data and information
• Amphibious IODP‐ICDP drilling proposal procedures and guidelines
• Curatorial Advisory Board: Curators make recommendations FBs approve• Curatorial Advisory Board: Curators make recommendations, FBs approve3 new members to start October 2015
i di i i l i h i i• Suggestions regarding retiring proposals with no proponent activity
JR FacilityBoardPanels• ScienceEvaluationPanel
(merger of Proposal Evaluation Panel and Site Characterization Panel)• Responsible for evaluation of all IODP drilling proposals • Two co‐Chairs (one each for scientific evaluation and site survey review)• Initially will remain the same size as two panels but may reduce in size Initially will remain the same size as two panels, but may reduce in size
Advantages:‐ Allows more holistic review of feasibility and readiness of proposals for drilling‐ Proponents receive one comprehensive review letter‐ Should result in fewer proposals in the “holding bin” ‐ One message to the appropriate FBs on status of proposal
• EnvironmentalProtection&SafetyPanel• Provides independent advice with regard to safety and environmental issuesp g yassociated with proposed drilling
• Used by ECORD FB, and the CIB only for riserless proposals (riserproposals go straight to Chikyu safety panel)proposals go straight to Chikyu safety panel)
JOIDESResolution FacilityPoliciesandGuidelines
Approved: • Conflict of Interest Policy• JR Staffing Proceduresg• JR Standard Measurements• SEP Site Survey Guidelines• EPSP Safety Review Guidelines• Third Party Tools & Instruments Policy
IODPPolicies
A d IODP E i t l P i i lApproved: • IODP Environmental Principles• IODP Proposal Confidentiality Policy• IODP Site Survey Data Confidentiality Policy• IODP Site Survey Data Confidentiality Policy• IODP Proposal Submission Guidelines• IODP Sample, Data and Obligations Policyp , g y
Role of JOIDES Resolution Facility BoardRoleofJOIDESResolutionFacilityBoard
• Determine the operations schedule of the JOIDES Resolution
• Approve the JOIDES Resolution Annual Program Plan
• Approve the IODP Science Support Office Annual Program Plan
• Provide oversight of the JOIDES Resolution Facility’s advisory panelso de o e s g o e O S eso u o ac y s ad so y pa e s‐‐Maintaincommunicationswith,andreceivefeedbackfrom,otherFBsregardingtheeffectivenessoftheadvisorypanelsinmeetingtheirneeds
• Develop and monitor policies for data collection, pre‐ and post‐cruisepublications, and core curation associated with the JOIDES Resolution
Meetings: March and August 201323‐24 April 2014
Next Meeting: 12‐13 May 2015
ECORD Facility Board (EFB)ECORD Facility Board (EFB)
R t d P U d tReport and Progress Update
CIB Meeting Yokohama 30 31 March 2015CIB Meeting, Yokohama, 30-31 March 2015
ECORD FB members:
- Science Board: Karsten Gohl (GER), Chair - reportingAntonio Cattaneo (F)Dominique Weis (CAN)Dominique Weis (CAN)Gerald R. Dickens (USA)Marta Torres (USA)
ECORD E ti B (ECORD C il b EMA ESO- ECORD Executive Bureau (ECORD Council core members, EMA, ESO,ESSAC, E-ILP)
- Funding agencies (NSF, MEXT)
Status of MSP proposals at EFB as of 26 March 2015
758 F ll2 ‘Atl ti M if’ (F üh G t l )758-Full2 ‘Atlantis Massif’ (Früh-Green et al.)- Expedition 357 in late 2015 (Co-Chiefs G. Früh-Green & B. Orcutt)- 10 drill sites with MeBo70 and RockDrill-2 on RV James Cook- 10 drill sites with MeBo70 and RockDrill-2 on RV James Cook- expedition costs are about $4.0M with ship as IKC
548-Full3-Add ‘Chicxulub Crater‘ (Morgan et al.)
- Expedition 364 in early 2016y- 1 drill hole to 1500 m penetration; jack-up drill- expedition costs are about $9.9M with $8.5M coming from ECORD,$1 0M f ICDP d IKC ( l l?) t d f M i$1.0M from ICDP and IKC (supply vessel?) requested from Mexico
Status of MSP proposals at EFB as of 26 March 2015
813-Full-Add ‘Antarctic Paleoclimate’ (Williams et al.)
- scheduled for early 2018 (2017 not possible)- 8 sites with RockDrill-2 on RV N/B Palmer- expedition costs must be lower than $9.0M incl ship costs (negotiations with NSF on ship costs), provided that primary objectives in proposal and addendum are not changedaddendum are not changed
708-Full ‘Arctic Paleoceanography’ (Stein et al.)g p y ( )
- scheduled for Arctic summer 2018- 1 site with drill ship- expedition cost is limited to $15.0M with ice-breaker support as IKC, provided that primary objectives in proposal and addendum are not changedchanged
Status of MSP proposals at EFB as of 26 March 2015
581-Full2 ‘Late Pleistocene Coralgal Banks’ (Droxler & Sager)g ( g )- EFB holding bin
637-Full2 ‘New England Shelf Hydrogeology’ (Person et al.)- EFB holding bin
716-Full2 ‘Hawaiian Drowned Reefs’ (Webster et al.)- EFB holding bin- EFB holding bin
Schedule of MSP expeditions2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 20232015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
758 Atlantis M. MeBo & RD‐II,
548 Chicxulub jack‐up, MC
none 813 Antarctic RD‐II, LC‐MC
LC LC MC LC HCMeBo & RD II, LC
jack up, MC RD II, LC MC708 Arcticdrill ship, HC
LC l t (<$8M) MC id t ($8 15M) HC hi h t (>$15M)
708
LC = low-cost (<$8M) MC = mid-cost ($8-15M) HC = high-cost (>$15M)
758Exp. 357
637
716 548Exp. 364
581
Exp. 364
813
MSP proposals in EFB holding binscheduled MSP proposals
EFB Science Board membership changes
Number of Science Board members increases to 6 with fixed quotas:
- 3 members from ECORD countries (incl. Chair)1 b f IODP JR (USA)- 1 member from IODP-JR (USA)
- 1 member from associated IODP-JR (non-US)- 1 member from IODP-Chikyu (Japan)
Members rotating off at end of 2015:
- Antonio Cattaneo (France)( )- Marta Torres (USA)
New members starting 1 Jan 2016:
- Gilles Lericolais (France)- Stephen Gallagher (Australia)- Fumio Inagaki (Japan)- Fumio Inagaki (Japan)
New Chair and Vice-Chair starting 1 Jan 2016:
Chair Gilles Lericolais (France) Vice Chair Dominiq e Weis (Canada)Chair: Gilles Lericolais (France) Vice-Chair: Dominique Weis (Canada)
Other issues
MSP Third-Party Tools Policy
The EFB accepts the MSP Third-Party Tools and Instruments Policy. The policy will be posted on the IODP website.
Guidelines on Amphibious Drilling Proposals (ADP)
The EFB discussed the guidelines of ADPs which were drafted by an g yIODP-ICDP committee led by Ken Miller and presented at the EFB meeting by Keir Becker. The EFB suggested some minor changes and corrections to the flow charts for workshops and full proposals andcorrections to the flow charts for workshops and full proposals, and accepted the guidelines.
Next EFB meetingNext EFB meeting
- 2 days in the two weeks of 4-15 April 2016 (dates still to be determined)- meeting venue will likely be in Brussels (Belgium)meeting venue will likely be in Brussels (Belgium)
International Ocean Discovery Program
International Continental Scientific Drilling Program
Guidelines for joint review of “Amphibious Drilling Proposals” (ADP’s)
Version 1 (Jan/Feb 2015) developed by the joint ICDP-SAG IODP-SEP committee
Kenneth Miller (IODP SEP), Pierre Francus (ICDP EC), Flavio Anselmetti (ICDP SAG),
Jochen Erbacher (IODP Forum), and Sean Gulick (IODP SEP)
Version 2 (3 April 2015) modified after review at EFB and March CIB meetings
The International Ocean Discovery Program (IODP) and the International Continental
Scientific Drilling Program (ICDP) support scientific endeavours requiring drilling on the
seafloor or on land, respectively. Both programs focus on challenging themes of global
geoscientific and socio-economic relevance, including, but not limited to: 1) active faulting,
earthquake, and geohazard processes; 2) heat and mass transport, global cycles, and planetary
dynamics; 3) environmental and climate change; and 4) the hidden biosphere. Scientific
interests in these topics potentially span onshore and offshore drilling objectives, though
programmatically crossing the shoreline can be a challenge since IODP is focused on
seafloor scientific drilling and ICDP is focused on continental scientific drilling. Although
previous onshore-offshore coordinated drilling proposals have been successful (New Jersey
sea level and Chicxulub impact structure), IODP and ICDP recognized the challenges in
proposing scientific drilling to two organizations with different deadlines and procedures.
Hence, IODP and ICDP commissioned a committee to develop protocols for joint review of
proposals that require scientific drilling both onshore and offshore, here dubbed Amphibious
Drilling Proposals (ADP’s).
Definition: Amphibious drilling proposals are those for which full achievement of the
scientific objectives requires scientific drilling at both onshore and offshore sites.
This report presents the recommended submission and joint evaluation procedures for
ADP’s. To the extent possible, they generally preserve the normal deadlines and review
procedures of the two programs, with an added final step to produce a single integrated
review statement that is passed back to proponents and forward to both IODP facility boards
and the ICDP Executive Committee (EC) for potential joint implementation. The committee
was not tasked with working out protocols for joint implementation, which will need to be
resolved between IODP Facility Boards and ICDP EC and Assembly of Governors, possibly
on a case-by-case basis.
Workshop Proposals
Development of a successful ADP will normally require a workshop to bring together
members of the IODP and ICDP communities and to justify the need for both onshore and
offshore sites. Figure 1 presents a flow chart to illustrate the recommended procedure for
joint ICDP-IODP evaluation of ADP workshop proposals. ICDP formally accepts workshop
proposals that can be funded by ICDP program funds. The current phase of IODP has no
program-wide commingled funds for support of workshops, but most IODP national or
consortium committees have some workshop funding (e.g., Magellan+ within ECORD,
USSSP workshop funding, JDESC workshop funding, etc). It should be noted that ICDP
workshop proposals are in some ways equivalent to pre-proposals within IODP. The
following recommended procedures for review of ADP workshop proposals involve
coordination between the different ICDP and IODP procedures but no significant changes to
them.
Formal ADP workshop proposals should be submitted to ICDP for its annual January
15 deadline for normal review at the spring meeting of the ICDP SAG. On a coordinated
timeline, proponents should submit workshop co-funding proposals to relevant IODP
national or consortium workshop funding sources (and potentially to other sources like
private foundations and industry) for review by their normal procedures. The formal ICDP
workshop proposal should be clearly identified as an ADP workshop proposal in the abstract
of the submission. An ADP workshop proposal submission to ICDP should include a
complete and realistic workshop agenda, enabling the execution of the workshop and
production of a workshop report within a maximum of 12 months following funding. The
workshop proposal should describe the scientific objectives of the project, general drilling
strategy, and the societal relevance. It is recommended that the workshop plan include: (1)
invitation of international experts of the relevant disciplines to provide scientific input to the
workshop themes and to foster international collaboration; (2) participation of experts in
drilling strategies and technologies; and (3) participation of the operators (ICDP for onshore
sites and from JRSO, ESO or CEDEX as appropriate for the offshore sites) to provide some
idea of feasibility and preliminary cost estimates. The participation of young scientists should
be especially encouraged.
ADP workshop proposals will be reviewed by the ICDP SAG/EC following normal
ICDP procedures and the IODP SEP by adapting its procedures for review of IODP pre-
proposals. For the latter, the ICDP office will transmit a copy of the ICDP submission to the
IODP Science Support Office, who will distribute it to SEP for evaluation of the proposed
amphibious drilling program much as if it were an IODP pre-proposal. The SEP review will
generally occur at its regular late June/early July meeting, shortly after the ICDP EC
considers the SAG review and makes a decision about ICDP workshop funding. At the time
of the SEP review, there might also be feedback from IODP national or consortium workshop
programs about the coordinated workshop co-funding proposals. The SEP review will focus
primarily on scientific and preliminary logistical feedback that can be provided along with
the SAG review to proponents/workshop organizers well before any workshop actually
occurs.
Full Proposals
Funding of a workshop proposal should lead to a joint IODP-ICDP Full Amphibious
Drilling Proposal. We recommend the following pathway for evaluation of a Full ADP.
Full ADP proposals should be submitted for the 1 Oct. IODP deadline using the IODP
proposal template (modified to allow appendices as outlined below) and electronic
submission system (see www.iodp.org/submitting-proposals); the IODP Science Support
Office will send copies of the formal IODP submission to the ICDP science office for
forwarding to SAG members. As there are differences in IODP and ICDP proposal formats
(see next paragraph), proponents may also need to make coordinated ICDP submissions for
the annual ICDP 15 Jan deadline, if required by ICDP. This submission timing will allow
time for the IODP-SEP to evaluate the proposal in early January, to decide if the proposal
warrants revision or external reviews. If external reviews are sought, these should be
obtained by mid-March, which would require that the reviews be fast tracked by the IODP
Science Support Office. This process will allow time for the ICDP SAG to review the joint
proposal plus IODP external reviews at its regular mid-March to early April annual meeting.
The SAG will forward their review in time for the late spring ICDP EC/OAG meeting and
early summer IODP SEP meeting, when the SEP would normally consider the external
reviews plus any proponent response before making a recommendation that could include
endorsement and forwarding to the appropriate IODP facility board for potential
implementation.
Full Proposals differ somewhat in ICDP and IODP. In ICDP, key components, aside
from the scientific goals and drilling strategy common to both, include developing the
scientific team, ensuring that it is sufficiently international. ICDP proposals also include site
survey, drilling strategy, and cost information in the body of the proposal, whereas IODP
proposals include site survey information in proscribed tables following the proposal and do
not include staffing suggestions. We suggest that these standard ICDP proposal components
(non-binding science team, international representation, site survey description, and drilling
strategy including costing) be included as an appendix to the formal IODP Full ADP
submission. The formal IODP ADP must include all IODP forms for offshore sites (and
possibly onshore sites if recommended by ICDP) and follow IODP protocols for delivery of
site survey information needed to drill these sites.
Following the SAG and SEP reviews, the chairs of these two panels should organize a
joint evaluation resulting in an integrated judgment and formal review document for the
ADP. This could be accomplished electronically or by sending an appropriate SAG member
to the early summer SEP meeting. The suggested timing would allow SEP to iterate with
comments from the SAG at its summer meeting. Both the SAG and the SEP can consider
evaluation of the science and the suitability of the site survey data for the ADP in their
normal deliberations.
Implementation of an Approved ADP
The committee was not tasked with developing all the procedures for actual
implementation of an approved amphibious drilling project, but it makes the following initial
recommendations. If the full proposal is viewed favourably by the SAG (early spring) and
SEP (early summer), then it will be forwarded to both the Executive Committee/Assembly of
Governors (ICDP) and the appropriate facility board (IODP) for consideration and possible
implementation (Fig. 2). At this point, issues of coordination of the onshore and offshore
components will be discussed by the appropriate facility board and ICDP Operational
Support Group (OSG).
Budgeting of the proposed science should be done by the appropriate IODP Science
Operator for offshore and ICDP for onshore, though it is likely that close interaction may be
involved when using mission specific platforms. As noted above, we strongly recommend
that possible costs be discussed at the workshop stage and preliminary costs estimates be
obtained prior to submission of the Full Proposal.
Science members of expedition science parties should be staffed jointly by the
relevant IODP operator (JRSO, ESO or CDEX) and ICDP, with the realization that
proponents are not guaranteed slots; rather the suggestions of participants in the Full Proposal
represent advice to the programs of interested potential science party members. All
participants should follow IODP sample and data policies in terms of obligations and
moratoria. ADP cores should be archived at the relevant IODP repositories. Project
publications should be handled through IODP-TAMU, following current IODP practice.
ICDP Potsdam
Evaluation
IODP-ICDP Amphibious Drilling Proposal (ADP) Development: Workshop
IODP Science Support Office
submission submission
June decision and funding
SEP SAG/EC
Green = ICDPBlue = IODPGray = scientists Workshop
ProposalJan 15 and ?
