Download 33089 University of Manitoba Barber, David The Churchill Marine Observatory

University of Manitoba
33089
Barber, David
The Churchill Marine Observatory
2015 Innovation Fund
CFI Funding Decision
Board decision made on 03-24-15
Project Leader:
Barber, David
Fund:
2015 Innovation Fund
Administrative
institution:
University of Manitoba
Project number:
33089
Project Title:
The Churchill Marine Observatory
Special MAC recommendation:
The Special Multidisciplinary Assessment Committee (S-MAC), informed by the Multidisciplinary Assessment Committee
(MAC) reports and the project summaries for context, ensured consistency among the MACs and recommended to the CFI
Board of Directors the proposals that most effectively support the CFI’s mandate, meet the objectives of the competition —
striving for global leadership, forging and fostering productive partnerships, and reaping the benefits — and represent the most
effective portfolio of investments for Canada.
Funding Recommendation:
Conditional funding
Recommended contribution:
$12,396,452
CFI Decision:
Funding Decision: Conditional funding Maximum CFI contribution: $12,396,452
Applicable conditions:
Given the project’s complexity and scale, the CFI requires that the University of Manitoba establish a robust project
management and oversight approach for the implementation of this project. At a minimum, this must include bi-monthly
(every two months) progress updates starting in May 2015 that demonstrate satisfactory progress towards 1) securing
matching funds, 2) securing the required permits and meeting other regulatory requirements, and 3) confirming the actual
costs of the design and construction of the facilities, and confirming the construction timeline and milestones. The University
of Manitoba will also complete a detailed project risk assessment, and beginning with the July 2015 progress update, will
report regularly on key risks and mitigation measures and strategies.
2015 Innovation Fund
Multidisciplinary Assessment Committee (MAC) Report
Project leader:
Barber, David
Project number:
Administrative
institution:
University of Manitoba
Project title:
The Churchill Marine Observatory
33089
MAC Recommendations:
Funding recommendation:
Full funding
Exceptional project?:
Yes
Recommended amount:
$12,396,452
Rationale for MAC recommendation:
Funding is requested to establish a facility to study oil spills and mitigation strategies in arctic marine environments (i.e. sea ice). The research objectives
focus on the detection of oil in and under ice; the ecological impacts; and mitigation techniques. The environmental observation system will directly measure
and monitor the natural range and variability of key environmental factors. The MAC lauded the proposed research activities, which by any definition would be
considered world-class. This proposal brings together, under the leadership of Dr. Barber and the University of Manitoba, all the elements required to be a
leading player in this critical field of research. This includes an exemplary, multidisciplinary team with two Canada Excellence Research Chairs and numerous
Canada Research Chairs.
The melting of arctic ice due to global warming is accelerating, opening up new oil reserves and shipping channels through the arctic. The MAC concurred
that it is of critical importance to understand the behaviour of oil in and under ice and its potential impacts, and to develop effective mitigation strategies. This
proposal will establish a whole new type of facility in Canada and indeed the world – a full-scale permanent facility dedicated to solving oil in ice problems.
This does not exist elsewhere, and very few countries are in a position to establish such a facility. The proposal builds on an existing area of research
excellence at the lead and partner institutions, and benefits from their considerable depth in the relevant disciplines and fields. The MAC noted that the
proposal contains clear evidence confirming the long-term commitment to this important research area.
The committee noted the exceptional level of engagement and participation in the project at the national and international level. Principal users from the three
collaborating institutions, as well as University Laval and the University of Washington, span the relevant disciplines (earth science, biology, oceanography,
geography, and engineering) necessary for this research. The MAC also highlighted the institutions' plans to hire more faculty, including industrial research
chairs, to support the research team. The facility will serve national and international needs, gathering over 170 researchers from six Canadian universities,
three international universities; ten government departments, and ten private sector partners. The MAC remarked there are very few projects it could identify
that are able to secure commitments from both big oil companies (e.g. Exxon) and non-governmental organizations (e.g. World Wildlife Fund) as this one has
done. Beyond the partnerships and networks already established, the MAC was convinced that, once built, this facility will be conducive to new and attractive
partnerships. It also appreciated the sound, long term (5year+) strategy to maintain and operate the facility.
