Findings and Recommendations - New Research Opportunities in the Earth Sciences - page 101

this report in how to service the expanding needs of the community relative to other
core facilities noted above that underlie opportunity areas.
Traditionally, age determinations have been made in single principal
investigator (PI) laboratories. These laboratories are usually funded by a combination
of grants directly to the laboratory PI and to investigators with which the PI
collaborates. However, as the technical complexity of the measurements and the cost
of instrumentation rise, this model is becoming financially unsustainable. In addition,
there is a sense among potential users that this model does not serve the community
as broadly and effectively as it could. One way forward is for EAR to entertain
proposals that seek funding for major new facilities capable of meeting these
challenges. The committee prefers to avoid being overly prescriptive of what such a
facility should look like—whether it be a single laboratory or an alliance of multiple
laboratories, whether it be focused on a single method or a range of methods, and so
forth. However, a collection of important objectives for such facilities is offered:
1. The best science outcomes occur when strong intellectual engagement
exists between the investigators who make the measurements and those
who use them. This extends all the way from the inception of a project,
through sampling strategy and sample selection, to the collection and
interpretation of results. The committee believes that a simple analysis-
for-hire scheme is unlikely to yield results of consistent high quality.
2. It will be useful to identify mechanisms that will encourage broad
community access to the facilities.
3. It would be useful if facilities were encouraged or required to routinely
demonstrate that the quality of their results meet the standard expected by
the community they serve. Such a demonstration would eliminate any
questions regarding the integrity of ages produced.
4. The education of investigators, especially students and post-docs, is an
essential goal of these facilities. The education of geochronologists and
that of users of geochronology are equally important. Intellectual isolation
of measurements from applications is best avoided.
5. A component of the support given to facilities could be used to innovate
new or better methods.
6. Traditional single-PI laboratories doing high-quality, innovative research
will remain essential to the vitality of the field.
The facilities envisioned here could be quite expensive, and the committee
does not prescribe a specific funding mechanism. In its boldest implementation the
committee can envision creating one or more national geochronology centers that
would require capitalization and operating costs that exceed the capacity of existing
NSF-EAR programs, including the Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) program.
Alternatively, single PI laboratories or networks of such laboratories could potentially
fulfill the same objectives but would require substantially more support and more
commitment to serving community needs than if implemented through current EAR
programs.