Workshop Funding
National/Consortium
IODP Workshop Programs
Figure 1
Costestimates
ICDP Potsdam
Evaluation
IODP-ICDP Amphibious Drilling Proposal (ADP) Development: Full Proposal
IODP Science Support Office
submission submission
Decision and funding
SAG
IODP Platfom Operators
Costestimates
SEP
Facilityboards
Workshop
Full ProposalOct 1 + Jan 15
Scheduling EC + OSG
Figure 2
IODP Progress Toward New Science PlanExpeditions and Full Proposals by Theme/Challenge
• Updated after Jan 2015 SEP + Mar 2015 EFB/CIB decisions• Does not include 12 pre-proposals identified at last two
SEP meetings (6 at each) for development to full
Key:* = holding bin after external review** = sent to external review after Jan 2015 SEP( ) = done at end of first IODP{ } = security issuesgreen font = 2012 top US priority challenge for JRcyan font = MSPorange font = Chikyu (*** = PCT approved)white font = JOIDES Resolution(or Chikyu riserless if CIB criteria are met)
Climate and Ocean Change (Challenges 1 & 2)
Challenge Done/scheduled At FB’s At SEP
#1 Climate response to high atmospheric CO2
361 SAFARI708 ACEX2813 Ant. Cenozoic
567 SPac Paleogene760 SW Australia K{778 Tanzania?}
771 Iberia Paleoclimate**834 Agulhas Cret.847 Drake/Scotia884CPP S Australia Cret.
#2 Ice sheet and sea level response to warming climate
(347 Baltic Sea)359 Maldives Monsoon708 ACEX2813 Ant. Cenozoic
581 Coralgal Banks716 Hawaiian Reefs732 Ant. Sed. Drifts839 Amund. Sea WAIS
730 Vanuatu SL751 Ross Sea WAIS*771 Iberia Paleoclimate**847 Drake/Scotia863 MDP ISOLAT
Climate and Ocean Change (Challenges 3 & 4)
Challenge Done/scheduled At FB’s At SEP
#3 Control of regional precipitation patterns
(341 S Alaska Margin)(346 Asian Monsoon)353 Indian Monsoon354 Bengal Fan355 Arab. Sea CPP356 Indon. Thruflow359 Maldives Mons’n361 SAFARI363 WPac Warm Pool
{549 Arabian Sea}{595 Indus Fan}618 E. Asian Mons’n777APL Okinawa
730 Vanuatu SL 819APL Arab Sea OMZ863 MDP ISOLAT868 Drake/Scotia877 Indian Monsoon
#4 Ocean response to chemical perturbation
364 Chicxulub Impact
760 Mentelle Basin 819APL Arab Sea OMZ857MDP DREAM858 APL NW Aust
Biosphere FrontiersChallenge Done/scheduled At FB’s At SEP
#5 Origin, extent, significance of subseafloor biosphere
(347 Baltic Sea)357 Atlantis Massif
505 Mariana forearc
635 Hydrate Ridge830 APL Scott Plat.833 Guaymas Basin857MDP DREAM
#6 Limits of subseafloor life
830 APL Scott Plat.865 Nankai T Limit*** 857MDP DREAM
#7 Ecosystem sensitivity to environmental change
{724 Gulf of Aden}
760 Mentelle Basin 819 APL Arab OMZ857MDP DREAM858 APL NW Aust
Earth Connections
Challenge Done/scheduled At FB’s At SEP
#8 Upper mantle composition and dynamics
(345 Hess Deep)360 Atlantis Bank
522 Superfast Crust800 Atlantis Bank
834 Agulhas Cret. 805 MDP Mohole
#9 Seafloor spreading and ocean crustal architecture
(345 Hess Deep)349 SCS Tectonics
522 Superfast Crust769 APL 504B logs
760 Naturiste Plat. 805 MDP Mohole838 CPP SCS II879 Corinth Rift**
#10 Chemical exchange between crust and seawater
357 Atlantis Massif 505 Mariana forearc 818 Brothers Arc
#11 Subduction and formation of continental crust
350 IBM rear arc351 IBM arc origins352 IBM forearc
698 IBM middle crust***
Earth in Motion
Challenge Done/scheduled At FB’s At SEP
#12 Control of earthquakes, landslides, tsunamis
(NanTroSEIZE 1,2,3)(334/344 CRISP A)362 Sumatra364 NTS C10 Obs’y
NanTroSEIZE 3,4***537B CRISP B***781A Hikurangi782B Hikurangi
770 Kanto Asperity796 Ligurian Slide 811 Cape Fear841 APL Hikurangi835 JTRACK
#13 Storage and flow of subseafloor carbon
533 Cascadia CORKs791 APL Cascadia
811 Cape Fear836 APL Timor Tr.841 APL Hikurangi
#14 Fluids linking biological, chemical, physical processes
837 New Eng. hydro.505 Mariana forearc633 Costa Rica mud mounds
MEXT Report to CIB #3 Meeting
Yuzuru KimuraYuzuru Kimura
JAMSTEC Budget
400000(Unit: 100 Mil Yen)
300000 Supplementary300000 Supplementary budget Others
Supplementary 200000 budget Drilling
Subsidy
100000Original budget
0
FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015
MOF evaluated Science Drilling ProjectMOF evaluated Science Drilling Project
• Ministry of Finance is responsible for its budgetdisbursement, and evaluates several sectorsevery year.
• Ministry of Finance studied the implementation• Ministry of Finance studied the implementationof Chikyu budget by itself in FY2014, and
l frecommended several actions of improvementof the contract procedures in its report.
E CORD newsE CORD news
G . CAMO ING . CAMO IN
Director of the ECORD Managing Agency Director of the ECORD Managing Agency
> Renewed contacts with Spain
> Potential newcomersFY14 contributions
($US) ‐ « Accessing Member » : Russia
‐ Contacts : Turkey, Czech Republic, Luxembourg
($US)Austria > FY18 100,000 Belgium TBD 30,000 Canada > FY15 150,000 5 5 ,Denmark > FY16 184,000Finland > FY18 80,000 Germany > FY18 5,600,000
l d
17
Iceland >FY14 30,000 Ireland >FY18 137,000 Israel > FY16 30,000 Italy > FY18 400,000
ECOTotal fixed costs :
M 11.2 $ yr ‐1Italy > FY18 400,000 Netherlands >FY18 500,000
Norway >FY18 1,100,000Poland >FY18 30,000
RD m
$ y
Available for MSP
Portugal >FY18 90,000 Sweden >FY18 528,080
Switzerland >FY16 600,000 UK >FY18 4 296 400
mem
b
operations :
M 7.8 $ yr ‐1UK >FY18 4,296,400
France >FY18 5,212,000TOTAL 19,097,480
ers
> P o t e n t i a l a d d i t i o n a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s ( c a s h , I K C s ) n o t c o n s i d e r e d
http://www.ecord.org
A m p h i b i o u s D r i l l i n g P r o p o s a l s ( A D P s )A m p h i b i o u s D r i l l i n g P r o p o s a l s ( A D P s )
ADPs can only be accomplished by
( )drilling both onshore (ICDP) and
offshore (IODP, mostly throughff ( y g
ECORD)
Landslide geohazards :
796 Full
g
Testing multiple trigger mechanisms
at the Ligurian slope (A. Kopf et al.)
NADIR
Nice Amphibious Drilling, in situ
monitoring and risk analysis
(A. Kopf et al.)
I n ‐ K i n d C o n t r i b u t i o n s ( I K C s )I n ‐ K i n d C o n t r i b u t i o n s ( I K C s )
• D r i l l i n g p l a t f o rms / s y s t ems
• Suppo r t v e s s e l s
• E s s e n t i a l s c i e n t i f i c s e r v i c e• E s s e n t i a l s c i e n t i f i c s e r v i c e
• Ha z a r d s i t e s u r v e y
• On sho r e fa c i l i t y n e a r t h e d r i l l s i t e
• I c e managemen tg
• Remo t e l o g i s t i c s a nd a s s i s t a n c e
I n ‐ K i n d C o n t r i b u t i o n s ( I K C s )I n ‐ K i n d C o n t r i b u t i o n s ( I K C s )
An y I ODP memb e r a n d n o n ‐membe r c o u n t r y c a n
p r o p o s e I K C s f o l l ow i n g a n o p e n c a l l
I K C s o f f e r s e v a l u a t e d b y E SO a n d t h e i r p r o p o s e d
c a s h v a l u e mu s t b e a p p r o v e d b y t h e E CORD C o u n c i l
I K C s r ew a r d e d b y e x t r a S c i e n c e P a r t y p o s i t i o n s o n t h e I K C s r ew a r d e d b y e x t r a S c i e n c e P a r t y p o s i t i o n s o n t h e
MSP e x p e d i t i o n f o r wh i c h t h e I K C h a s b e e n r e n d e r e d .
ECORD Science and Educat ional ProgrammeECORD Science and Educat ional Programme
D i s t i ngu i s hed Le c tu r e r P rog ramme
Mage l l anP l u s Work shop Se r i e s P rog ramme
ECORD Summer Schoo l s
ECORD Scho l a r sh i p s ECORD Scho l a r sh i p s
ECORD Gran t s
Tea che r s a t Sea
ECORD Schoo l o f Rock
Magel lanPlus Workshop Series ProgrammeMagel lanPlus Workshop Series Programme
2014
( ) Deep‐Sea Record of Mediterranean Messinian Events (DREAM‐II), Paris, France
IODP Drilling within the Corinth Continental Rift, Athens, Greeceg f , ,
BLACKSINK: Black Sea History of the past 15 Ma, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Accelerating Neoproterozoic Research through Scientific Drilling, Nottingham, UK
Advancing Sub‐surface Biosphere and Paleoclimate Research, Seoul, Korea
North Atlantic Drilling for Climate dynamics, Heidelberg, Germanyg f y , g, y
Magel lanPlus Workshop Series ProgrammeMagel lanPlus Workshop Series Programme
2015
D illi th C t P l t i l S th Atl ti N tl • Drilling the Cretaceous‐Palaeogene tropical South Atlantic, Newcastle,
UK
• MEDGATE : Mediterranean‐Atlantic Gateways, Rabat, Morocco
• Mantle, Water and Life, Lyon, France, f , y ,
• Submarine Paleoseismology, Zurich, Switzerland
Amph ib i ou s D r i l l i ng P roposa l work shops :
20 k€ y r ‐ 12 0 k€ y r 1
E C O R D S umm e r S c h o o l sE C O R D S umm e r S c h o o l s
20150 5
• Urbino Summer School in Paleoclimatology
• ECORD Bremen Summer School 2015 Ocean crust processes :
f lt fl d lifmagma, faults, fluxes and life
• 8th Course, International School of Foraminifera, Urbino, Italy8 Course, International School of Foraminifera, Urbino, Italy
• ECORD Training Course : “The Virtual Drillship Experience”,
Bremen, Germany
ECORD Council Funding agencies
JOIDES
EMA
JOIDESResolution
EMAManaging Agency
MagellanPlusW k h S i
Chikyu
ECORD FB MSP scheduling
committee
Workshop Series(ECORD – ICDP)
ESOImplementing Organisation
ESSACScientific CommitteeMission Specific
Platforms
Education / Outreach
Vision
Task Force
Platforms
Task ForceTask Force
ECORD ILP( Industry Liaison )( Industry Liaison )
____________________________________________
Chikyu Board Meeting 30-31 March 2015 - ANZIC Report
ANZIC funding for membership expires within the Australian 2015-16
financial year. Currently ANZIC is preparing an application for another
5 years of funding for its IODP membership from the Australian
Government.
ANZIC currently comprises: Australia: 2 Australian Government funded
research agencies and 15 universities; NZ 1 NZ Government Funded
research agency and 2 universities. The new consortium will comprise
similar number and composition of agencies, with some universities
leaving and others joining. Membership is still strong and while the
majority of the membership fees comes from the Australian Government the
other ANZIC members will bring in about AUS$785K per year committed for
the life of the membership.
Under the new application ANZIC's membership will be similar to present,
joining the Chikyu, JOIDES, and ECORD platforms at US$1.5M to US/Europe
and US$0.3M to Japan. However, as part of the normal course of events,
we have been asked to provide an assessment of the effects on the
membership if we were to receive less Australian Government funding.
ANZIC should know likely outcome at the IODP forum in July with official
approval by September/October 2015.
During its membership of IODP, ANZIC has continued to provide world
class scientists on all IODP legs across a range of scientific
disciplines. Recently, we have had high quality scientists on Legs 353,
354, and 365. This will continue into the foreseeable future. ANZIC
continues to be able to develop world class drilling proposals. Leg 356
to NW Australia to investigate Indonesian Throughflow has an ANZIC co-
Chief and will sail in the middle of this year. Two very highly regarded
and exiting IODP proposals have been developed for potential riser
drilling on Chikyu in the Australia-NZ region: Hikurangi Margin - slow
slip led by Uni of Texas and GNS, and LHR - eastern Gondwana margin
break-up led by GA and JAMSTEC.
The Hikurangi Margin project is a multiphase drilling project, with the
Chikyu required for riser drilling in the slow slip fracture zone.
Unfortunately the proposal for the 3D seismic survey wasn't funded,
however another application will be prepared and submitted this calendar
year, and we are still awaiting the outcome of an application to NERC
for the same work. Understand its at the final stage and we are
expecting a decision very soon. Given the EPSP favourably reviewed the
proposed drill sites, we are expecting the riserless component to be
scheduled into the JOIDES 2017/18 schedule.
The LHR pre-proposal submitted in October 2014 was reviewed extremely
well by the SEP in January 2015, and on the back of this GA and JAMSTEC
will jointly be convening a science development workshop in Sydney next
week (7-10 April) to progress the proposal for submission in October
2014. A total of 36 scientists from all over the world will be in
attendance. The LHR project is a potential CPP, and GA has recently
obtained funding from the Australian Government to undertake the site
survey work with JAMSTEC. GAs commitment to the site survey has been
communicated to JAMSTEC. On the back of a good review of the proposal,
GA would then go back to the Australian Government for the remaining
funds for the drilling leg. We continue to have positive discussions
with the Federal Government about this project proposal - need to
identify a source of funding.
ANZIC is looking forward to receiving many of you at the IODP forum in
Canberra in July. Please bring warm clothes!
Andrew Heap
Geoscience Australia (on behalf of ANZIC)
12. Chikyu Safety Review Committee Report
Drilling Safety Sub-Committee U dUpdate
3rd Chikyu IODP Board (CIB) Meeting3rd Chikyu IODP Board (CIB) Meeting30 March 2015
Shigemi NaganawaChair of Drilling Safety Sub-Committee
Outline
2nd meeting on 13 March 2015: Review on interim report by CDEX for future NanTro C2 operation planreport by CDEX for future NanTro C2 operation plan
Borehole breakout was a major problem at Exp. 348 C0002 riser holeC0002 riser hole
Extremely difficult and challenging drilling project l i h i l d i i i t
1. Interpretation of the breakout mechanism: Prof.
also in geomechanical and engineering points
Morita gave an important comment to the iGM report2. Appropriate drilling fluid management: A
countermeasure for the borehole breakout was agreed3. New drilling plan: Casing program CDEX proposed
for the borehole breakout problem was discussed3rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015 2
1. Formation Characteristics and AnisotropicBorehole Breakout from iGM Report
Borehole Breakout Simulation Result
Formation Dip
4983.1m
4983.9m
Time-lapse Borehole Images
While drilling
Borehole Breakout from iGM Report Formation with steeply
dipping bedding planes
Coring Int.
30-Dec-13 22:30
30-Dec-13 23:00
4981.2m
4986.8m
4989.5m
4992.0m
4995.3m
4998.2m
900 Strong anisotropy in horizontalformation strength
Strong anisotropy in horizontalShmax(from C2A)
ding
fric
tion30-Dec-13 23:305001.2m
5003 7
After 3.5-5.5hrs
g pystress field
Formation with potentialweak planes
esio
n an
d sl
id weak planes A number of steeply dipping
sliding planes due to structuraldeformation
uctio
n of
coh
e
Aft 36h
deformation Anisotropic borehole
breakoutD illi fl id i i th h
ReduAfter 36hrs Drilling fluid invasion through
the weak planes into bedding/fracture which reduces cohesion and sliding frictioncohesion and sliding friction
3rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015 3* iGM: Insight GeoMechanics Pty. Ltd.