The MAC noted that the proposed research is very much “problem-driven”, and was convinced it will lead to tangible benefits of material importance and high
visibility. Indeed, it is hard to argue against the value of learning about the detection, impacts and mitigation of potential contaminants in the Arctic marine
ecosystem, and agreed that with the right partners – which this group has – this research will translate into real-world policies and practices for safer
transportation, and the safeguarding of marine ecosystems and commercial fishing. The MAC would have appreciated more details regarding the data
management plan for this facility, and strongly encourages the proponents to make the data freely available and accessible. However, it noted positively the
collaboration with those from Ocean Networks Canada who have considerable experience with and success in the management and dissemination of large
datasets. As a result, the MAC was confident that appropriate data management and sharing strategies would be established.
The MAC deemed this project exceptional. As noted, this is a rare opportunity to establish a unique facility in Canada that capitalizes on clear strengths and
partnerships to address pressing issues of global importance for which Canada can and should be a global leader. Canada will forfeit a tremendous
opportunity if this proposal is not funded.
While the expert committee expressed some concerns regarding the need for regulatory permits, particularly for wastewater release from the facility, the MAC
was confident the proponents will be able to secure the necessary permits given their strong collaborative ties with the relevant federal, provincial, and
municipal governments. The MAC recommends full funding of $12,396,452 for the requested infrastructure. It also agreed that the additional 5% funding from
the CFI for administrative costs, travel, accommodation and space for meetings of the Board of Directors was well justified in light of the extensive
partnerships and remote location of the facility. As such, an additional $619,823 is recommended for these expenses.
Global Leadership
Productive Partnerships
Benefits to Canadians
EX
EX
SA
Legend for assessment: EX = Satisfies and significantly exceeds the objective in one or more aspects, SA = Satisfies the objective in all aspects, SW = Satisfies the objective with
only a few minor weaknesses, PS = Partially satisfies the objective with some significant weaknesses, NS = Does not satisfy the objective due to major weaknesses
Canada Foundation for Innovation | Fondation canadienne pour l’innovation
2015 Innovation Fund
Expert Review Committee Report
INSTITUTIONAL TRACK RECORD AND COMMITMENT
Standard: The proposal builds on existing capacity and key investments in people and infrastructure.
Through tangible commitments, the institution supports the area of the proposal in order to maintain or
gain a competitive advantage internationally.
The University of Manitoba intends to create the Churchill Marine Observatory (CMO) to be located in
Churchill, Manitoba, close to Canada’s only Arctic deep water port. The CMO plans to conduct research
activities related to oil spills in areas with sea ice, to the impacts of these contaminants on the marine
ecosystem, and to the development of environmental technologies designed for detection and mitigation
of oil in ice-covered waters. The committee highlighted that this is a daring proposal which seeks to
establish a wholly new type of facility in Canada for oil in ice studies in a high northern site where
appropriate ice conditions can be created and maintained in situ. The proposed facility has great
strengths in ice physics research.
The committee recognized that the University of Manitoba (UM) and, to a large extent, the lead proponent
of this proposal (Dr. Barber) are well known for their leadership in primarily marine Arctic research. Dr.
Barber is well known to the community as a major spokesman for Arctic sea ice. The committee agreed
that the CMO will be a logical evolution in its long-standing history of leadership and investment in Arctic
research. It noted that two of the six areas of UM’s current Strategic Research Plan reflect their strong
capacity in Arctic research. As evidenced in the proposal and during the face-to-face meeting, UM’s
commitment to this area of research was considered strong since the “Arctic System Science and
Technology” will be one of only three areas of research excellence to be identified within UM’s new
Strategic Research Plan. The UW is acknowledged global leader in this field. In addition, the university
has showed continued support for this branch of research, mostly focused in their Centre for Earth
Observation Science (CEOS), with a very strong contingent of dedicated researchers. The committee
found that considerable evidence of a sustained and significant commitment to research excellence from
the lead (and partner) organizations were provided. The proposal builds on an existing area of research
excellence (CEOS) with considerable research depth in the relevant field. The proposal contains
evidence that further confirms both their excellence and, perhaps more importantly, their long-term
commitment to this research area. By Canadian standards, it is hard to envisage stronger institutional
commitment.
