Australia and New Zealand could be on the brink of a major scientific coup. In roughly a month’s time, the site for the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) radio telescope will be announced.
Australia and New Zealand are competing against a consortium of nine African countries – led by South Africa – for the right to host this A$2 billion mega-science project – one of the largest and most ambitious scientific projects ever conceived.
Last year, representatives from Australia-New Zealand prepared a detailed submission to assist the SKA Site Advisory Committee with its deliberations. I was lucky enough to be a part of that team.
The document, which exceeded 1,000 pages and included input from more than 40 organisations and agencies, provided data in sometimes eye-watering detail on the physical and environmental characteristics of our candidate site. It also described the social, political and legal structures relevant to administering the project in Australia and New Zealand.
For several weeks, submissions from both candidate sites were scrutinised by an international panel of experts. Very shortly, in the next few weeks, the committee will deliver its recommendation of the preferred site to the SKA Board of Directors. The board will then have the final responsibility for choosing a site. This decision is expected to be announced in mid- to late-March.
The level of anticipation within the scientific community is palpable. Astronomers, engineers and officials are collectively holding their breath, awaiting the announcement.
I have witnessed a remarkable level of enthusiasm from the general public. At an ABC “meet a scientist” event last year I asked a young girl – of around 11 years old – if she knew what a radio telescope was. Her reply stunned me: “Is that like the SKA?”, she asked, before proceeding to tell me there was competition between Australia and South Africa to host the telescope.
So what makes the ideal site for the world’s most sensitive radio telescope?
The primary consideration is, unsurprisingly, the suitability of the location for radio astronomy. With the rapid expansion of electronic communications devices such as mobile phones, radio astronomers around the world have experienced a large negative impact from the encroachment of stray “radio frequency interference” into their telescope receiver systems.
This can be extremely damaging to science output and costly to mitigate. CSIRO’s existing observatories in rural New South Wales – such as the Parkes Observatory – are increasingly suffering from population growth and the associated radio interference. The problem will be much more acute for the SKA, which will be more sensitive and observe over a very large frequency range, in order to pick up signals from the distant universe.
To avoid such man-made interference, CSIRO, working with WA State and Federal Governments, has established the Murchison Radio-Astronomy Observatory in one of the most remote areas of Western Australia.
By way of contrast, the region within 100km of CSIRO’s Paul Wild Observatory near Narrabri, NSW, has a population density of one person per square kilometre. Within 100km of our candidate SKA site, the figure is 100 times lower.
In order to protect this extraordinarily radio-quiet region, CSIRO and government agencies have negotiated a strong legal framework to protect the Murchison Radio-Astronomy Observatory for generations to come.
The SKA will comprise a number of different receiver systems, which will enable observations over a large frequency range. There are strong scientific advantages of placing these systems at a single, high-quality site:
- the infrastructure cost is shared between the high- and low-frequency receivers, increasing the available budget for the (scientifically productive) hardware and active components of the telescope
- the scientific return of a geographically distributed telescope is diminished because simultaneous observations of the sky over a large frequency range would be impossible
- if man-made interference were greater at one location, it would inevitably diminish the science return to place any antennas on the site more afflicted by radio interference.
For these reasons, I have no doubt that the merit-based process to identify a single site for the telescope is the correct approach. Given the SKA will inhabit one of the last remaining radio-quiet sites on Earth, the quality of science is not an area in which we can afford to compromise.
I have heard the SKA site bid compared to an Olympic bid, but in many ways that understates the significance of the project. A successful SKA telescope will provide a massive boost for science worldwide, together with the spin-off benefits that flow from such internationally focused innovative technology projects.
This will happen, provided the very best site is chosen to enable maximum potential for scientific discovery and maximum engagement from the global technology community.
Australia and New Zealand have incredibly strong credentials to support the SKA on behalf of the whole world for the 50-year lifetime of the instrument. I hope in 2012 – an Olympic year – we ensure scientific excellence emerges from this process victorious.
Join the conversation
Comments (13)
Brad Hut
Go-for (logged in via email @iinet.net.au)
Senator Conroy says some out reach propertys will use Satilite trasmisions to receive their NBN coverage. Has SKA, anzSKA, ASKAP etc... taken this into account? I assume these isolated inhabitants will be connected(hard wired) to the Dishs bandwidth? to prevent noise. Wow
Get involved help crunch the Data with your home computer Join theSkynet.org Here: http://www.theskynet.org/index.php
@theSkynet (twitter) @Brains3
Lisa Harvey-Smith
(Square Kilometre Array (SKA) Project Scientist at CSIRO)
Hi, thanks for your insightful question.