12 Chikyu Safety Review Update12. Chikyu Safety Review Update
Health, Safety and Environment(HSE) GroupShi i M t dShigemi Matsuda
Agenda 12
Recent Activities of Chikyu Safety Review Committee and Sub committeeYear Safety Review Committee Sub ‐Committee2014 1 Drilling Safety Sub committee was
and Sub‐committee
20142. Committee mtg. was held
to review the result of Exp348 based on CDEX report
1. Drilling Safety Sub‐committee was formed and 1st mtg. was held to find out the reason why Borehole Instability problem occurred while
348 Resu& sugg
and the suggestion madeby Drilling Safety Sub‐committee (June)
drilling C0002 in Ex348. SC provided the suggestion to CDEX in the end (March)
lt review
estion
2015 3. 2nd Drilling SC Mtg. was held to discussthe interim report of the possiblecountermeasures CDEX has studied so
Discus
4. Committee Mtg. will beheld after Chikyu returnsfrom India in Aug. to
countermeasures CDEX has studied sofar for NanTroSEIZE final TD drilling(March)
ss counter‐& Drilling P
discuss C10 detail drillingplan
5. Drilling SC Mtg. will be held 1or 2 timesaccording to the progress of CDEX study
6. Geo‐hazard Sub‐committee will beformed in 2015 in cooperation with
‐measures
Plan
formed in 2015 in cooperation withDrilling Sub‐committee
Chikyu Safety Review Committee StructureSub‐committees (responsibility):1) Drilling Safety SC.(Riser and Riserless)2) G h d P ti SC (Ri )
JAMSTEC President&
2) Geo‐hazard Prevention SC. (Riser)Mandate : After the project is shifted to the implementation stage,
CDEX Director General
Recommendations Review Request•• GeoGeo‐‐hazard Prevention SChazard Prevention SC shall study
the site survey data submitted by theproponent to identify potential geo‐Chikyu Safety Review Committee
q
hazard at the proposed riser drillingsite. ※ Geohazard SC will be formed in JFY 2015
•• Drilling Safety SC Drilling Safety SC shall study the A Committee Chair, SC chairs and other members with expertise in Drilling Ops Marine g yg y y
drilling plan and the technologies employed in that drilling to verify operational feasibility
members with expertise in Drilling Ops, Marine Ops, Hole Stability, Ship Safety and Ship engineering
•• Chikyu Chikyu Safety Review CommitteeSafety Review Committeeshall provide advice and suggestionbased on the committee meeting
Result Study Result Study
DrillingSafety SC
GeohazardPrevention SC g
discussion and the feed back fromeach sub‐committee prior to carryingout the expedition
Safety SC.(4 experts)
(Currently active)
Prevention SC.
(To be active)
Supplemental Comment on Breakout Mechanism by Prof Morita a member of sub-committee
(1) Stress Stress-strain curve of steeply dipping rock
formation changes in millimeters
by Prof. Morita, a member of sub-committee
e formation changes in millimeters Hard and soft beddings are layered one
after another* Heterogeneity * Macroscopically Directional Stress concentration in millimeters eh
ole
the
kout
Stress concentration in millimetersBorehole breakout occurs in the way of formation detaching along bedding planes
(2) Shale Swelling e to
bor
eng
Bre
ak
(4) Increase in Pore Pressure & Escalation
in Swelling( ) S a e S e gIn hard rock formation the layer detaching breakout and/or micro-fracture (0.01-0.1mm in width, a few cm in length) Especially laminated shale often creates tu
ck d
ueD
etac
hinin Swelling
Mud and filtrate invasion due to outbreak of micro-fracture
spec a y a ated s a e o te c eatesthis problem
(3) Temperature Change∆T (temp. difference between while drilling ll
Pipe
Sla
yer
D
∆T (temp. difference between while drilling and original formation temperature) causes the laminated formation to swell and shrinkWhen the temperature increases while drilling the hard rock formation in thermal i d d f il d
(5)D
ridrilling the hard rock formation in thermal expansion will have the same problem as (2) shale swelling
Time-dependent failure caused by synergistic effect of (1) to (4)
3rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015 4
2. Management of Drilling Fluid Properties(suggestion from Prof Morita)(suggestion from Prof. Morita) Sub-committee agreed on the following drilling fluid
management planmanagement plan Nano-sealant is recommended to be added into
drilling fluid: To prevent detaching breakout causeddrilling fluid: To prevent detaching breakout causedby shale swelling in 0.1% order along the beddingsteeply dipping bedding plane
Maximizing mud weight as much as practicallypossible is recommended to be adopted and to bemaintained around minimum horizontal stressmaintained around minimum horizontal stress(Shmin) as upper limit: To resist large stress ofaccretionary prismaccretionary prism
Management of drilling fluid is crucial for good borehole stability to deepen the C0002 site hole
53rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015
borehole stability to deepen the C0002 site hole
Pore Pressure/Stress Prediction, Mud Weight Window and Casing ProgramWindow and Casing Program
Upper limit of mud weight Should be determined
Pore Peressure/Stress Projection
WD: 1939mMSL (1967.5mbsf)
Casing/Liner
rrent Configuration and Future P
01.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.20 2.40
ECD (sg)
Should be determined from predicted Shminand/or data from leakoff
36"53.9mbsf
500m
20"860 3mbsf 1000m
0Pore pressure (海水柱
圧)Mud Specific Gravity(17,12.25, 14.5 in hole)1.15sg_from LOT
1.39sg_from LOT
Sv
test at 11-3/4” Liner Casing design, riser load
i d i l i
860.3mbsf 1000m
1500m
T.O.L.1915.35mbsf
1000Shmin 1.42sg(InjectionTest Result)'SHmax 1.65sg(Packoff Event)'Shmin(est.)
'SHmax(est )' capacity and riser analysis should be also considered
Lower limit of mud weight
2000m13-3/8"2010.0mbsf
2500m
11-3/4"2922 5mbsf
2000
Dep
th (
mbs
f)
SHmax(est.)
Sv
SHmaxShmin
applied MW
Lower limit of mud weight Collapse/breakout
pressure
2922.5mbsf3000m
Length=±650m 3500m
3000
10-5
/8"
x 12
-1/4
"hol
e11
-3/4
"Exp
. ol
e
Pp
C ll /B k t pressure Casing program is discussed
based on safe operating
4000m
Length=±650m
4500mLength=±500m
4000
9-1/
2"x
11-3
/8"h
9-3/
8Lin
er
7-1/
2"x
8-1/
2!"h
ole
6" h l b l thi O li
<Contingency liner>8-1/2"x9-1/2"hole9-3/8"Exp.
Collapse/Breakoutpress.(estimated)
p gmud window
3rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015 6
5000m 5000
6" hole below this Org lineTarget interval including
3. New Drilling Plan and Casing Program
CDEX's New drilling plans are discussedCase A: Deepening the existing hole with sidetrack atCase A: Deepening the existing hole with sidetrack at
11-1/8" lowest existing casingCase B: Deepening the existing hole with sidetrack atCase B: Deepening the existing hole with sidetrack at
13-3/8" upper existing casingCase C: Drilling a new hole
Casing program for Case A, most realistic plan CDEX proposal: Drill fast and set casing immediately in
every 650±m interval (3 casing + 1 contingency) to maintain safe mud window
Proposal from member: To reduce time spent for under Proposal from member: To reduce time spent for under-reaming and risk of using expandable casing, drill 1,000m in one interval (2 casing + 1 contingency)1,000m in one interval (2 casing + 1 contingency)
73rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015
Proposed Casing Program for Case A11-3/4”Liner(already installed)
2922.5mbsf
Hole Size:10-5/8” x 12-1/4”6” hole will be drilled
through target formation 9-5/8” x 11-3/4”Expandable Casing
Hole Size:9-1/2” x 11-3/8”
of mega-splay fault
9-3/8” Liner
9-1/2 x 11-3/8
Hole Size:
Contingency7-5/8” x 9-3/8”Expandable Casing
8-1/2” x 9-1/2”
Hole Size:7 1/2” x 8 1/2”
7” Liner
7-1/2” x 8-1/2”
3rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015 8
Mega-splay fault
6” hole
IODP Science Support OfficefScripps Institution of Oceanography
University of California San Diego
Brief Report to Chikyu IODP BoardBrief Report to Chikyu IODP Board 30 March 2015
Holly Given, Executive Director
IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org
What is the IODP Science Support Office?What is the IODP Science Support Office?
• Funded by US National Science Foundation• FY2015 budget US$1008KFY2015 budget US$1008K • 4.9 person‐years (FTEs): 87% of budget
F T k• Four Tasks:– Support the JRFB and its advisory panels– Oversee the proposal process for IODP– Manage the Site Survey Data Bankg y– Provide www.iodp.org
IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org
What Holds IODP Together Now?
Science Plan MOUs on platform funding and staffing
What Holds IODP Together Now?
Science Plan, MOUs on platform funding and staffing
Common policies, proposal process
Expeditions, public relations, workshops
Discoveries, publications, other outcomes , p ,
IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org
30
35
IODP Proposal SubmissionsNew program
25
20
15
New1716 19
10
New
Revised
0
510 11 9
0
Oct‐04
Apr‐05
Oct‐05
Apr‐06
Oct‐06
Apr‐07
Oct‐07
Apr‐08
Oct‐08
Apr‐09
Oct‐09
Apr‐10
Oct‐10
Apr‐11
Oct‐11
Apr‐12
Oct‐12
Apr‐13
Oct‐13
Apr‐14
Oct‐14
106 Active Proposalsp17% involve Chikyu
(Engineering:1)
Earth in MotionEarth in Motion
(Engineering:1)
Climate and OceanClimate and OceanEarth ConnectionsEarth Connections
2020
55551717
BiosphereBiosphere
Earth ConnectionsEarth Connections
1313BiosphereBiosphere
l l h kAs of 12 February 2015
12 proposals are uniquely Chikyu
Active proposal status: 106 ct e p oposa status 06by target ocean
Arctic: 8Southern: Southern:
88
Mediterranean: 4
Arctic: 8
Indian: Indian: 1818Pacific: Pacific: 4141
Atlantic:Atlantic: 2727
d ad a 88
Atlantic: Atlantic: 2727
A f 12 F b 2015As of 12 February 2015
Active proposal status: 106p pby Review stage
Holding Bin: 7
SSEPEP: : 5555FBs: 44FBs: 44
As of 12 February 2015
106 Active Proposals by lead proponent’s affiliation
China: 1K 1
Brazil: 1
Japan:9
Japan:9
China: 1Korea: 1India: 2
US43US43
ANZIC: 9
4343
ECORD40
ECORD404040
Lead proponent’s affiliation (as of 12 February 2015)
Active proponent distributionActive proponent distribution
1300 unique proponentsKorea: 10
q p p
China: 37China: 37
Korea: 10
ANZIC: 72
India: 22Brazil: 26
Others:53
US: 428
ANZIC: 72
Japan: 138
53
Japan: 138
ECORD: 514
As of 12 February 2015
Proposalsp
• IODP proposal submissions MUST be made via p pthe e‐system (proposals.iodp.org)
l b i i id li d i• Proposal Submission Guidelines document is continuously evolving (iodp.org/program‐documents)
• Proposals continue to be refined at the Facility• Proposals continue to be refined at the Facility Board (see p147 of Agenda Book)
proponents Facility Board
IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org
SEP
Inquiries re: Agreements for proprietary site survey data (SSDB)
Proposal Region Data Provider
846‐APL (Peck) Falkland Islands Geophysical Services Inc
840‐Pre (Wagner)
Niger Margin Transect
Shell Nigeria
864‐Pre Pernambuco Unknown864‐Pre(Dunkley Jones)
PernambucoPlateau, Brazil
Unknown
730‐Full (Taylor) Bouganville Guyot, V t
IFREMERVanuatu
These inquiries resulted in clarifications to IODP Proposal and Data q pConfidentiality Policies (www.iodp.org/program‐documents)
IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org
Posting Program Policiesnts Posting Program Policies
cumen
m‐doc
progra
p.org/p
w.iodp
www
IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org
Call for Proposal language needed in early July
IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org
als
prop
ostting‐p
subm
itp.org/s
w.iodp
www
IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org
IODP proposals at the CIBIODP proposals at the CIBNumber Type Short Title Lead Proponent Affiliation Platform Status
537 CDP7 Costa Rica Seismogenesis Project Overview von Huene USA Chikyu+JR CIB
537B Full4 Costa Rica Seismogenesis Project Phase B Ranero ECORD: Germany Chikyu CIB
603 CDP3 NanTroSEIZE Overview Kimura Japan JR+Chikyu CIB
603C Full NanTroSEIZE Phase 3: Plate Interface Tobin Japan Chikyu CIB
698 Full3 Izu‐Bonin‐Mariana Arc Middle Crust Tatsumi Japan Chikyu CIB
707 CDP3 Kanto Asperity Project: Overview Kobayashi Japan JR+Chikyu SEP
781 MDP Hikurangi subduction margin Wallace ANZIC: New Zealand Chikyu+JR CIB
781B Full Hikurangi: Riser Wallace USA Chikyu CIBg y
782 Pre Kanto Asperity Project: Plate Boundary Deformation Yamamoto Japan Chikyu SEP
800 MDP Indian Ridge Moho Dick USA Chikyu+JR CIB
805 MDP MoHole to the Mantle Umino Japan Chikyu SEP
835 Full Japan Trench Tsunamigenesis Kodaira Japan Chikyu SEP835 Full Japan Trench Tsunamigenesis Kodaira Japan Chikyu SEP
857 MDP2 DREAM: Mediterranean Salt Giant Camerlenghi ECORD: Italy Chikyu+JR SEP
857A pre DREAM: Deep‐Surface Connection Rabineau ECORD: France Chikyu SEP
865 Full Nankai Trough Temperature Limit Hinrichs ECORD: Germany NR‐Chikyu CIB
871 Pre Lord Howe Rise Crustal Evolution Heap ANZIC: Australia Chikyu SEP871 Pre Lord Howe Rise Crustal Evolution Heap ANZIC: Australia Chikyu SEP
876 Pre Bend‐Fault Serpentinization Phipps Morgan ECORD: UK JR+Chikyu SEP
880 APL Experiment: Drilling parameters for Lithology Moe Japan NR‐Chikyu SEP
IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org
Chikyu IODP Board #1 Chikyu IODP Board #1 –– March, 2015March, 2015
INTEGRATED OCEANDRILLING PROGRAM
横浜市
505 Full 5: Mariana Convergent Margin: Geochemical, Tectonic, and Biological Processes
At JRFB
P t P t i i F t l
Objectives:
Proponents: Patricia Fryer et al. (1) Understand mass transport and geochemical cycling in subduction zones of non-accretionary forearcs*Possible non-riser Chikyu expedition
(2) Determine spatial and temporal variability of slab-related fluids to trace dehydration carbonate dissolution and
y p
dehydration, carbonate dissolution, and water/rock reactions
(3) Understand physical properties as(3) Understand physical properties as controls over dehydration reactions and seismicity
(4) Study spatial and temporal variability in metamorphic and tectonic processes
(5) Investigate controls over biological activity associated with mud volcanoes
Site Issues Class
505 Full 5: SEP review June 2014Site Issues Class
MAF-2B No data in SSDB 3ANo longer
dMAF-3B No data in SSDB 3A
MAF-9B 150 m • Problems with discrepancies in site locations (NAV file does not agree with
1Bc
proposed
locations (NAV file does not agree with proposed site locations) for 11, 12, 13, 14.
• No bathy and backscatter in digital and l f
MAF-10B 250 m 1BcMAF-11A 150 m 1Bc
MAF 12B 250 1BSignificant
analog form; • No interpreted seismic data with site
locations.• No information on bottom samples or
MAF-12B 250 m 1BcMAF-13A 250 m 1BcMAF-14A 250 m 1Bc
gnavigation problems
o o a o o bo o sa p es onearby cores
• No metadata
MAF 14A 250 m 1BcMAF-15A 100 m
MAF-16A 250 m 1Bc
1B – A few items of required data are not in the SSDB but are readily available3A – No data are in the SSDB but are believed to exist“c” – data do not image the target adequately (in reference to low res bathy andc data do not image the target adequately (in reference to low res bathy and backscatter images)
505 Full 5: SEP review June 2014
Update:Navigation issues (site locations) were addressed in the PRL. Proponents need to finish uploading data, and correct the mistakes (mismatch between CMPs oncorrect the mistakes (mismatch between CMPs on basemap and in NAV and SEGY data). New maps should provide us with the unambiguous siteNew maps should provide us with the unambiguous site locations.