Further evidence of university support is the designation of two Canada Research Chairs (CRCs) and
even one of the new Canada Excellence Research chairs (CERC). The university, as well as the major
proponents, are also well-known leaders on the development of the Canadian Coast Guard Service
(CCGS) Research Icebreaker, the Amundsen, and key players in Canada’s ArcticNet community, a
national network of centres of excellence. The committee felt that strong collaborative links have been
established also at the international level (e.g. Arctic Science Partnership). While some of the information
about the benefits of past research was briefly mentioned in the proposal (e.g. roles in advisory roles with
government, distinguished lectureships and media coverage, plus mention of publishing books), more
evidence was provided at the meeting to support the claim that they have been successful, connecting
academia, government, industry and Inuit into a closely coordinated research enterprise. Finally, the
committee concluded that the University of Manitoba is the logical place to lead institution this type of
proposal. No major weaknesses were noted.
2
Canada Foundation for Innovation | Fondation canadienne pour l’innovation
2015 Innovation Fund
Expert Review Committee Report
RESEARCH OR TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
Standard: The proposed research or technology development activities enabled by the research
infrastructure are timely, innovative and at the leading edge internationally. The activities have the
potential to lead to breakthroughs and will enhance the international competitiveness of the institution
and its researchers.
The committee believed it is a strong and innovative research and technology development proposal, with
strong links to issues of importance to Canada (i.e. Arctic marine waters, petroleum transport and
production, etc.). The overall goal of this research infrastructure is to explore and develop approaches
and technologies needed to detect, quantify and mitigate impacts in ice-laden Arctic waters should
accidental release of various forms of crude oil, liquefied natural gas, and transportation-related
contaminants occur. The requested infrastructure includes three core research and technology elements:
1) the Oil in Sea Ice Mesocosm (OSIM); 2) a fully integrated Environmental Observing (EO) system
designed to act as a detection system for ocean and atmospheric climate state variables (physical,
biological and contaminant); and 3) a Logistics Base facility linking CMO to field programs and modeling.
The committee acknowledged that this is a leading edge research program as well as proposed state of
the art research infrastructure because nowhere, including USA or Scandinavia, is there a full scale
permanent facility devoted to solving oil in ice problems. The nearest is OHMSETT test tank (US), which
only recently has been partially adapted for oil work. The argument to conduct controlled experiments in a
reproducible fashion to address questions around thresholds for impairment, severity of impacts,
chemical fate and partitioning, and potential for recovery and remediation from contaminants related to oil
resource extraction and shipping in Arctic marine waters was clearly made by the applicants and is
compelling. The committee believed that the research program is well-argued, with a clear account of the
current knowledge, needs and description of how the facilities can address the proposed research
questions and challenges.
Given the growing interest in oil exploration and increased shipping in the Arctic, the committee fully
agreed that a facility of this kind and proposed research activities are indeed timely and important with the
prospect of sea ice is declining and oil exploration and shipping is increasing in Arctic marine waters.
This will help Canada to increase Arctic oil spill research and technology development in order to remain
at the forefront of engineering and scientific knowledge in this area and to increase its level of
competitiveness at the international level. Importantly, the CMO will be available year-round, and will be
designed for real-time observations of biogeochemical and optical water properties including monitoring
of algal biomass for major taxonomic groups, zooplankton biomass and species composition, fish
biomass and species composition, and acoustic tracking of marine mammals. Once again, this should fill
in major data gaps that we currently have in these still relatively unexplored but rapidly changing
environment.