The answer is yes, for the Murchison Radio-Astronomy Observatory there is a robust spectrum management framework to protect the telescopes from unwanted interference. Government agencies and stakeholders in this region work closely together to ensure that the observatory is protected from potential sources of interference. Of course, the most valuable attribute of the site is the extremely low population density. There are so few people living in the Murchison Shire that the potential issue of interference from communications devices is greatly reduced. Best wishes, Lisa
Arie Huidenkooper
Random guy (logged in via email @gmail.com)
Just to be curious, could you elaborate on the differences between the two SKA site bids? I guess both sites are extremely radio quiet and that both sites have decent governmental backing (although I could immagine that negotiating with only two countries is more efficient than with half of Africa). But what are the most important differences in your opinion?
Lisa Harvey-Smith
(Square Kilometre Array (SKA) Project Scientist at CSIRO)
Hi Arie,
Thanks for your question. I cannot speak about the South African bid at all, as both teams have agreed not to do so. I support the role of the SKA Site Advisory Committee to make judgement based upon the documentation that was submitted in September. I'm very much looking forward to seeing their recommendation.
Best wishes,
Lisa
Arie Huidenkooper
Random guy (logged in via email @gmail.com)
Thanks for your reply. I understand the agreement (probably it could hurt the image of the field as such a lot if people would start arguing too much in the public). So my best shot is to go and find a blogger whi writes on the african SKA location to see what they have to offer.
I wish you all good luck with the coming decission.
Dale Bloom
Laboratory analyst (logged in via email @mail.com)
There is a question of exactly how much will Australians gain from this, and will it become like so many other projects, such as mining, where most of the equipment is imported, much of the technology is imported, and increasingly, more and more of the workers are from other countries, with Australians being left with jobs such as running service stations and grocery stores.
Sorry to sound so pessimistic, but continuously giving away so much of Australia for very little gain in return, is now becoming a very important factor in Australia’s economy.
William Ferguson
Software Developer (logged in via email @xandar.com.au)
I would imagine that Australia will gain a great deal from this. A concentration of like minds in a high tech enterprise of this scale is bound to generate many secondary and tertiary effects. If you are looking to boost the economy then investing in forward looking technology is the right approach.
I really hope the Australian bid gets up.
Dale Bloom
Laboratory analyst (logged in via email @mail.com)
William
I hope it is correct that this project will generate some industry in Australia that is long lasting, and generate some jobs for Australians other than changing the light bulbs and mowing the lawns.
Unfortunately I have seen too much industry in Australia sold off to foreign interests, and too much land being sold off, for very little long term gain.
I also hope that the taxpayer isn’t left to foot the bill for the infrastructure for this project, such as building roads and power generation, but any profits from the project go elsewhere.
Wil B
Environmental Planner (logged in via email @gmail.com)
Dale, it's pretty obvious that all Australians will benefit from this, through expanded knowledge of the Universe. Of course most technology will be imported, and many if not most radio-astronomers will be from overseas. But so what. It's an exciting time to be getting into the field for a young physicist isn't it?
I guess what I'm saying is that this project isn't about financial wealth generation (how boring), it's about knowledge generation. We're not "giving away" Australia here, all we're losing is the right of a very small number of people to make radio noise. In return we're gaining a universe.
Arie Huidenkooper
Random guy (logged in via email @gmail.com)
Well, I certainly hope that Australia has decent tax laws so that decent amounts of the salaries and groceries end up in the hands of the state.
John Elliott
(logged in via Facebook)
WiFi Windfall (http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2708730.htm)
Australian electrical engineer whose work in the application of Fourier transforms to radio astronomy[1] led to his invention with colleagues of a core technology that made wireless LAN fast and reliable. This technology was patented by CSIRO and forms part of the 802.11a, 802.11g and 802.11n Wi-Fi standards.
He is currently working on the design of the Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder telescope, a step towards the proposed Square Kilometre Array telescope.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_O%27Sullivan_%28engineer%29)
I am less pessimistic.
And if the "foreign workers" are funded by foreign money then thats cash in isn't it?
Australia is a world leader in Radio Astronomy. Much of the instrument will be custom built - some locally.
Dale Bloom
Laboratory analyst (logged in via email @mail.com)
John,
I have seen it occur too often in the mining industry that foreign workers are employed in Australia, and out of their wages they take money for rent and food, and send the rest of their wages back home.
And I have personally seen the situation of a large project built in a pristine area that thoroughly made an eyesore out of the area, then the local council put up the rates to pay for extra infrastructure, then the company went bankrupt, and then everyone was left with increased rates for no financial gain, and an eyesore made out of their environment..
This SKA project will largely be a foreign run project, and I hope Australia has some say in what happens, or it can cost us in many ways.
Mark Davidson
Hospitality Sector (logged in via email @yahoo.com.au)
I for one am completely opposed to spending so much money on this type of project (Like the LHC). Don't get me wrong; I'd love to get the information that may result from these type of projects as even remote science is still fascinating. However you only have to visit the third world to see the desperately poor and sick children who are suffering and in need of immediate help whilst we enjoy modern medicine, housing and clean water. People "earning" a hundred thousand dollars per annum for getting…
show full comment