537B-Full4 Costa Rica SeismogenesisProject Stage 2Project – Stage 2
• Lead Proponent: Cesar R. Ranero• CRISP Program B: The transition from stable to unstable slip at erosional• CRISP Program B: The transition from stable to unstable slip at erosional
convergent plate boundaries• Review Dates: Feb. 2005 (SSP), August 2011 (SPC) – At CIB
537B-Full4 Costa Rica SeismogenesisProject – Stage 2Project Stage 2A principal objective of CRISP Program B is to reach the plate boundary,
observe physical conditions, and sample fault zone material at two sites, p y pone before and one after the onset of seismogenic behavior of large earthquakes.
537B-Full4 Costa Rica SeismogenesisProject Stage 2Site Characterization (2005) – SSP Consensus
Project – Stage 2
• the goal of obtaining physical properties of a 3D volume that spans the seismogenic zone….will require acquisition of a 3D MCS data set, which spans the aseismic to seismic transition.
• Require further documentation of the velocity model at the target location. • Need better definition of the updip limit of the seismogenic zone through further
OBS and GPS studies.OBS and GPS studies.
• SPC noted in 2011: Pending site selection, to be decided by proponents and the operator will incorporate the interpretation of newly acquired 3D seismicthe operator, will incorporate the interpretation of newly acquired 3D seismic data, as well as the integration of results from CRISP-A drilled to date
603C-Full: NanTroSEIZE Drilling and Observatory Phase 3and Observatory Phase 3
• Proponent(s): Kiyoshi Suyehiro, Harold Tobin et al.• Review Dates: Feb 23, 2005 (SSP), June 2009 (EPSP) – at CIBT d ill th l t i t fTo drill across the plate interfaceInto the Philippine Plate-intersect the mega-splay andintersect the mega splay and Decollement and studyprogressive change in fault properties
603C-Full: NanTroSEIZE Drilling and Observatory Phase 3
SSP Consensus (2005):• We recommend the proponents acquire 3D seismic data (done!) and show crossing
orthogonal seismic sections (in depth) imaging the targets (mega splay decollement top
and Observatory Phase 3
orthogonal seismic sections (in depth) imaging the targets (mega-splay, decollement, top basement)
• Reservations regarding the proposed alternate site NT3-02A: The p wave velocity model (and thus all estimates of target depth) is less well constrained- The p-wave velocity model (and thus all estimates of target depth) is less well constrained than the primary site, as the OBS velocity model is situated approximately 30 km from Line B.
- Heat flow data would have to be recompiled for the western transect.p
Good option for 2017
618-Add5; East Asia Margin• Lead Proponent: Peter Clift• Review date: January 2015 of 618-Add5• This proposal addresses three issues related to the uplift of the Tibetan
Plateau:– (1) the effect of orogenic growth on regional and global climate(1) the effect of orogenic growth on regional and global climate,– (2) the influence of the evolving tectonic and climatic situation on
continental erosion, and(3) understanding strain accommodation in the orogenic belt– (3) understanding strain accommodation in the orogenic belt.
Addendum provides new sites to recover full composite section and to avoid bright spots on seismic data.
INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL OCEAN OCEAN DISCOVERY DISCOVERY PROGRAMPROGRAMSEP January 12SEP January 12--14, 201514, 2015
618-Add5 East Asia Margin
618 Add5618-Add5• 618-Add5 was reviewed at Jan. 2015 SEP meeting.
• Two new sites were proposed to build a composite section to replace VN-3.
• VN-4; SEP requested VN-4 be moved slightly to acquire better undisturbed section.
• VN-5; location appears fine.
• New data recently uploaded – a few issues with navigation (CDP y p g (mismatches between seismic data, maps and sections), but these have been addressed.
• Problems with drilling in disputed waters in the SCS
698-Full3: Continental Crust Formation at Intra-Oceanic ArcContinental Crust Formation at Intra-Oceanic Arc• Lead Proponent: Yoshiyuki Tatsumi• Review date: 29 January 2010 (SSP); Dec. 2011 (PEP)• This proposal is part of the Izu-Bonin-Mariana (IBM) project, which
aims at answering questions of the long-term growth of continents.
698-Full3: Continental Crust Formation at Intra-Oceanic ArcContinental Crust Formation at Intra-Oceanic Arc
• PEP 2011 stated: It is the opinion of the PEP that this proposal is ready for drilling as all site characterization data have been obtained, the site selection strategy is well developed (and criticisms of it have been addressed), and the hypotheses to be tested show good traceability fromaddressed), and the hypotheses to be tested show good traceability from the objectives, to the lithologies that will be drilled and the logging plan.
Si Ch i i C l d D Ad Cl ifi i• Site Characterization Completeness and Data Adequacy Classification:
1A: All required data are in the Data Bank and have been reviewed by SSP.b: Data image the target adequately but there are scientific concerns of drill site location or Penetrationb: Data image the target adequately but there are scientific concerns of drill site location or Penetration.
781B-Full: Northern Hikurangi subduction marging g• Lead Proponent: Laura Wallace• Deep, riser drilling component of 781-MDP to discern the mechanisms of slow slip
t (SSE ) b i tifi d illi i th i f h ll SSE t thevents (SSEs) by scientific drilling in the region of shallow SSEs at northern Hikurangi. The primary aims are to sample, log, and conduct downhole measurements in the hanging wall and across the plate interface where SSE occur.
• Reviewed by SEP: January 2014• Recommendation: Forward to CIB with excellent rating
781B-Full: Northern Hikurangi Subduction Marging g• SCP Consensus:Require 3D seismic data files with crossing lines around the proposed drill site….The proponents have acknowledged the need for these data and have a plan to acquire them, but have not yet scheduled a cruise (funding request was unsuccessful). )NSF funding provided for 34 OBS and active pressure gauges deployment beginning in March.
d l f l f h b k d l b b h d dRequire digital files for the backscatter and multibeam bathymetry grids, and velocity data as tables. Suggest uploading (copying) all date from 781A as well.gg p g ( py g)Concerns regarding site location (anticlinal structure with bright spots) which can only be addressed with more 3D MCS.
782-Pre: Kanto Asperity Project Program A• Lead Proponent: Yuzuru Yamamoto• SSP Watchdogs: G. Uenzelmann-Neben, M. Yamashita, A.Tanaka• Review date: 3 August 2011 (SSP), Dec. 2011 (PEP)• This pre-proposal is closely connected to proposal 770-Full2 and addresses
the two different types of asperities of subduction zone at the southern Kantothe two different types of asperities of subduction zone at the southern Kanto region of Japan.
782-Pre: Kanto Asperity Project Program A
• PEP Recommendation (Dec. 2011): submit full proposal• More data are required for characterizing the drilling sites.• Some high quality 2D MCS data in SSDB. Requires grid of 3D MCS data,
precise velocity bathy backscatterprecise velocity, bathy, backscatter.• Concern regarding amplitude anomaly at KAP-8
800-MDP: Nature of the Lower crust and Moho at slower-spreading Ridges: Henry Dickp g g y
Lead Proponent: Henry DickReview date: Dec. 2012 (PEP); no SCP reviewObjective is to drill through the Atlantis Bank gabbroic massif into mantle near site 735B to 500-m below Moho. 2 major objectives:1) recover the lowermost gabbros and crust-mantle transition to understand
the processes creating Mid-Ocean Ridge Basalt and lower crust2) resolve the controversy as to whether the Moho at slow spreading ridges
can be a serpentinization front.
800-MDP: Nature of the Lower crust and Moho at slower-spreading Ridges, priority proposal by EC group within SEPp g g , p y p p y C g p S
PEP Review, Dec. 2012: proposal was extremely well written with excellent objectives. The PEP applauds the proponents for expanding the science goals to include the subsurface biosphere. Has the potential to produce t f ti l i th t ld dd t l t t h ll i thtransformational science that would address at least two challenges in the new science plan.
The PEP asked the proponents to design a multi phase drilling program; i eThe PEP asked the proponents to design a multi-phase drilling program; i.e. using the JR for two legs, or even the Chikyu if needed
Externally reviewed in Feb 2013 excellent reviewsExternally reviewed in Feb. 2013 – excellent reviews.PEP rated it as ‘excellent’ – first expedition scheduling by JRFB for November
805-MDP: Mohole to Mantle (M2M)• Lead Proponent: Susumu Umino• Objective: The MDP 805-Full plans to drill a complete section through the
oceanic crust and ~500 m into the mantle in a fast spreading environment using the Riser drill ship, Chikyu to understand bulk composition, fluids, heterogeneity, accretion history, limits of life, seismic properties, magnetic g y, y, , p p , ganomalies, etc.
805-MDP: Mohole to Mantle (M2M)• Lead Proponent: Susumu Umino• PEP review date: May 2012• Recommendation: submit revised proposal• No site survey data have been uploaded to the SSDB
3 potential sites considered: A) Cocos Plate; B) Baja area; C) Hawaii area
Technological challenges related to high temperature (300 C) and deep water.
835-Full: J-Track: Tracking the tsunamigenic slips across and along the Japan Trenchacross and along the Japan Trench• Lead Proponent: Shuichi Kodara
Objectives:JTRACK proposes to investigate processes leading to catastrophic, tsunamigenic earthquakes and the history of such events along the margin;tsunamigenic earthquakes and the history of such events along the margin; builds on success of Exp. 343
• SEP Review date: January 2014; forwarded the proposal to the CIB.• The CIB gave the green light and a workshop was held in Japan.
F ll l i d b SEP i J 2015• Full proposal was reviewed by SEP in Jan. 2015• Recommendation: submit revised proposal
835-Full: J-Track: Tracking the tsunamigenic slips across and along the Japan Trenchacross and along the Japan Trench
• 6 sites proposed focusing on the Tohoku segment• WD is 6900 to 7590 m• WD is 6900 to 7590 m• TD is 300 to 1350 mbsf
835-Full: J-Track: Tracking the tsunamigenic slips across and along the Japan Trench
• Workshop held in May 2014• SEP review January 2015
across and along the Japan Trench
SEP review, January 2015• Revised Full proposal recommended• Recommend removing paleoseismology objective and sites
R d d t t l i f k f lt d h i i l di th• Recommended structural mapping of key faults and horizons including the decollement.
• Possible site relocations based upon new data and maps collected in Oct. 2014
New data will improve characterizationcharacterization
857-MDP Umbrella proposal of the Deep Sea record of MediterraneanMessinian events (DREAM multi-phase drilling project: Uncovering a saltgiantgiant
• Lead Proponent: Camerlenghi• Review date: June 2014 (SEP)
Obj tiObjectives:
Four site-specific drilling proposals are conceived under this umbrella:Four site specific drilling proposals are conceived under this umbrella:• DREAM: Deep-Sea Records of the MSC;• Deformation and fluid flow in the MSC salt giant;g• Probing the Salt Giant for its Deep Biosphere secrets;• Probing deep Earth and surface connections (857A-Pre).
857-MDP Umbrella proposal of the Deep Sea record of MediterraneanMessinian events (DREAM multi-phase drilling project: Uncovering a saltgiantgiant
What are the causes, timing and emplacement mechanisms of the MSC salt giant?• Establish the chronology of the MSC;• Test existing hypotheses for Mediterranean evaporite formation;• Develop unifying models for the MSC salt giant.What are the factors responsible for early salt deformation and fluid flow across and out of theWhat are the factors responsible for early salt deformation and fluid flow across and out of the halite layer?• Understand syn-sedimentary salt tectonics and halite creep;• Constrain post-depositional salt deformation and its consequences on sedimentary massConstrain post depositional salt deformation and its consequences on sedimentary mass
wasting;• Understand the physical and mineralogical conditions that allow fluids to migrate in and
through thick tabular salt sequencesg qDo salt giants promote the development of a phylogenetically diverse and exceptionally active deep biosphere?• Determine whether evaporitic sulfate minerals are fuelling the Mediterranean’s deep p g p
biosphere;• Establish whether the interaction between limiting factors (pressure, temperature, salinity) and
a highly variable chemical environment has produced a diverse and novel deep biosphere community;
• Use the biomarkers and surviving microbes trapped within brine inclusions to reconstruct the depth, photic and oxic conditions of ancient, hypersaline depositional environments.
857A-Pre: Probing connections between deep earth and surface processes in a land-locked ocean basin transformed into a giant saline basin: Mediterranean DREAM-GOLDbasin: Mediterranean DREAM-GOLD
L d P t M R bi• Lead Proponent: M. Rabineau• SEP review date: June 2014• Recommendation: submit full proposal.Recommendation: submit full proposal.
Objective:The main objective is to sample for the first time the deep basin of the Mediterranean Sea in the Gulf of Lion while recovering strata from the base ofMediterranean Sea in the Gulf of Lion while recovering strata from the base of Pliocene, through the Messinian Series (evaporites and clastics), the pre-MSC Series, and down to basement rocks in a key transitional zone of unknown natureunknown nature.
857A-Pre: Probing connections between deep earth and surface processes in a land-locked ocean basin transformed into a giant saline basin: Mediterranean DREAM-GOLDbasin: Mediterranean DREAM-GOLD
• 1 site to 6500 mbsf – 6230 m of sediments; 270 m of basement; • Data appear to be readily available (but not in SSDB)Data appear to be readily available (but not in SSDB)
A brief overview…• Used to be 798-Pre; revised considerably and resubmitted• Companion to 857, both form part of the “DREAM” sequence.
This one is “GOLD”This one is “GOLD”.
• Objectives of this part:Ch t i d tif di t fl i th b i i d t – Characterise and quantify sediment fluxes in the basin in order to assess effects of MSC
– Reconstruct history of vertical basement motions– Characterise the nature of the crust in the western Mediterranean– Characterise the nature of the crust in the western Mediterranean
GOLD is essentially ythe deep basin part, Target A
Data given for GOL-01A, “alternate” alluded to but no ddata given
857A-Pre: Probing connections between deep earth and surface processes in a land-locked ocean basin transformed into a giant saline
SEP Comments:
processes in a land locked ocean basin transformed into a giant saline basin: Mediterranean DREAM-GOLD
• SEP suggested developing this as a CPP with industry• Develop a Deep Biosphere component• Address how the chronology will be established• Address how the chronology will be established• Address the subsidence history and base level changes in greater detail.• Consider thicker salt sequence to address fluid flow.• Justify basement drilling.• Justify site selection using data• Choose an alternate siteChoose an alternate site.• Submit data.• Proponents and CDEX need to scope out the expedition in detail for the full
proposal For example coring over 4 km of rock is not feasible and aproposal. For example, coring over 4 km of rock is not feasible and a compromise needs to be reached so that the science goals can be met with operational reality.
865-Full: Constraining the temperature limit of the microbial deepbiosphere in the Nankai Trough subseafloorp g
L d P t K Hi i h
A possible option in April 2016, following C0010 Obs replacement?
• Lead Proponent: K. Hinrichs• Review date: The SEP reviewed this proposal at New Brunswick late June
2014
Objective:We aim to study subseafloor sedimentary microbial communities situated in temperature ranges that span the temperature limit of microbial life in anoxic sedimentary systems (the biotic fringe)
Soft tissue signatures(e.g. membrane)
Molecular signatures Prokaryotes(e.g. Archaea & Bacteria)
865-Full: Constraining the temperature limit of the microbial deepbiosphere in the Nankai Trough subseafloorp g
2 sites proposedODP1173A: WD is 4790 m; 725 m of sed; 20 m of basementO 3 90 ; 5 ; 0ODP1174A: WD is 4750 m; 1194 m of sed; 120 m of basementProposal calls for casing to sed/basement interface with cap containinghi h l ti T d P bhigh resolution T and P probes.
865-Full
Site 1174 Site 1173
Decollement
Oceanic crust
Muroto Transect: after Science party (2001), Bangs et al. (1999), Moore et al. (1999)
865-FullOverview (2) and lesson from Exp 337
Detection limits for microbial life have improved by a factor
Thermal OM degradation
life have improved by a factor of 500 since 2000.
Thermal OM degradation
865-FullTemperature window of site 1173 and 1174
measured
Focusing on the temperature range for 110-140 oC.