The committee recognized that mesocosms are an attempt to mimic the real marine environment and so
do have limitations. Some discussion on the pros/cons of an un-replicated ‘medium’-scale experimental
facility took place during the face to face meeting (e.g. compared with floating mesocosms, or smallerscale replicated mesocosms on land). Further evidence of novelty is that, of the few marine mesocosms
that currently exist, they are significantly smaller in size – and arguably less realistic mimics of the Arctic
marine environment. Following the discussion, the committee was reassured that the group is well aware
of this aspect, understand the limitations and will take measures to mitigate it. In fact, this would be the
first ecological mesocosm focusing on contaminant effects and behavior in Arctic marine waters. The
committee thought that the proposed infrastructure would allow for significantly longer biological and
temporal stability – so in many ways, a more realistic assessment.
The committee concluded that the host institution and its partners are well-positioned to continue to be
world-leaders in this research area. No weaknesses were noted.
3
Canada Foundation for Innovation | Fondation canadienne pour l’innovation
2015 Innovation Fund
Expert Review Committee Report
TEAM
Standard: The principal users of the infrastructure are established or emerging leaders in the relevant
research or technology development domains. The team has the necessary expertise, ability and
relevant collaborations and partnerships in place to successfully conduct the research or technology
development activities.
The committee noted that the research team is very strong and appropriate for this proposal. As
demonstrated in the proposal and at the meeting, Dr. Barber is well known for his scientific reputation. He
has considerable experience as an administrator (at the university as an associate dean) and in
leadership of similar large, interdisciplinary projects in the Arctic (he has led many projects and programs
with ArcticNet, International Polar Year etc.). He is often the first person one thinks of when a question
about Arctic sea ice is mentioned. The team has a good balance of skills and expertise. There is also a
good mix of experienced and mid-career researchers.
The committee also noted that the team includes other high profile researchers, well known for their work
in this general area, including an additional Canada Research Chair (Dr. Shafai is another Tier 1 CRC at
the University of Manitoba) and two of the highly competitive Canada Excellence Research Chairs (Drs.
Babin and Rysgaard). Other researchers certainly cover other areas relevant and critical to the project.
More importantly, many members of the team have a record of working well as a group, with a strong end
enviable record of getting things done collaboratively. As demonstrated at the meeting, there is also a
good depth in expertise within the partner institutions and success is not completely dependent on one or
two individuals. Overall, this a strong, enthusiastic and cohesive team with many successes behind it in
sea ice research.
The committee found that there was an exceptional level of engagement (or participation) to the project at
the national and international level. As evidenced in the proposal and further at the meeting, CMO will be
a national facility, serving national and international needs and gathering over 170 researchers from six
Canadian universities, three international universities (Aarhus - Denmark; Greenland Climate Research
Centre - Greenland and University of Washington); 10 government departments, and 10 private sector
partners. Relevant collaborations and partnerships are already in place (e.g. ArcticNet, CHARS etc).
In summary, the committee was quite impressed by the breath and stature of the team to conduct the
proposed research activities. It noted that with some exceptions (e.g. Dr. Stern), few on the key team
players have direct involvement with the potential pollutants themselves and the application of oil spill
remediation technologies. On the other hand and based on discussion at the meeting, they have a lot of
connections with energy people and companies. Considering the focus of the grant, the committee still
encourages the group to broaden their expertise in oil mitigation on the academic side. For the above
reason, it did not rate this criterion as exceeding the criterion standard.
INFRASTRUCTURE
Standard: The infrastructure is necessary and appropriate to conduct the research or technology
development programs. The use of the infrastructure will be maximized within and among the
institutions and sectors (private, public and non-profit).
The committee found that the proposed facilities complement existing equipment and infrastructure
hosted by the partner organizations. It felt that stationing CMO in Churchill is clearly logical, being the
only deep water Arctic port and an important shipping and ecological area. This part of the Arctic marine
system is also changing very rapidly, as further evidenced during the presentation and in the proposal.
