Nobody doubts that the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) being built at CERN is technically robust or that it will produce spectacular science once it starts smashing protons together. But the project is in trouble financially: Managers at CERN, which straddles the border of France and Switzerland, revealed in September that costs have crept 850 million Swiss francs (roughly $514 million) above the allotted 2.6 billion Swiss francs. Now they are scrambling to come up with a plan to pay the extra price.
CERN faults the original budget for not having any contingency. “When the LHC was approved in 1996,” says Roger Cashmore, the lab’s director of research for collider programs, “[the governing] council gave us, as an extra present, a 900 million Swiss franc budget cut, so it was a very tough deal that we struck—to build a new high-tech accelerator with a cut to personnel and money.” (See Physics Today, February 1997, page 58.)
The size and suddenness of the price hike came as a shock, say CERN scientists and council members, who represent the lab’s 20 member states. CERN management “didn’t take the tight budget seriously enough. This is proved because they started new programs. They don’t have the mentality of doing things at cost,” says council vice president Hermann Schunck, from Germany’s research ministry. “How did they get into this without warning us earlier?” asks British delegate Ian Halliday, head of the UK’s Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council.
Indeed, many high-energy physicists and policy-makers worry that the LHC overruns reflect badly on the field and could have ripple effects on other current and future high-energy projects. “What CERN has blown over the past few months is its reputation for delivering on time and on budget,” says Halliday.
Coping with overspending
The LHC tab swelled in part due to the added costs of the superconducting dipole magnets—CERN spent 150 million Swiss francs on unplanned prototypes, and magnet assembly climbed some 180 million Swiss francs higher than expected. (Sources close to the issue say the magnet makers inflated the prices.) Then there were computing costs for developing a vast data grid (120 million Swiss francs); civil engineering problems encountered in digging a cavern for the Compact Muon Solenoid (CMS), one of the two main LHC experiments (70 million Swiss francs); outside contractors (150 million Swiss francs); a shortfall in money from nonmember states (50 million Swiss francs); a rise in CERN’s contribution to the LHC detectors (50 million Swiss francs); and assorted smaller items.
Of the new bill, only 480 million Swiss francs is for things specified in the original LHC budget, says Director General Luciano Maiani. That’s an overrun of about 18%. The rest of the roughly 30% in extra costs was supposed to be absorbed by CERN’s general budget. “Though in absolute terms it is a large amount of money, it’s not such an unusual or unforeseen thing,” says Maiani. “I think that in the end, when we have a new plan, people will realize that this is part of the normal fight of a new big project.”
With a combination of loans, austerity measures, and more money from member states, says Maiani, “we should be able to cope.” But it will be tough: Loans would put CERN’s future in hock. As for economies within CERN, belt-tightening has already left the lab lean. “There’s not much to be had there,” says Cashmore, “and a lot of damage could be done to good programs.” CERN is nonetheless considering slowing or stopping its non-LHC programs, which include the fixed-target and heavyion experiments at the Super Proton Synchrotron, the Antiproton Decelerator, and a neutrino beam to Italy’s Gran Sasso National Laboratory.
While austerity measures are not likely to save much, they’re necessary to regain the trust of the CERN council. “It is important that [CERN management is] seen to be making strenuous efforts to get back on budget,” says Halliday.
More money from member states would be the simplest solution for CERN. An initial appeal for a 4% hike was not well received, but council members seem open to a smaller increase.
High-energy physicists worldwide worry that the budget crisis will postpone the LHC from starting in 2006. But Maiani says time will not be used as a contingency to draw out payment. “We would like to insist on that. A delay to ease the financial situation would not be acceptable,” he says.
But many CERN scientists oppose sacrificing other experiments to the LHC, especially given that they suspect its schedule will slip in any case. “Building the LHC is the first priority, even to me,” says Friedrich Dydak, who is involved in planning a neutrino factory at CERN. “But only half of the particle physics community wants to do LHC physics. Therefore a world laboratory like CERN should retain attraction also to the other half of the community.” The LHC is the highest-energy accelerator in the world, so it has no competition, he adds. “A delay would be acceptable if there is a non-LHC physics program that can ease the terrible prospect of not producing physics results for many years to come.”
The CERN staff is more split now than it was five years ago, when members voluntarily accepted pay cuts and other belt-tightening measures to accommodate the LHC’s squeezed budget (see Physics Today, August 1997, page 51). This time, says one physicist, “there seems to be little will on the side of the personnel to make more sacrifices in order to bail out bad managers.”
Diabolical timing
For the UK, says Halliday, “CERN’s timing is diabolical, because we have just presented our budget request, which fixes funding through 2006. If we have to pay more for the LHC, that reduces our chances of getting funding for the e+ e− linear collider.”
“It’s not a good time to ask for more money,” admits Maiani. Among other demands on budgets, many European countries are beefing up security in the wake of the terrorist attacks in the US.
Despite the problems, the CERN management and council are intent on finding a solution. “I am certain that everybody involved will do everything not to endanger the LHC,” says Schunck of Germany, the country that clamped down hardest on the CERN budget in 1996. Referring to the US cancellation of the Superconducting Super Collider in 1993, he adds, “We are not in an SSC situation.”
When the budget for the Large Hadron Collider was being set a few years ago, CERN staff members warned that it was draconian.
When the budget for the Large Hadron Collider was being set a few years ago, CERN staff members warned that it was draconian.
Excavation for the Compact Muon Solenoid experiment contributed to the Large Hadron Collider’s cost overrun.
Excavation for the Compact Muon Solenoid experiment contributed to the Large Hadron Collider’s cost overrun.