865-Full: Constraining the temperature limit of the microbial deepbiosphere in the Nankai Trough subseafloor
Site Classification Latitude Longitude
ODP1173A 1Aa 32°14.66'N 135°01.51'E
p g
ODP1174A 1Aa 32°20.54'N 134°57.39'E
Completeness: 1A: All required data are in the Data Bank and have been reviewed by the SEP. Appears Complete. We couldn’t find the 3D seismic data which would be an additional bonus, but it is likely found under 196 site survey data and can be readily downloaded at the UTIG seismic data portal. D t Ad d t i th t t d t l d th i tifiData Adequacy: a: data image the target adequately and there are no scientific concerns of drill site location and penetration.
Primary issue: WD5 notes that the science plan is operationally feasible proposal butPrimary issue: WD5 notes that the science plan is operationally feasible proposal but proponent's time estimation based on the JR operation to drill/core ODP sites 1173 and 1174 to penetrate into the oceanic crust (> 120 m) may be too optimistic for Chikyuoperation. Also, WD5 advised that CRFP casing installation operation needs to be carefully considered and the Kuroshio current could be an issue for the entire operation.
Addressed by PRL (Dec. 2014)
Revised operational plan from PRLIndicates 65.3 days for coring, BHA change, casing, capping, logging, transits and contingency timetransits, and contingency time
• Chikyu project
• Proposal of special interest to JAMSTEC
• Proposal expected to attract external fundingProposal expected to attract external funding as a Complementary Project Proposal (CPP)
• Science meeting planned for March 24-26, 2015 t th U i it f Sid2015 at the University of Sidney
• Presented as jointly initiated by Geoscience Australia and JAMSTECAustralia and JAMSTEC
• Proposal 871-Pre complements proposal 832 “Tasman Frontier” led by R. Sutherland, which i t d t d tif d f ti i thaims to date and quantify deformation in the
southwest Pacific
876 Pre: Bend Fault Serpentinization: Oceanic Crust876-Pre: Bend-Fault Serpentinization: Oceanic Crust and Mantle Evolution from Ridge through Trench
Lead Proponent: J. MorganReview data: January 2015Recommendation: Develop full proposalRecommendation: Develop full proposal
Objectives: R i it ti f t d ti i d tl• Recover in-situ sections of ocean crust and serpentinized mantle from a region undergoing Bend Fault Serpentinization.
• Establish if any Alpine-type ophiolites are actually preserved ‘fossil’ BFS systems.
• Determine the limits and activities of chemosynthetic communities in this environment related to hydrothermal activity. y y
• Establish the extent, timing, and rates of carbonation-related reactions that take place during mantle bend-fault serpentinization, and whether these reactions are a large player in the global carbonand whether these reactions are a large player in the global carbon cycle.
Hydration of Mantle• Subducting plate bends and
develops faults as it sinks into the mantle.
• Water can be pumped into the lithospheric mantle along faults;lithospheric mantle along faults; allows hydration of the slab while it is at the trench and chemical hydration linked reactionshydration-linked reactions.
• In order to determine the composition of the oceanic crust and mantle recycled into subduction zones, we need samples of the oceanic crust and
Billen, Nat Geo (2008)
pmantle after it has experienced the chemical transformations linked to bend-fault serpentinizationbend fault serpentinization.
Serpentinization and connected carbonate precipitation has large impact on Earth climate studyprecipitation has large impact on Earth climate study
Subducted carbonate (commonly 1%) associated with BFS would recycle waterSubducted carbonate (commonly ~1%) associated with BFS would recycle water and CO2 into the mantle comparable to that emitted by plate spreading or consumed by crustal alteration, weathering and mountain building
Proposed site: offshore NicaraguaSeveral lines of geophysical evidence forgeophysical evidence for Bend-fault Serpentinization (BFS)p ( )• Direct seismic imaging• Bend-fault
earthquakes• Low regional heat flow• etc.
Drilling sites• Site 1a – WD 3200 m; 500 mbsf
Drill through active bend-fault in th di t ti i d
The same bend-fault should be drilled at different structural levels that include intersecting the fault
the sediment section, coring and CORKing
• Site 1b - WD 3250 m; 2400 mbsfDrill through bend-fault in the upper part of the gabbro section, spot coring LWD CORKingspot coring, LWD, CORKing
• Site 1c - WD 3300 m; 7000 mbsfDrill through bend-fault just g jbelow the Moho, fast-drill first, LWD, then side-wall coring (lower ~2/3), CORKing(lower 2/3), CORKing
• Site 1d - WD 3300 m; 7000 mbsfSame as 1c, but more coring of crustal and mantle sections, CORKing
Strength, etc.• Strength
– Scientific question has global relevance of Earth’s global carbon and water cycles
– Scientific team is very strong including world leading experts in the relevant fields
– Great potential to address multiple challenges of IODP science plan
• Potential issue• Potential issue– Drilling at this WD is beyond Chikyu’s capability
Proposals for site surveys were submitted to UK-IODP and the JAMSTEC Large-scale Planning workshop 2014.P t ill b i i i t ti l k h tProponents will be organizing an international workshop to assess drilling plans with discussion and input from the broader scientific communityy
WDs’ RecommendationDevelop Full Proposal
Development of full scientific plan with strategy to achieve– Development of full scientific plan with strategy to achieve their goal
– Need specific plans for non-riser coring, logging, and observatory
– Contact IOs for building feasible drilling planAlternate sites– Alternate sites
– Justification of multiple holes (especially deeper holes)
880APL I it h i l t t ith d ill bit880APL In-situ mechanical tests with drill bit (IMTB)
Proponents: K. Moe, T. Inoue, Y. Yamada, S. Saito, K. Ujiie, J. Ishiwata,Review date: January 2015e e date Ja ua y 0 5Recommendation: Revise
Primary Goals:Primary Goals:1. To make systematic analysis and experiment on the relationship
between routine drilling measurements (weight on bit, drillstringrotational torque rate of penetration and drillstring rotational speed)rotational torque, rate of penetration, and drillstring rotational speed) and scientifically important in situ rock properties
2 T i d illi d t f th h th2. To improve drilling and measurement performances through these experiment results and understanding on the rock mechanics by real-time monitoring and controlling in the future expeditions, and further extend it into better sampling and scientific interpretations
Experimental design and drilling plan
Experimental design is not clear. We need a better l ti ith d t il d diexplanation with details and diagrams.
• 1. Using different drilling parameters across same lithology formation experiment starting approximatelylithology formation, experiment starting approximately from the depth of 150 m below seafloor (mbsf) and then change the strategy into drilling for three different depthschange the strategy into drilling for three different depths with 50 meter distance after lowering down the weight-on-bit (WOB) to minimum (or reset to zero).
• 2. Using constant drilling parameters across different lithology/formation from the depth of 150 meter below
fl ( b f) dseafloor (mbsf) or deeper.
Drilling plang p• Either experiment during primary expedition if science party allows, or
drill new holes by primary sites – any LWD site on Chikyu can y p y y yaccommodate the proposed experiments
• Proposed locations are at NanTroSEIZE sites...i.e. well characterized alreadyalready.
Issues and Recommendations• The science behind this proposal needs to be better defined.• Petrophysical logging is not specified in detail...but LWD data collection and
l i i i t l t th ianalysis is integral to the science• Describe and consider the Chikyu MSE (Mechanical Specific Energy)
system (BHA configuration, drillstring behaviour, bit types.• Provide a thorough analysis of the sites/intervals you want to re-drill in
terms of lithology, recovery, drilling history, and data from the ship• Provide one or two examples with details showing the approach that they p g pp y
would take at that site including a diagram showing the drilling plan and linking it to the seismic data and stratigraphy as outlined by the shipboard sedimentologists.
• Consider testing on other lithologies• Consider a parametric approach, holding various conditions constant and
varying one at a time.varying one at a time.• The requirements for ship time and shipboard personnel should be specified
as required by the Proposal Submission Guidelines.• Workshop• Workshop• …and more…
300 mbsf
IMTB-2IMTB 2
450 mbsf
IMTB-3
300 mbsf
IMTB-4
400 mbsf
GeneralRecommendations
General1. Need to put proposal in context of previous work with references2 Describe and consider the Chikyu MSE system- viz BHA2. Describe and consider the Chikyu MSE system- viz, BHA
configuration, Chikyu drillstring behaviour and bit types in a lot more detail
3 The proposed data analysis and modeling work could be3. The proposed data analysis and modeling work could be developed more fully, giving a workflow, perhaps with an example from a Nankai or Japan trench well, and pointing out what comes
t f th l i th t i f b fit d h t i t b dout of the analysis that is of benefit, and what remains to be done 4. Lab work in support of proposal would be beneficial- looking at
the different aspects like cutting bit wear and balling, stick slip, drill string vibration.
5. Workshop the topic- Invite experts from oil and gas industry/service companies/bit p g y p
manufacturers as well as academic researchers- Define the state of the art in defining physical properties from drilling
data- Identify the inherent limitations of MSE analysis as practiced, and
identify steps to overcome some of the key barriers.
Recommendations
Specific to sites1 P id th h l i f th it /i t l t t1. Provide a thorough analysis of the sites/intervals you want to re-
drill in terms of lithology, recovery, drilling history and data from the ship (eg., downhole drilling rate through the intervals/lithologies, time on bit when started). Where were the problems at these sties and how might you solve them?
2. Be clear about the lithological differences being referred to: as g glithotypes and in terms of mechanical stratigraphy- i.e. logs of expected UCS, K, G...
3. Make a diagram showing the drilling plan and link it to the3. Make a diagram showing the drilling plan and link it to the seismic/stratigraphy, and lithology changes
4. Consider targeting some hard-to-drill sections e.g. Cherts.
DLHR-2A (alt.) 871-Pre
“DLHR-2A (-26.759528° 161.197392°) samples a rotated fault block near the edge of aDLHR 2A ( 26.759528 161.197392 ) samples a rotated fault block near the edge of amajor depocentre in the western Faust Basin, in water depth of c. 1600–1700 m. The site is located c. 570 km NNE of Lord Howe Island at the cross point of two high-quality seismic reflection lines (GA-302/01 and GA-302/08) and one moderate-quality line ( ) q y(s206r/02a). Given that the site is located on a cross point of three industry-standard seismic lines, and within the coverage of a high-resolution multibeam bathymetry data set, the pre-drill site survey should only require site reconnaissance activities
BLHRV-1A“volcanic basement”volcanic basement
Excellent industry data are availableExcellent industry data are available
650 mbsf
505 Full 5: Mariana Convergent Margin: Geochemical, Tectonic, and Biological ProcessesSite WD TD ObjectiveMAF-2B 3560 150 Pacman: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids at an
active protrusion/spring site (Cerulean Springs)
g
active protrusion/spring site (Cerulean Springs)
MAF-3B 3850 250 Pacman: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids above an active fault
MAF 9B 2000 150 C l ti l T i ti it d d fl id tMAF-9B 2000 150 Celestial: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids at an active protrusion/spring site
MAF-10B 3200 250 Celestial: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids on lower flank for stratigraphy age and compositional variabilitylower flank for stratigraphy, age and compositional variability
MAF-11A 1260 150 Big Blue: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids at an active protrusion/spring site
MAF 12B 1400 250 Bi Bl T i ti it d d fl idMAF-12B 1400 250 Big Blue: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids on upper flank
MAF-13A 2200 250 Big Blue: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids on mid-flank for stratigraphy age and compositional variabilityflank for stratigraphy age and compositional variability
MAF-14A 3300 250MAF-15A 3666 100 Blue Moon: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids at an
active protrusion/spring sitep p g
MAF-16A 4500 250 Blue Moon: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids on mid-flank for stratigraphy, age and compositional variability
Objectives:
(1) Understand mass transport and(1) Understand mass transport and geochemical cycling in subduction zones of non-accretionary forearcs
(2) Determine spatial and temporal variability of slab-related fluids to trace dehydration, carbonate dissolution, and ywater/rock reactions
(3) Understand physical properties as controls over dehydration reactions and seismicity
(4) Study spatial and temporal variability in metamorphic and tectonic processes
(5) I ti t t l bi l i l(5) Investigate controls over biological activity associated with mud volcanoes
505 Full 5: SEP review June 2014
Proponents need to finish uploading data, and correct the mistakes (duplicate location for 11B and 12A; mismatch between CMPs on basemap(duplicate location for 11B and 12A; mismatch between CMPs on basemapand in NAV and SEGY data). This is critical. We don’t know if sites are correctly located (MAF-11A, 12B, 13A, 14A)!
We still require the following files:
• General CMP position (range) of proposed sites• General CMP position (range) of proposed sites• Annotated seismic images (with sites located)• Bathymetry data (as a netCDF grd, XYZ, GIS shapefile, etc.) and high
resolution analog (pdf jpeg gif)resolution analog (pdf, jpeg, gif)• Backscatter data (as a GIS shapefile) and high resolution analog (pdf, jpeg,
gif).• Geographic projection used for seafloor mapsGeographic projection used for seafloor maps• Information (geotechnical; lithologic, etc.) regarding short cores/bottom
samples• Acquisition and processing data for all geophysics.q p g g p y
Initial Issues:
Deep penetration (3 5 4 0 km) and risk of hydrocarbons and sandyDeep penetration (3.5–4.0 km) and risk of hydrocarbons and sandy lithologies requires riser drilling but water is too shallow at VN-1 and VN-2 for RV Chikyu and will need a mission specific platform. H d illi t VN 3 d XI 1 i id l f Chik b thHowever, drilling at VN-3 and XI-1 is ideal for Chikyu because the water depths are 1200 m and 1500 m respectively, in the middle of the proposed operation range of this vessel.
Non-riser drilling to ~1 km at VN-3 and XI-1 could be performed by RV Chikyu or JOIDES Resolution (or similar vessel), allowing penetration y ( ) g pto the middle Miocene (10 Ma). Such drilling would not only lay the geotechnical groundwork for deeper drilling but would allow the hypothesis of an 8-Ma Tibetan surface uplift and monsoonhypothesis of an 8 Ma Tibetan surface uplift and monsoon strengthening to be tested.
618-Full3; East Asia Margin• Lead Proponent: Peter Clift• Review date: January 2008 of 618-Add2• This proposal addresses three issues related to the uplift of the Tibetan
Plateau:– (1) the effect of orogenic growth on regional and global climate,( ) g g g g ,– (2) the influence of the evolving tectonic and climatic situation on
continental erosion, and– (3) understanding strain accommodation in the orogenic belt– (3) understanding strain accommodation in the orogenic belt.
Initial sites had issues with respect to hydrocarbons, lithologies depth of drilling; several Addenda werelithologies, depth of drilling; several Addenda were
subsequently submitted
The NanTroSEIZE Transect So Far:Accomplishments and a Look Ahead for IODPʼs
The NanTroSEIZE Transect So Far:Accomplishments and a Look Ahead for IODPʼsAccomplishments and a Look Ahead for IODP s
Deep Window into Megathrust ProcessesAccomplishments and a Look Ahead for IODP s
Deep Window into Megathrust ProcessesGaku Kimura Un TokyoGaku Kimura Un TokyoGaku Kimura, Un. Tokyo
Harol Tobin,Un of Wisconsin-Madison
Gaku Kimura, Un. TokyoHarol Tobin,
Un of Wisconsin-MadisonUn. of Wisconsin Madison
and all NanTroSEIZE Expedition
Un. of Wisconsin Madison
and all NanTroSEIZE Expeditionand all NanTroSEIZE ExpeditionScientists
and all NanTroSEIZE ExpeditionScientists
Initial Science Plan (2001): Seismogenic Zone Initiative
Seismogenic ZoneSeismogenic Zone Challenges
• What governs subduction zone seismogenic fault locking vsseismogenic fault locking vs stable slip and/or transitional fault behavior?
• Does fault state evolve during interseismic and pre-seismic period? If so, how?
• What governs tsunami generation characteristics for a given great earthquake?