The committee agreed that the group requests novel technologies and track record technology. As
discussed previously, this proposal is ‘a first-of-a-kind facility for the circumpolar Arctic’ and is important
for Canada and at the international level. Several Nordic countries are concerned about oil and ice
problems. There does appear to a major data void in Canada and elsewhere on this type of research. The
4
Canada Foundation for Innovation | Fondation canadienne pour l’innovation
2015 Innovation Fund
Expert Review Committee Report
proponents acknowledge that work has been done on experimental oil spills, but permits to conduct this
work are harder to obtain. The requested infrastructure, such as the Oil in Sea in Mesocosm (OSIM),
should address many of these issues, which is divided into three logical programs: detection, impacts and
mitigation.
The committee questioned during the meeting the high cost and need of the retractable roof. The
proponents claimed that it is the only way to replicate natural conditions and essential to the success to
the research program. Several options were considered, but the proposed option is the better considering
the climatic conditions in Churchill. The committee was confident that the construction plans are well
advanced and considerable effort has been invested in proposed design of the major facilities. The
committee found that the description of each major component of the facility is clear and comprehensive,
and the rationale for each item of equipment is well-argued. It agreed that a great deal of careful analysis
has been done of the needs, design and costs of the facility.
As evidenced in the proposal and during the face to face meeting, the committee was convinced that the
research facility will be fully utilized by the research groups and its partners. The committee believed that
the OSIM has been designed to facilitate multiple applications and foster cross-disciplinary projects.
Considering the number of collaborators, the UM requested infrastructure use will likely be maximized.
The committee highlighted that link with oil industry might be difficult to keep research independent and
may want to withhold negative research results. The group warns the group to pay attention to COI and
interaction with the oil industry sector to ensure that any work any work with private sector be open and
transparent. No weaknesses noted, though the committee noted the need for permitting to construct the
facility to meet compliance for the release of waste water (oil in water) and atmospheric emissions
(smoke) from the conduct of the experiments. If funded, the committee recommended that CFI funding be
conditional until such regulatory permits for the conduct of experiments are in-hand.
SUSTAINABILITY OF THE RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE
Standard: The proposal presents a compelling plan for the management, operation and maintenance of
the proposed infrastructure with tangible and appropriate commitments over its useful life.
The committee agreed that the proposal makes a strong case for sustainability. This was also clearly
demonstrated during the face-to-face meeting. At one level, the proponents and the University of
Manitoba have a solid record in this area when it comes to sea ice programs, but there was much more
evidence presented in this proposal and during the meeting to provide confidence that this infrastructure
is sustainable. For example, there are important plans for faculty renewal in this area at UM as well as
plans to secure three new tenure track positions (including two proposed NSERC - Industrial Research
Chairs).
The interaction with the new Canadian High Arctic Research Station (CHARS) is important. Significant
local support is available for the facility from Churchill Northern Studies Centre (estimated at $95k pa).
Other revenue from OSIM and ship time rental are estimated at >$240k pa. The group confirmed at the
meeting that the links to the Arctic Research Foundation (ARF) will provide additional logistical support on
long-term basis ($120k pa in kind) as well as CHARS ($325k pa in kind). Both offer strong collaborative
support. Significant local support is also available for the facility from Churchill Northern Studies Centre
(estimated at $95k pa).
The committee was somewhat surprised by the low cost for the maintenance and utilities of the OSIM
facility ($30K); this was confirmed during the face-to face meeting. The Riddell Faculty has agreed to
support this annual operating cost. Two full time technicians will be hired – their technical and laboratory
space will be provided by the Churchill Northern Studies Centre. Overall, the O&M costs are well justified.
The fact that the infrastructure would be based in Churchill will facilitate interaction with the Churchill
Northern Studies Centre, as well as the use of their facilities, an obvious advantage on a long-term basis.
Importantly and also confirmed during the face to face meeting, there are plans for OSIM rental (including
ship) and leasing to industrial partners that would support ongoing operational costs. Revenue from OSIM
5
Canada Foundation for Innovation | Fondation canadienne pour l’innovation
2015 Innovation Fund
Expert Review Committee Report
and ship time rental are estimated at >$500k pa. Following discussion with the group and considering the
help and assistance of the ARF, the committee was reassured that the support for the ship will be
materialized.