NanTroSEIZE conceived to address these questions2011 Tohoku M9.0 earthquake slip model
(Lay et al., 2011)
3D seismic box
NanTroSEIZENanTroSEIZE: The Nankai Trough Seismogenic : The Nankai Trough Seismogenic Z E i tZ E i tZone ExperimentZone Experiment
A ltiA lti t ff t tt ff t tA multiA multi--stage effort tostage effort tosample sample and and instrument instrument thethel t b d f ltl t b d f ltplate boundary fault zone plate boundary fault zone acrossacross
the upthe up--dip end of locking and rupturedip end of locking and rupture
NanTroSEIZE Drilling TransectNanTroSEIZE Drilling Transect
2007 – 2014: 10 expeditions More than 195 scientists from 15 countries 13 main sites 13 main sites
Max depth 3058 meters bsf – target 5200 m bsf Most extensive LWD program and downhole stress pressure Most extensive LWD program and downhole stress, pressure Most advanced seafloor borehole monitoring system achieved,
now streaming data in real-time to land g More than 100 papers published and counting…
Age of formation and of accretionAge of formation and of accretion
Incoming plateOuter wedgeInner wedge g
Basement18 – 20 Ma
g
Depositional age:0 – 2 Ma (cover)
g
0 – 2 Ma (forearc basin cover)2.5 – 3.6 Ma (basin/wedge 18 20 Ma
Sediments0 -15 Ma
0 2 Ma (cover)2 ~ 6 Ma (accreted)Max age not known
2.5 3.6 Ma (basin/wedge boundary)5 Ma – 7 Ma upper wedge)
0 -15 MaMax age not known, but decollement position is in 5 – 7 Ma seds
At 2500 – 3000 m depth:~ 10 Ma (preliminary sed age)
Plio-Pleistocene to
Ma seds
Deformation age: Plio-Pleistocene to
Wedge deformation is late MioceneWedge deformation is late Miocene
Reconstruction of splay fault history
Strasser et al., 2009
~2 million years of fault activity ~2 million years of fault activity
Activity of splay fault varies through time
What controls rupture area?
Hyodo & Hori, 2013
Who is the principal criminal?Who is the principal criminal?worst criminal → ʻevolved upper plateʼother criminals → subducting plate?other criminals → subducting plate?→ plate interface=plate boundary fault with water?
Shallow fault zones: frontal thrust and upShallow fault zones: frontal thrust and up--dip end of dip end of l f lt tl f lt tmegamega--splay fault systemsplay fault system
Documented history of shallow localized, likely Documented history of shallow localized, likely y , yy , yseismic slip to the trench (like Tohoku?)seismic slip to the trench (like Tohoku?)
Frontal Thrust Site C0007Splay OOST fault Site p yC0004
Strongly localized into thin microbreccia/fault gouge band
d d b dsurrounded by damage zone
Wallrock is weak muddy sediment, yet heavily fractured
No porewater chemical evidence pfor substantial fault-controlled fluid flow
Ujiie & Kimura, 2014
Vitrinite Reflectance (thermal) anomaly associated with mm‐thick fault zonesSuggests high velocity or seismic slip
iocene
Pl
Pliocene
DarkLayer
Dark Layer
Pl iPleistocene
nePleistocen
P
Sakaguchi et al., Geology, 2011Sakaguchi et al., Geology,2011
XRF scanner mapping of C0004 (splay fault)C0004 (splay fault) microbreccia fault zone
- Fault zone enriched in Al, K, Fe, depleted in Ca, Sr, p ,
- Increased illitization relative to surrounding host rocksurrounding host rock
Represents additional evidence of possible frictional heating andpossible frictional heating and mechano-chemical clay mineral alteration even in shallow (~ 400
) fm) fault.
Co-seismic slip Co seismic slip
Y hi t l G l 2011Yamaguchi et al., Geology, 2011
Shallow Shallow Fault Slip Fault Slip –– ResultsResults fromfrom IODP IODP NanTroSEIZENanTroSEIZE
Lab lowLab low--velocity velocity friction studies on friction studies on friction studies on friction studies on IODP samples IODP samples confirm shallow faults confirm shallow faults are velocity are velocity strengthening…strengthening…
…BUT…BUTIkari et al., 2009
Tsutsumi et al., 2011
Dynamic rupture may Dynamic rupture may cause rapid cause rapid weakeningweakeningweakeningweakening
And new mechanics And new mechanics discussed for discussed for facilitating slow slip facilitating slow slip earthquakesearthquakesearthquakesearthquakes
Ikari et al., 2013
Present state of stress across NanTroSEIZE transect
breakoutsbreakouts
Lin et al., 2011, GRL
(Sibson, 1992; Fault-Valve model)
Borehole observation
C0002
timeSHmax
Still normal fault regime?When are we now?
g
Ab l fl id ti l th l t b dAbnormal fluid pressure ratio along the plate boundary(Tsuji et al., 2014 EPSL)
VLF earthquakes and up-dip VLF earthquakes and up-dip ea qua es a d up d ptremor coincide with
NanTroSEIZE transect
ea qua es a d up d ptremor coincide with
NanTroSEIZE transect
low-angle thrust mechanismslow-angle thrust mechanismsg
in prism or on plate boundary
g
in prism or on plate boundary
Sugioka et al., 2011g ,
CORKs and longCORKs and long--term monitoring systemsterm monitoring systemsDONET seafloor network
Wiring the Megathrust: a 3D monitoringWiring the Megathrust: a 3D monitoringWiring the Megathrust: a 3D monitoring Wiring the Megathrust: a 3D monitoring observatoryobservatory•• Borehole CORKs part of larger DONET networkBorehole CORKs part of larger DONET network•• Borehole CORKs part of larger DONET networkBorehole CORKs part of larger DONET network•• Seismic, strain, tilt, pore pressure, temperatureSeismic, strain, tilt, pore pressure, temperature
Long‐Term monitoring of downhole properties (Zhang & Saffer, AGU, 2013)
What remains: UltraWhat remains: Ultra--deep riser drilling across the deep riser drilling across the l t b d f ltl t b d f ltplate boundary fault zoneplate boundary fault zone
•• Main deep “megaMain deep “mega splay” / main thrust reflectorsplay” / main thrust reflector•• Main deep megaMain deep mega--splay / main thrust reflectorsplay / main thrust reflector
Key ResultsKey Resultsyy Frontal thrust and splay fault systems show Frontal thrust and splay fault systems show p y y
evidence of very strong slip localization and rapid slip even at shallow position (< 1 km below sea
p y yevidence of very strong slip localization and rapid slip even at shallow position (< 1 km below seaslip, even at shallow position (< 1 km below sea floor) like Tohoku??slip, even at shallow position (< 1 km below sea floor) like Tohoku??
Shallow faults are in stable sliding (non-i i ) i i ti l l b
Shallow faults are in stable sliding (non-i i ) i i ti l l bseismogenic) regime in conventional lab
experiments, but high-velocity behavior likely weakseismogenic) regime in conventional lab experiments, but high-velocity behavior likely weakand velocity weakening. and velocity weakening.
No evidence so far for fault hosted anomalous fluid chemistry.
No evidence so far for fault hosted anomalous fluid chemistry.y
Principal stress axis orientations are controlled by
y
Principal stress axis orientations are controlled by
Riser Hole Riser Hole C0002 planC0002 plan
Expedition 348:- drilled, logged, and
cased hole to 3000cased hole to ~3000 meters bsf
- Cored 63 meters
Planned for future (2016?)Planned for future (2016?) expedition: - drill, log, and case , g,
across megasplay fault reflector at ~5000 meters bsfmeters bsf
- Core ~ 400 meters
- Prepare hole for future deep observatory
15 Chik B d t O i d15. Chikyu Budgetary Overview and Outline of Operation ScheduleOutline of Operation Schedule
for JFY2014 – 2016
Planning and Coordination Dept. Shinya GotoShinya Goto
● JPFY2014~2015 will be the most difficult years because :
15‐1. Background of Chikyu Operation
Regulatory shipyard maintenance and BOP special survey is planed in
USD300m
USD350m(*)USDJPY@120
mid. 2015 which will cost more than USD40m+.
As the new “5 years mid termUSD250m
USD300m
As the new 5 years mid term business Plan” period has just started from JPFY2014, JAMSTEC do not have any carry forward fund from Gov. Fund Gov Fund Gov FundUSD150
USD200m
Continuous budget cut by
not have any carry forward fund from previous period. USD279m
(¥335b)
Gov. Fund
USD272m(¥326b)
Gov. Fund
USD264m(¥316b)
Gov. Fund
USD256m(¥307b)
Gov. Fund
USD248m(¥297b)USD100m
USD150m
Japanese Government.
USD0
USD50m
In addition
● d d b ( )
(JAMSTEC Budget Forecast)Government funding for operating expenses
USD0mJPFY2014 JPFY2015 JPFY2016 JPFY2017 JPFY2018
● Japanese Yen depreciated by 20(%) .
● Crude Oil Market collapsed!
(excl. mission specific fund and supplementary budget)
120WTI(USD/bbl)
15‐2. Market conditions surrounding Chikyu Operation(USDJPY)
100
110120
80
90 115
60
70110
50
60105
40
JPY depreciated by 20(%) against USD.Crude Oil Market collapsed.
100
p Our main source of fund (Gov. Fund) is
denominated in JPY, however major part of our expenditures, such as R&M,
Less opportunity for commercial work. Fuel is much cheaper.
of our expenditures, such as R&M, equipment and Expats(Crew), are in USD. Day rate will be much lower.
Pros and Cons, however, overall impact on Chikyu Operation is negative
JPFY2014 JPFY2015 JPFY2016
1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q
15‐3. CHIKYU Operation Plan for JPFY 2014~2016 (*)USDJPY@120
1QApr – Jun2014
2QJuly – Sep2014
3QOct – Dec2014
4QJan – Mar2015
1QApr – Jun 2015
2QJuly – Sep2015
3QOct – Dec2015
4QJan – Mar2016
1QApr – Jun 2016
2QJuly – Sep2016
3QOct – Dec2016
4QJan – Mar2017
2014 2015 2016
①① DOR ‐5 DOR
② Non IODP Exp
③ Standby Standby
3rd CIB
③ Standby Standby
④ DOR ‐6 DOR India NGHP‐02
⑤ 5 year Inspection Dry Dock⑤ 5 year Inspection y
⑥ Non IODP
⑦ IODP Riser less IODP
⑧ Non IODP
⑨ IODP Riser less Subject to fund availability IODP
(Utilization as of 31st Mar, 2015)
IODP Drilling 0 (%) 2 (%) ⑦ 8 (%) ⑦
Non‐IODP Drilling 32 (%) ①+②+④ 50 (%) ④+⑥ ‐
(Total) 32 (%) 52 (%) ‐
15‐4. CHIKYU Funding Structure for JPFY 2014 (Source of Fund)
(1) Gov. Fund (Budget for JPFY 2014)(2) Gov. Fund (Mission Specific)(3) Chikyu member Fees
‐ Regular Member Fee (USD1m)Partnership Fee(USD300k)
(Budget for JPFY 2014)
USD59m ( )‐ Partnership Fee(USD300k)
‐ Project Member Fee(USD10m~)(4) DOR(Commercial Drilling)(5) Donation
(USD71m @ USDJPY100)
(Budget Amount)
DOR Non IODP DOR
( g )
Paid(2)
Paid
Variable cost(Drilling Cost)
by
Oil Company
Mission SpecificFund
by
Oil Company
(1) Gov. Fund
USD40m Base Cost
(4) DOR
USD8m(4) DOR
USD11m CF
(3) Chikyu Member Fees
Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan /2015 Feb/2015 Mar/2015(*)USDJPY@120
15‐5. CHIKYU Funding Structure for JPFY 2015 (Source of Fund)
(1) Gov. Fund (Budget for JPFY 2015)(2) Gov. Fund (Mission Specific)(3) Chikyu member Fees
‐ Regular Member Fee (USD1m)Partnership Fee(USD300k)
(Budget for JPFY 2015)
USD99m( )‐ Partnership Fee(USD300k)
‐ Project Member Fee(USD10m~)(4) DOR(Commercial Drilling)(5) Donation
(USD119m @ USDJPY100)
(Budget Amount)
DOR Non IODP IODP5 year Inspection
(incl. Dry Dock)
( g )
bl
Paid(2) or (4) (3)
+(1)
(1) Gov. Fund
Variable cost(Drilling Cost) by
Oil CompanyNon‐IODP
( )
USD3m
5 year Inspection + BOP Special Survey
USD33m +
(1) Gov. Fund
USD40m Base Cost
(4) DOR
USD23m
(3) Chikyu Member Fees
Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan /2016 Feb/2016 Mar/2016(*)USDJPY@120
JPFY2014 JPFY2015 JPFY2016 JPFY2017 JPFY2018
(Back up) 15‐6. CHIKYU Long Term Operation Plan
1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
① DOR ‐5
②
3rd CIB
② Non IODP
③ Standby Standby
④ DOR ‐6 IndiaNGHP‐02
⑤ 5 year Inspection DryDock
⑥ Non IODP
⑦ IODP Riser less RiserL⑦ IODP Riser less Less
⑧ Non IODP Non ‐ IODP
⑨ IODP Riser less RiserLess
⑩ Non IODP Non IODP⑩ Non IODP Non ‐ IODP
⑪ IODP Riser Riser
⑫ Non‐IODP Non ‐ IODP
Chikyu Proposal Chikyu Project : Nantro SEIZE C2 (Riser)/ C10,C6 (Riser less)CRISP (Riser)IBM(Riser)
N P l 865 F ll N k i T h T Li it (Ri l )New Proposal : 865‐Full Nankai Trough T Limit (Riser less)871‐Pre Lord Howe Rise (Riser)876‐Pre Bend‐Fault Serpentinization (Riser)
(Back up) CHIKYU Funding Structure(Source of Fund)
(1) Gov. Fund(2) Gov. Fund (Mission Specific)(3) Chikyu member Fees
‐ Regular Member Fee (USD1m)Partnership Fee(USD300k)‐ Partnership Fee(USD300k)
‐ Project Member Fee(USD10m~)(4) DOR(Commercial Drilling)(5) Donation
(Budget Amount)
IODP Expedition Non‐IODP Operation(including Commercial Drilling)
(3) Chikyu Regular Member Fee(5) Chikyu Project Member Fee
( g )
(1) G F d (2) Gov. Fund (Mission Specific)
Drilling Cost(variable cost)
(1) Gov. Fund(Subject to Fund Availability)
USD50m ~
(1) Gov. Fund (6) DOR (Commercial Drilling)Rig Cost(Base Cost)
Contribution
(Total Rig Cost) USD70m~(4) Chikyu Partnership member Fee
Chik I l t ti P liChikyu Implementation Policy
• For the best Science, JAMSTEC shall take a ibilit f ti Chik b lresponsibility for operating Chikyu by close
collaboration with the international scientific community of IODP.h k ’ h h d ll• Chikyu’s highest priority upon riser drilling.
Riser‐less drilling also important to accomplish g p pIODP objectives, which can only be achieved b tili i Chik bilitiby utilizing Chikyu capabilities.
Chik B i PlChikyu Business Plan
• Chikyu will operate 5 months for scientific drilling, 5 months for other non‐scientific drilling, and 25 months for other non scientific drilling, and 2 months for maintenance per annum as a general business plan. This business plan could be p pchanged due to unforeseeable budgetary situation.
• Rather large scientific project implementation requires additional funds.requires additional funds.
• Soliciting Chikyu project members and project donations are essential to implement largedonations are essential to implement large projects.
Chikyu Implementation PolicyChikyu Implementation Policy• Maximize science output and outcome
– Increase IODP Operation Windows (not limited to riser drilling)riser drilling)
– Flexible adaptation of other source of fundingi JFAST• ie. JFAST
– Co‐develop CPP‐like project• ie. Shimokita‐Hachinohe
– Build Robust Funding Structureg• Non‐IODP (commercial) operation is not always available• International project promotion neededInternational project promotion needed
Chikyu IODP Long‐term Planningy g g(presented in the last CIB meeting, July 2014)
JPFY Planned Implementation items
2014 NanTroSEIZE C10 observatory (1 month)
2015 NanTroSEIZE C6 observatory(1 month), 5 year Inspection in dock(4 months)NanTroSEIZE C2 Riser
2016 NanTroSEIZE C2 Riser(5 months)
2017 NanTroSEIZE C2 Riser(5 months)
2018 Post NanTroSEIZE?
*The above long term schedule will be forced to change depending on whether thereThe above long term schedule will be forced to change depending on whether there will be commercial works for each fiscal year.
Reasons WHY?1) Total budget sealing for JAMSTEC and serious budget cut in JAMSTEC2) No carry forward from previous FY because of the boundary of 5‐years Implementation Plan3) Unpredicted Riser and BOP repair and maintenance cost3) Unpredicted Riser and BOP repair and maintenance cost4) Significant delay of non‐IODP operation schedule5) Un‐predictable matters, ie. exchange rate, oil price, procurement and service cost, etc.
A il M J J l A t S t b O t b N b D b J F b M h
10 year Actual Performance of Chikyu Operation
April May June July August September October November December January February March
2005 Shakedown Cruise 1
2006 ll h k d2006(AF 98%)
R&M Shimokita Shakedown Cruise 2 Overseas Drilling Shakedown@Kenya
2007(AF 79%)
DOR@Australia AnnualSurvey
IODP Exp.314/315/316NanTro SEIZE
AnnualSurvey(AF 79%) Survey NanTro SEIZE Survey
2008(AF 0%)
Production of Azimuth Thruster GearOutreach Activity Construction of Azimuth Thruster Gear Shakedown
Cruise
2009(AF 42%)
IODP Exp319/322NanTro SEIZE
ShakedownCruise
MaintenanceOperation Training
2010 IODP E 326 IODP E 331 IODP E 332 DOR Tohoku2010(AF 48%)
Regular Inspection Shakedown Cruise
IODP Exp.326NanTro SEIZE C2
IODP Exp.331Deep Hot Biosphere
IODP Exp.332NamTro SEIZE
DOR@Japan
Tohoku Earthquake
2011 Construction of repairing ship’s bottom DOR@Sri Lanka DOR@Japan(AF 53%)
Construction of repairing ship s bottom DOR@Sri Lanka DOR@Japan
2012(AF 89%)
IODP Exp.343(JFAST)
R&MExp343JFAST2
IODP Exp.337Shimokita
IODP Exp.338NanTro SEIZE C2 DOR@Japan
2013(AF 82%)
DOR@Japan DOR@JapanIODP Exp.348
NanTro SEIZE C2 Maintenance
2014(AF 22%)
DOR@Japan SIPOkinawa
Maintenance DOR@India
Science Theme Categorizationg@ Chikyu+10 WS
Science Theme Flagship (Large) Project Discovery (Small) Project Other Opportunities
Dynamic Fault Behavior NanTroSEIZECRISP
Japan TrenchKAP
Faulting in Oceanic CrustMonitoringCRISP
Hikurangi MarginKAP Monitoring
Nicoya Peninsula
Ocean Crust & Earth’s Mantle M2MLife Cycle of the Oceanic Lithosphere
Atlantis BankOntong Java PlateauIBMGodzilla Megamullion
Deep Life & Hydrothermal System (Habitable Zone Drilling) 4500 m hole off HachinoheShikoku Basin (High Temp.)Décollement Hydrology (JFAST)Mud Volcano in the Kumano BasinMud Volcano in the Kumano BasinBrothers Volcano (Kermadec Arc)Eastern Manus BasinSerpentinization System
Continent Formation IBM Aleutian
Sediment Secrets Mediterranean Salinity Crisis (DREAM)
Lord Howe RiseChallenger PlateauPegasus BasinSouth China Sea
Pacific GuyotsDeep PacificSomali BasinEastern MediterraneanSouth China Sea
Santos BasinBering Sea
Eastern MediterraneanSanta Barbara BasinWest Caroline BasinBohai BasinDronning Maud Land
Chikyu IODP Long‐term Planningy g g4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3
JFY2014
non‐IODPCommercial
R&M R&Mnon‐IODPScience2014
2015
Commercial
R&M (@Doc BOP Riser)
Science
non‐IODP non‐IODP2015
2016
R&M (@Doc, BOP, Riser)
IODP
non IODPCommercial Science
2016 IODPC10 IODP Riserless
2017IODP C2?
2018
E t l F di SExternal Funding Sources
• Project‐base approach …may much acceptable for f d ( i d i i f d i ?)funders (governments, industries, science foundations?)
ie.
– Mantle DrillingMediterranean Sea Drilling– Mediterranean Sea Drilling
– Lord Howe Rise Drilling
• In‐kind ContributionsC i i d l (D W Ri– Co‐engineering development (Deep Water Riser, High‐Temp. Tools, Mud, Bit, DP, etc)
17. Mantle Drilling Working Group
Shin’ichi KuramotoShin ichi Kuramoto
CIB Consensus 0714 05CIB Consensus 0714‐05To support existing proposals for full crustal penetration to the mantle, pp g p p p ,the CIB recommends the formation of a Working Group, which focuses on: • compile and assess existing engineering studies• compile and assess existing engineering studies • specify technological development needed for a drill hole to the
mantle depending on different scenarios in discussion by the scientific community
• assess feasibility of technological developments • assess potential risks• assess potential risks • assess financial implications The group will consist of xx proponents, xx CDEX representative and g p p p , pxx members of TAT. Travel costs are covered by CDEX. The Working Group will meet for the first time in 2014 and report to CIB in the next CIB meetingin the next CIB meeting.
DRAFT Terms of ReferenceDRAFT Terms of Reference(see the Agenda Book)
1. Compile and assess existing engineering studies. p g g gThe group shall review the “Mohole Initial Feasibility Study Report” (Blade Energy, 2011), and identify expected engineering difficulties and challenges.
2. Specify technological development needed for a drill hole to the mantle depending on different scenarios in discussion by the scientific community. The group shall define necessary engineering developments as project wide and proposed site‐specific. Advantages and disadvantages of each proposed site location shall be discussed and will also consider balance between each site, in terms of science and engineering development.
3. Assess feasibility of technological developments. Based on the above two assessments, the group shall discuss a time‐ line of necessary technological development. The group also seeks for existing technologies in industry that may fulfill technological requirements of this mission. A t l f ibilit t ld t k l i l t tActual feasibility assessment could take place in a later stage.
4. Assess potential risks. The group shall assess potential risks: not only operational, but also scientific, risks, e g what can be achieved if the full penetration of the crust does not take placee.g., what can be achieved if the full penetration of the crust does not take place.
5. Assess financial implications.
BEAM activities in IODP(~2013)BEAM activities in IODP( 2013)B h l i t E th’ M tl (BEAM) j t h d i tifi• Borehole into Earth’s Mantle (BEAM) project had scientific workshops, a high‐level roundtable discussion, engineering studies by a 3rd party company and reported.
• BEAM roundtable (leaded by D. James Baker, The William J. Clinton Foundation) recommended the following points, Founding Public Awareness Community RelationsFounding, Public Awareness, Community Relations (Science/Political), Technology/Engineering Development, Appropriate Program Structure, Science Planning, Risk: Black Swans/Perfect Storms And possible meetings wereBlack Swans/Perfect Storms. And possible meetings were 1) A workshop to better define the program2) A workshop to have professionals listen to the scientists2) A workshop to have professionals listen to the scientistsand translate the science goals into exiting language3) A funding meeting
Step into the next level of Project Approach• Science
– Needs M2M proposal update
Step into the next level of Project Approach
Needs M2M proposal update• Conduct actual site surveys in the 3 potential areas. • JAMSTEC and Univ. Hawaii are preparing a site survey off Hawaii.• More interdisciplinary research collaboration must be neededMore interdisciplinary research collaboration must be needed.
• Engineering Development– Deep water, deep penetration and high temperature
t l / t i l d dtools/materials needed.• Can we share the horizons with industries? New resources must be involved.S ll i t h b l d d t k i JAMSTEC• Small experiments have been already undertaken in JAMSTEC.
• Funding– Approach governments, inter‐government organizations, private pp g , g g , p
founders.• The project must be designated.
• Outreach/PROutreach/PR– Must be supported by tax payers.
• Shows how exiting program it is.
JAMSTEC’s Current Eng ApproachJAMSTEC s Current Eng. Approach• Deep Water Operation
T h l
CFRP Riser
12 000
Technology– Deep Water Riser System
(4000m class)• Deep Penetration Technology
Turbine Motor
12,000 DP– Long‐Life Drill Bit
– Turbine Motor Drilling System– High Temperature (~300℃)
Tools
Core B.
• Logging• Coring• Drilling Fluid
– Tough Drill Pipe (12,000 m l )
Long-life DB
class)
Small scale CFRP riser pipe test DP test Turbine Motor
Discussion(just a personal idea)
• ScienceK i i l
*simultaneously approach
– Keeping eyes on site survey results.– Encourage WS to involve variety of scientists.
• Engineering Development– Continue TAT’s advices/discussion– Increase TAT member for deep drilling technology
• Funding– Appropriate cost estimation and management planmust be drafted by JAMSTEC first and reviewed by the CIB.
• Outreach/PR– Once above issues reached visible stage, small WS should be held by experienced people.
Usage of Membership FeeUsage of Membership Fee
• Membership Fee is secured in separate account of JAMSTEC– Carry over to next FY if not used within the mid‐term project periodterm project period
– Use scientific operation (like a SOC in previous IODP scheme)IODP scheme)
– Use platform operation
Agenda 18
Nagoya Protocol g yon ABSits effect to IODP
Convention on Biological Diversity: http://www.cbd.int/abs/
Access and benefit-sharingIntroduction on access and benefit-sharingWhere the Nagoya protocol be applied? ‐> EEZ
United Nations Convention on the law of the Sea (UNCLOS)PART V. EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE
In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State has:
United Nations Convention on the law of the Sea (UNCLOS)
In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State has: (a)Sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving and managing the
natural resources, whether living or non‐living, of the waters superjacent to the seabed and of the seabed and its subsoil, and with regard to other activities for the economic , gexploitation and exploration of the zone, such as the production of energy from the ….
(b)Jurisdiction as provided for in the relevant provisions of this Convention with regard to:(ii) marine scientific research;
“The Nagoya Protocol” is applied in combination with “UNCLOS”,i d illi EEZ h i i l i fli.e. drilling at EEZ has critical influence.
Access and benefit-sharingUses of genetic resources
Prior Informed Consent (PIC)Prior Informed Consent (PIC)
User of GR(& associated TK):
i d t
Provider of GR Provider of GR (& associated TK): Exp. 353; JR is drilling at Indian EEZ, no requested microbiology e.g. industry,
research institutes, universities
e.g. National Competent Authority
p ; g , q gysample are not taken from EEZ because of this issue
Mutually Agreed Terms Mutually Agreed Terms (MAT) between provider and user
• Non-commercial or commercial utilization of GR (& associated TK): e.g. basic research, research and development development of new pharmaceuticals development, development of new pharmaceuticals,
biotechnological products
• Benefit-Sharing (monetary & non-monetary): e.g. e e t S a g ( o eta y & o o eta y) e groyalties, technology transfer, training
Convention on Biological Diversity: http://www.cbd.int/abs/
Access and benefit-sharingUses of genetic resourcesMessage to CIB
• Recognition of this critical issue is great first step• Recognition of this critical issue is great first step forward
• Policy for responsibility (who should take action for• Policy for responsibility (who should take action for getting permission?) has not been established yet
• All biosphere-related objectives in proposal are affectedAll biosphere related objectives in proposal are affected• The permission often to be “PRIOR”, thus proper and
advance-enough notification to the proponents are g p pnecessary
• Not only for the objectives, but microbiologist may apply for sail to non-biosphere-oriented cruise, information dissemination to the potential applicant is of critical importanceimportance
Access and benefit-sharingUses of genetic resourcesIn reality…
• It often take more than half a year to get through proper process for permission -> for onboard scientists, it would b t l t t l ft tti i it tibe too late to apply after getting invitation
• The application scheme is complicated and differ for countries > support by IODP policy as well as operationcountries -> support by IODP policy as well as operation side will be critically required
• Nagoya protocol has not yet been common for evenNagoya protocol has not yet been common for even microbiologists, notification to proponents of IODP proposal is requiredp p q
General information can be found at here
http://www.cbd.int/abs/
Information on national focal points il blare available
https://absch.cbd.int/find?commonFormat=focalPoint
Kochi Core center (KCC)Kochi Core center (KCC)Established in 2005
Seeking for the Frontier Sciences & Services on core samplesSeeking for the Frontier Sciences & Services on core samples
KCC
KCC’s Role & ResponsibilityKCC s Role & Responsibility
A b f CIB t KCC d t f ll i t kAs a member of CIB, we at KCC conduct following tasks:
• Curation of samples according to the geographical model– Legacy & IODP cores – Cores, cuttings and DeepBIOS
• Chikyu Mirror siteChikyu Mirror site– Complement sampling & measurements pending from Chikyu expeditions
• Encourage intensive use of core and related informationC i t Vi t l C Vi d S l il bilit– Core inventory, Virtual Core Viewer, and Sample availability
• Curation‐specific researches– Monitoring core quality for long‐term effects of storage temperature
• Facilitate access to analytical facility of KCC for IODP core study
• Contribute in Pre‐cruise training Sakura Science School & J‐DESC coreContribute in Pre cruise training, Sakura Science School & J DESC core school
C ti t kCuration tasks
Core storage management
Sample request evaluation
Sampling plan
Organize sampling party Organize sampling party
Sample data managementp g
Education & Outreach
Curation of core material (JPFY2013)
IODP Expedition IODP core curation Including Legacy core curation
DSDP22%
IODP17%
New IODP1% ca. 102 km of core
22%17%
ODP60% IODP‐related curation budget
$
d
~$500k/year
Non‐IODP Expedition JAMSTEC core curationincluding Chikyu shakedown cruises
Curation of core material (as of Jan 2015)
IODP Expedition IODP core curation (includes Legacy cores)
ca. 105 km of coreDSDP21%
IODP16%
New IODP5%
21%16%
ODP58%
d Non‐IODP Expedition JAMSTEC core curationincluding Chikyu shakedown cruises
IODP core curationIODP core curation
• IODP Sample, Data & Obligations Policy
• Geographic model of core distributionGeographic model of core distribution
• Curation of cores, cuttings & DeepBIOS
C ll b i h 2 h IODP i i• Collaborate with 2 other IODP core repositories: BCR and GCR
• Facilitate access to analytical facility of KCC by IODP researchers from abroad
• Pre‐cruise training, Sakura Science School, and J‐DESC core school
IODP Sample Data & Obligation PolicyImplementation plan
• KCC accepted and implemented the new IODP policy d b th 3 FBapproved by the 3 FBs
• Curatorial Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) madeCuratorial Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) made available through the KCC website
http://www.kochi‐core.jp/en/iodp‐curation/curation‐sop.htmlhttp://www.kochi core.jp/en/iodp curation/curation sop.html
Gulf Coast RepositoryBremen Core Repository Kochi Core Center
ASIA
KCC
Geographic model: 3 oceanic regions, 3 IODP core repositories
IODP & Legacy (ODP/DSDP) coresIODP & Legacy (ODP/DSDP) cores
Repository Institution Amount of coreRepository Institution Amount of core
University ofBCR
University of Bremen
154 km
GCRTexas A&M University
128 km
KCCJAMSTEC & Kochi University
105 km
NJ Geological Survey
Rutgers University0.62 km
ODP Leg 150X
Curation of core material
1 5 m long core sections (AH & WH) 10 cm long whole rounds
Cuttingsat +4˚C, ~80% humidity1242 nos1.5 m long core sections (AH & WH)
at +4˚C, ~80% humidityca. 105 km
10 cm long whole rounds (DeepBIOS) at ‐80˚C296 nos.
1242 nos.
Shipboard sample residues and unused samples returned by sample requestersp p p y p qStored in +4˚C reefer and air‐conditioned container
Sample Request decision makingSample Request decision making
Expedition SpecificExpedition Specific~ 6 months pre-expedition
to 12 months post expedition
Post-moratorium> 12 months post expedition
Advice, AppealAdvice, Appeal, Permanent Archiverequests and long
CAB
IODP Curator
requests and long term loans
Ad i Ti b k A l
Onboard SAC
IODP CuratorAdvice, Tie-breaker, AppealAppeal
Feasibility of proposed researchConflict with other sample requests
InvestigatorConflict with other sample requestsSample volume / frequency
SAC : Sample Allocation Committee
CAB : Curatorial Advisory Board
Sample requestsSample requestsLegacy core IODP core L IODP Chik E
100
120
Legacy core IODP core
250
300
Legacy core IODP core Chikyu Exp.