The committee appreciated the fact that a sound long term (5year+) strategy to maintain and operate the
facility was presented. Although the plan is well thought out, the committee raised a few points: 1)
regulatory approval for wastewater treatment following research projects could be very costly and labour
intensive and will likely be required (e.g. reduction of oil in wastewater to acceptable limits) and 2) the
costs and difficulties of oil control and cleanup (e.g. decontamination of the test tank between
experiments) may be greater than what is estimated by the proponents. If funded, the committee
suggests to the group to take this into account in their user fees plan.
The group presented evidence of a substantive commitment of additional resources to support the facility
by UM. Other partner institutions have also signaled future support (estimated at $350k pa). Equally
importantly, the PIs are seasoned researchers with solid track records of obtaining substantial research
funding. The committee believed that this is about as best as you can expect from Canadian universities.
More details were provided about the proposed governance at the meeting. As discussed, the facility will
be largely managed by UM and governed by a Board, appointed by UM (but representing academic
collaborators, direct industry sponsors government, and affected community /regional stakeholders and
Inuit groups. The group plans to use a governance and management structure similar to the ArcticNet
structure. Since the project lead has been involved in this network for several years, he is acquainted to
this governance and management structure and modus operandi. The committee viewed positively the
CMO technology development strategy, which will involve government regulators, non-governmental
organizations, Inuit organizations, hydrocarbon companies, shipping companies and environmental
engineering companies. As a result of the discussion, the committee was confident that the group has put
in place a solid sustainability plans. It agreed that the 5% additional funding from the CFI is justified and
needed to cover additional facility costs for this complex project.
BENEFITS TO CANADIANS
Standard: The research or technology development activities are likely to lead to significant tangible
benefits for society, health, the economy and/or the environment. Where appropriate, effective
pathways have been identified and will be developed to transfer the results and outputs of the research
or technology development to potential end-users in a timely manner.
The committee believed that the benefits to Canadians and the rest of the world are quite obvious for
several reasons. The proposed project is very important for Canada, which is the nation most vulnerable
to damage from Arctic oil operations. It was also clear to the committee that the proposed facility will help
to meet the stated government objective ‘to ensure Canada remains a global leader in Arctic science, and
promotes economic and social development while protecting environmental heritage in the North’. The
infrastructure is ideally placed to improve knowledge of Canada’s important Arctic shipping routes through
Hudson Bay and Hudson Strait. Furthermore, ice-affected regions are known to house major petroleum
reserves. Clearly sea ice is declining and it is uncovering vast areas of potential petroleum exploration,
and we need to know how to deal with it.
The proponents have identified many research gaps, and infrastructure such as this should facilitate
answering a lot of important questions. It is hard to argue against the value of learning about the
detection, impacts and mitigation of various contaminants in the Arctic marine ecosystem – a problem
that will only increase with further development and declining ice. Understanding the fate of oil in sea ice
and its effects on marine ecology is essential for evidence-based studies of environmental risk
assessments and other analyses.
As evidenced in the proposal and during the presentation, the group is working closely with the Manitoba
government (as well as the federal level) and will be able to provide a forum to share results and shape
policy leading to safe transportation and safeguarding marine ecosystems and commercial fishing. Based
6
Canada Foundation for Innovation | Fondation canadienne pour l’innovation
2015 Innovation Fund
Expert Review Committee Report
on the group’s track record and with this new infrastructure, the committee agreed that the CMO is well
placed to serve as a centre of Arctic teaching excellence – both nationally and internationally and to
attract international researchers.
The committee felt that the project will make Canada the leading nation for understanding how to cope
with Arctic oil spills and blowouts. There is also the added benefit to the local economy of Churchill – who
continues to depend on ecotourism for much of its economy.
During the presentation, more information was provided on proposed pathways for knowledge translation
and technology development. Although the committee was confident that the group can deliver on
research discoveries and viewed positively the CMO technology development strategy with partners, it
encourages them to strengthen their plan (e.g. a more substantive engagement strategy, especially with
indigenous communities). For this reason, the committee did not rate this criterion standard as
“exceeded”.
7