60
80
150
200
20
40
50
100
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
T t l 1532Total 812
US FY US FY
(as of Jan. 2015)
Total 1532
Samples shipped
Legacy IODP
Samples shipped
15000
Legacy IODP
61478 34782 Large number due to
sampling party:
9000
12000Exp. 323 & 346
6000
9000
3000
02007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
US FY
(as of Jan. 2015)Total 144,471
VisitorsVisitors
J Ab d L IODP
100
Japan Abroad
100
Legacy IODP
50
75
50
75
25
50
25
50
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
US FY
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
US FY
T t l 315
US FY US FY
(as of Jan. 2015)
Total 315
Core Summary
Keyword based search, overview and links to reports of all cores being curated in the KCC (http://www.kochi-core.jp/cs/)curated in the KCC (http://www.kochi core.jp/cs/)
WH sample availability
Check the amount of core material available in Working Half (WH)
http://www kochi core jp/sample availability/http://www.kochi-core.jp/sample-availability/
Virtual Core Viewer
3D rendering of XCT images of cores on PC, tablet & smart-phoneColoring based on CT valuesSlice 3D image vertically Sh i th h SNS i (T itt F b k t )Share image through SNS services (Twitter, Facebook etc.)Annotation/marking possible, similar to Google map
Analytical facility for IODP researchersAnalytical facility for IODP researchers
• Opened for IODP community outside Japan since June 2012
• Logging equipment : XCT scannerLogging equipment : XCT scanner
• MSCL-S, -color, -NGR
• XRF core scanner
• Core Image Scanner
Some showed interest in utilizing it; some have actually utilized it.
Core Logging Instruments (non‐destructive measurements for physical properties and elemental composition)physical properties and elemental composition)
X‐ray CT Digital Color measurement
MSCL (Density, Mag‐Sus, etc) XRF Core Scanner (elemental composition)
Education and TrainingEducation and Training
About IODP policy and shipboard measurements
P i t i i
About IODP policy and shipboard measurements
• Pre‐cruise training
IODP Expeditions: 346, 348, 353, 354, 355
• J‐DESC core schoolJ DESC core school
Once every year
• Sakura Science School
Once every year
Japan-Asia Youth Exchange Program in Science (SAKURA Exchange Program in Science 2014)
•Core Curation and Basic Analyses Course Program for Graduate Students and Post-Doc Researchers•Learn curatorial and analyses methods for scientific drilling core samples: A key to unravel the Earth’s past, present and future.
•10 visitors from China, Taiwan, S. Korea, Indonesia and Vietnam•Nov. 10 – Nov. 22, 2014•The school program included: p g
•Core sample curation method•Non-destructive measurements•core description including microscopic observation (e.g., smear slides)p g p ( g , )•Field Trip•Oral Presentation
21
New cores and sampling parties p g pin KCC in 2015
JOIDES Resolution
IODP Exp. 353 (Indian Monsoon) ‐‐‐‐ Sampling party in July 2015
IODP Exp. 354 (Bengal Fan) ‐‐‐‐ Some sampling onshore ?
IODP Exp. 355 (Arabian Sea Monsoon) ‐‐‐‐ Sampling party in Oct. 2015 ?
IODP Exp. 356 (Indonesian Through Flow) ‐‐‐‐ Sampling party in 2016 ?
IODP Exp. 359 (Maldives Monsoon) ‐‐‐‐ Sampling party in 2016
Chikyu
IODP Exp. 358 ?
Additional repository since October 2014
Core repository
K C CNew
repository
Core repository
New reefer
Oct. 2014 onwards :
Transferred new IODP cores from existing reefers gto the new reefer
Cleared backlog of >50 sample requests
Plan transfer of DSDP/ODP/IODP cores to new reefer
Curatorial budgetCuratorial budgetespecially for the Legacy and JR cores
Last US FY : Consortium for Ocean Leadership, USA
Current : multi year contract with the IODP/TAMU USACurrent : multi‐year contract with the IODP/TAMU, USA
~ US$ 400k per year
See How we are related to each other.
KCCKochi UniversityCenter for Advenced Marine Core Research Building
JAMSTECKochi Inst. Core Sample Res.Core Research Building
LandOwner
p
Sci
Sci.Tech.
Gran
Grant
EquipmeMaintenance …
Equipments
Sci.Tech.
Contract.
JAMSTEC core
t Equipments
Joint UseCore
Repository
Univ. Core
Curation/Sampling/Measure
IODP Core
Joint Use p yIODP curator JAMSTEC curator
CDEXUniv. researchers NSF
Legacy CoreIODP res. Researchers
MEXT
CDEX
Joint Use
¥¥$$ core TaskFac. Org.
New Director: Dr. Ishikawa
KCCKochi UniversityCenter for Advenced Marine Core Research Building
JAMSTECKochi Inst. Core Sample Res.Core Research Building
LandOwner
p
Sci
Sci.Tech.
Gran
Grant
EquipmeMaintenance …
Equipments
Sci.Tech.
Contract.
JAMSTEC core
t Equipments
Joint UseCore
Repository
Univ. Core
Curation/Sampling/Measure
IODP Core
Joint Use p yIODP curator JAMSTEC curator
CDEXUniv. researchers NSF
Legacy CoreIODP res. Researchers
MEXT
CDEX
Joint Use
¥¥$$ core TaskFac. Org.
2015/3/31CHIKYU International Board meeting (CIB)
CDEX outreach activityJuly 2014〜March 2015
Tamano Omata
Contents
Update of CDEX outreach activityAGU fall meetingUN world conference on disaster risk reduction 2015 Sendai Japan2015, Sendai, JapanWebsite renewalMediaMedia
th iCHIKYU 10th anniversary Brief history and expedition in the decadeE t d iEvent under preparingAnniversary reportCollaboration with mediaCollaboration with mediaothers
Booth Exhibition at AGU Fall Meeting 2014
Booth exhibition2050
Refining
2051
MicroSupp
2150 2151
Terraplus,
2350
USRA
2351
University
2352
EMERGENCY
PEDESTRIAN RAMP
FACILITY
STORAGE
KEEP CLEARSNACK BAR SEATING
KEEP CLEAR
WFPHONES
WOMEN
RESTROOMS
MEN
Booth map
odo
20'Google,
Inc.
1728
20'B
eta
Ana
lytic
Inc
1729
50'
40'
AGU Marketplace
1732
DOSECC
1734
Association
1736
Scripps
1738
Sequoia
1740
Geospace
1742
Geotech
1744
Mathworks
1745
GNSScien
1746
CAMECA
1747
Planetary
20'
'
Nature’sOwn
1839
20'
20'
Research InGermany
1844
JewellInstru
1845
KMSTechn
1846
Reserved
1847
Gasmet
20'
1929
20'
30'
Wiley
1937
20'Gur
alp
Syst
ems
1941
Renishaw
1943
National
1944
GWRInstru
1945
LittleRiver
1946
SERDP /
1947
RealWorld
20'
'
Kinemetrics,Inc.
2029
20'
20'
Picarro, Inc.
2035
Instrumenta
2036
HORIBA
2037
GeoSIG Ltd
2038
20'A
sia
Oc e
ania
2039
IOPPublis
2041
Science/AA
2042
Earth,Planet
2043
AAASScien
2044
Reserved
2045
Turner
2046
Resonon,
2047
Applied
'cros
oft
esea
rch
2129
20'
20'
Universityof Alaska -Fairbanks
2134
gempa
2135
20'
Aer
odyn
eRe
sear
ch,
2136
OSOP,S.A.
2138
OnThe
2139
Ecotech Pty
2140
MALAGeosc
2141
National
2142
College of
2144
RMYOUN
2146
Blueprint
'Kor
eatit
ute
of 20'
'
Nanometrics
2229
20'
20'
ThermoScientific
2234
20'
Nat
iona
lA
cade
mie
s
2235
20'Cla
rk
2238
National
2239
Photon
2240
American
2241
Seismologic
2243
Institut
2245
20'Oce
anN
etw
orks
'mer
ican
teor
olog
i
2329
20'
20'
Xylem, IncAanderaa /
Sontek / YSI/ Waterlog
2334
20'Jo
hns
Hop
kins
2335
50'
40'
NASA
2338
RieglUSA
2340
GEMAdvan
2342
ZongeIntern
2344
20'
Res
erve
d
2345
20'Oxf
ord
Uni
vers
ity
'NA
VCO
,In
c.
20'
'
IRISConsortium
2429
20'
20'
REF TEK (ADivision of
Trimble)Navigation
2444
National
2445
Dynamax,
2446
Columbia
2447
Spectral
'UA
HSI
2529
20'
20'
Reserved
2535
20'
Res
erve
d
2539
PPSyste
2541
Taylor&
2543
RodGriffin
2544
EssexIndust
2545
Savillex
2546
DianaMarch
2547
Reserved
'urop
ean
osci
ence
2625
ToolikField
2629
Pro-Seism
2631
Onset-
2634
Stevens
2635
ARCScien
2636 2637
Ocean
2638 2639
2640 2641
Reserved
2642
Elementar
2644
2646
University
2724
Sea-Bird
2728
Internationa
2729
2730
2734
NaturePublis
2735
27362737
27382739
27402741
Reserved
2743
2825
2827
Centerfor
2828 2829
2831
HALL C
STORAGE
STORAGE
FACILITY
To Posters
Refreshment
Refreshment Refreshment
Refreshment
POSTER
S
1704
40'
Sprin
ger
1705
20'
30'
LI-CORBiosciences
1712
Princeton 1713
20'
30'
DecagonDevices, Inc
1714
University of
1716
Isotopx Inc.
1718
2GEnterp
1720
30'
Kom
o
1721
30'
1805
20'
30'
IKON Mining&
Exploration
1813
20'
Else
vier
1817
20'
Cam
brid
geUn
iver
sity
1823
20
1905
20'
30'
Los GatosResearch
1912
20'
Huk
seflu
xUSA
, Inc
.
1913
20'Mic
ro-g
Scin
trex
1916
20'Gem
s &
Crys
tals
1917
MountSopris
1921
30'
2005
20'
20'
JapanGeoscience
Union
2011
20'Kip
p &
Zone
n U
SA
2012
20'
Cam
pbel
lSc
ient
ific,
2015
Apogee
2016
Sensors &
2017
InterMet
2019
Droplet
2023
20
2105
20'
20'
Environmental SystemsResearchInstitute,
2110
ASCScient
2111
30'
Res
erve
d
2112
SIAM-Societ
2114
Aventech
2116
Scintec
2118
MetOne
2119
20'
Del
tare
s
2123
20Mi
Re
2205
Robertson
2207
Geophysic
2210
20'
Geo
logi
cal
Soci
ety
2211
SEPMSociet
2213
TheGeolo
2214
Kongsberg
2215
ACSPublic
2217
National
2218
20'
Latit
ude
Engi
neer
in
2219
ESRPC &
2222
20
KIn
s
2223
20
2304
IrisInstru
2305
20'O
yoC
orpo
ratio
n
2306
Geometrics
2309
20'
Law
renc
eB
erke
ley
2310
20'
Soci
ety
ofEx
plor
atio
n
2313
USGIN2314
Reserved
2315
EarthCube
2316
ZoomDigital
2317
Elemental
2318
Copernicus
2319
Stockholm
2321
SpaceScien
2323
20Am
Met
2404
20'UC
AR
Com
mun
ity
2405
20'
20'
NationalScience
FoundationGeoscience
2408
20'NC
R-
Nat
iona
l
2411
30'
Cons
ortiu
m fo
rO
cean
Lea
ders
hip
2412
ECORD/IOD
2414
AURANatio
2416 2417
20'
UM
IAQ
2418
Radiocarbo
2420
EarthScope
2422
20UN
2423
20
2505
20'
Nat
iona
lEc
olog
ical
2509
Reserved
2510
20'
Res
erve
d
2511
LacCore/CS
2513
2514
KochiCore
2515
National
2516
20'
Ope
nTop
ogra
phy
/
2517
Intergrated
2519
NSFAntarc
2521
Critical Zone
2523
20CU
2604
SoilScien
2605
Reserved
2606
AIPPublis
2607
20'
Res
erve
d
2608
2610 2611
2612 2613
Reserved
2614 2615
Reserved
2616
Unionof
2617
Reserved
2618
20'Th
eEu
rope
an
2619
2621
Rigaku
2622
20Eu Geo
2623
TheArctic
2701
20'UM
S
2704
Agilent
2706
Reserved
2707
2708
2710
2712
Reserved
2713
2714 2715
Reserved
2716
Reserved
2717
2718 2719
2720
2722
European
2800
2801
2802
Reserved
2803
2805
Reserved
2806 2807
2809
2811
2812 2813
Reserved
2814
Reserved
2815
Reserved
2816
Reserved
2817
2818 2819
2821
2823
NSF Street
Refreshment
S
3100
University
3101
Purdue
3102
3103
Virginia Tech
3104
3105
3107
3109
3112 3114
3200
School of
3201
TexasA&M
3204
Reserved
3205
STANFORD
3206
32073208
32093210 3211
3212
3213
3214
3215
3216
3300
Earth-Life
3301
Reserved
3302
University
3303
TexasTech
3304
3305
3306
3307
3308
3309
3311
3313
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
* * * * *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
* LAST IN, FIRST OUT
BusinessCenter
SOUTH LOBBYTO UPPER
ENTRANCE
ACADEMIC SHOWCASE
ブース№ JAMSTEC :2510(2ブース) ⾼知コア:2514(1ブース)
Outreach meeting among IOsUpdate information of each IOs
JAMSTECECORD‐ICDPSchool of Rock at ECORDCHIKYU onboard opportunity(as E&O activity)
Outreach activity(July 2014‐March 2015) Ocean Leadership
(as E&O activity)
Town hall meeting at AGU 2014
Co‐organized by Ocean Leadership, CDEX, ECORD and ICDP Ab l h d d i i About several hundred participants Information about the Taira Prize
f b Face to face communication among community members
UN world conference on di t i k d ti 2015 S d i Jdisaster risk reduction 2015, Sendai, Japan
Booth exhibition( d d h ) Temporary exhibition(Sendai mediatheque) Temporary exhibition
At Tohoku Univ. museum
Website renewal
Current structure New site structureCurrent structure New site structure
CHIKYU sitej t j / hikCHIKYU site
j t j / hik
STEC
pSTEC
p
www.jamstec.go.jp/chikyuwww.jamstec.go.jp/chikyu
CDEXCDEXCDEX site
www.jamstec.go.jp/chikyu
JAMS To
JAMS To www.jamstec.go.jp/cdexwww.jamstec.go.jp/cdex
IODPwww.jamstec.go.jp/iodp
IODPwww.jamstec.go.jp/iodp
Renewed Web DesignCHIKYU site CDEX site
Renewed homepage will be opened in April.
MediaTVTV
Australia ABC BS JapanTBS (Japan)
Book, newsletter and web
Book (Shincho‐sha) Web (US Santa Cruz) Book Book
List of outreach activityCategory Number
(international/domestic)
Detail
domestic)
Symposium (co‐organize) 0/1 Symposium for Integrated Ocean Drilling Program(with National Science Museum)
Symposium 0/1 Science session in Iwate: Mechanism of EarthquakeSymposium(with collaboration)
0/1 Science session in Iwate: Mechanism of Earthquake and Tsunami and Sea of Tohoku 4 years after
Education(P ti l k/ Fi ld
0/4 Yokohama Science Frontier HS, Tagajo HS, Uto HS, JpGU educational session for students(Practical work/ Field
excursion )
JpGU educational session for students
Booth exhibition 4/2 JpGU, AOGS, AGU, UN disaster meeting, Geological Society in Japan SSH in Aomori(International) Society in Japan, SSH in Aomori,
Lecture 0/25 Meeting for school directors, Japanese society for non‐destructive inspection, etc.
Media interview 3/19 The Seattle Times, Australia ABC, NHK, TBS, Nihon TV, Yomiuri News, Sankei News, etc.
Photo and movie providing for di
7/56 Discovery Channel Canada、University CaliforniaSanta Cruz Schlumberger Advanced Magazinemedia Santa Cruz、Schlumberger、Advanced Magazine, University of Leicester, Keirinkan, Tokyo‐Shoseki, Mitsubishi Minatomirai Museum etc.
CHIKYU 10th anniversary E diti hi tExpedition history
CHIKYU history of the decade Launching
Derrick Installation Delivery
2002 2003
Open ship at Kobe Exp 331 OkinawaExp 314‐316
2005
p p Exp 331 Okinawap 3 3 6NanTroSEIZE stage1
2008 20102007
CHIKYU +10CHIKYU +10
20112012Exp 343 JFAST 2012Exp 337 Hachinohe 2013
Plan for CHIKYU 10th anniversary
CeremonyOpen ship at Yokohamap pWorkshops as local activitiesA i (i J )Anniversary report (in Japanese)Collaboration with media (National Geographic Japan)