« PreviousContinue »
Mr. Brown. I am going to ask each of the panelists to present their statement before we begin asking any questions.
Next we have Dr. Albert W. Bally, Chairman of the National Research Council ad hoc panel to investigate the geological and geophysical research needs and problems of continental margins.
În this situation, I guess, Dr. Bally, you speak for the broader scientific community there.
[The biographical sketch of Dr. Bally follows:]
DR. ALBERT W. BALLY
Albert W. Bally was born in April 1925 in the Hague, Netherlands, and spent his early years in Indonesia, Italy, and Switzerland. He received the Ph.D. degree in geology from the University of Zurich in 1953. An area of the central Appennines was the subject of his thesis. While at the University, he worked for Gulf Oil and mapped the Ragusa Plateau of SE Sicily. Further work involved detailed mapping for hydroelectric power projects in the area of the Penninic nappes and their rootzone in southern Switzerland. This was followed by post-doctoral work at the Lamont Geological Observatory of Columbia University in 1953–54 involving the study of deep-sea sediments.
Dr. Bally was employed by Shell Canada in 1954. In Canada he was first involved in an exploration program on the Rocky Mountains and foothills of Alberta, which was followed by a large-scale reconnaissance project in the Northwest Territories and Yukon. As Chief Geologist from 1962-66, he was concerned with all Canadian exploration matters, but particularly with offshore programs on the Canadian east and west coasts and in the Northwest Terri. tories.
In 1966 he was transferred to Houston as Manager of Geological Research at Shell Development Company. He was appointed Chief Geologist U.S.A. for Shell Oil in 1968, a position he held until January 1975. During this time, he was involved in exploration in the U.S. both offshore and onshore and, since 1972, mainly with the study of global geology. Since January 1975 he has been Con. sulting Geologist for Shell Oil and is continuing his studies in global geology as well as more detailed studies in the Western Cordillera and the sedimentary basing of the U.S.
RECENT ACTIVITIES Ad Hoc Committee on the Geologic Sciences, U.S. National Research Council (1968).
Member Council of the Geological Society of America (1975).
Crosby Visiting Professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Spring 1977).
Member Passive Margin Panel of International Panel Ocean Drilling (IPOD) (1975–78).
Member Working Group 7 (Interunion Commission of Geodynamics) : Geodynamics of Plate Interiors and Editor of Section on Basin Subsidence of Final Report (1978–79).
Member U.S. Geodynamics Committee (1977–80).
Member Executive Committee of COCORP (Consortium for Continental Reflection Profiling) and chairman of Site Selection Committee (1974-80).
Co-covener of Penrose Conference: The Function of the Geologist in Society (Houston, Spring 1976).
Co-covener of Penrose Conference: Geophysics and Structure in Folded Belts (Ascona, Switzerland, Fall 1978).
Member Oceanography Advisory-Executive Committee of the National Science Foundation (1978–79).
Chairman of Panel on Research and Problems on Continental Margins—U.S. National Academy of Sciences (1976–78).
Member Scientific Committee of the International Geological Correlation Programme (IGCP) (1978–80).
Member IUGS Task Group on Post-Geodynamics Project Planning (1978–79).
Member of Plate Tectonics Delegation (of U.S. National Academy of Sciences' Committee on Scholarly Communication with People's Republic of China) - visit in 1979.
Advisory and Visiting Committees Member: Hawaii Institute of Geophysics; Geology Department, University of New Brunswick, Canada; Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, MIT; Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences, Caltech; Department of Geology, Princeton University.
STATEMENT BY A. W. BALLY, CHAIRMAN OF THE AD HOC PANEL TO
INVESTIGATE THE GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL SESEARCH NEEDS AND PROBLEMS OF CONTINENTAL MARGINS, NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
Dr. Bally. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me first answer the introduction. I was chairman of the ad hoc panel; I do work for Shell Oil, and as chairman, I served to the geological community; the panel finished its deliberations in 1978; 2 years have passed, so I will try to address my remarks to two questions: (1) why did we give deep sea drilling second priority, and (2) has anything happened since then that may be relevant to the drilling program.
The first question relates to the continental margin panel, which had the purpose to look at research on continental margins. We weren't specifically addressing the questions of deep sea drilling, and we did include landward portions of continental margins.
Looking at everything, we did conclude that a program such as the deep sea drilling proposed here was highly desirable. We were, however, aware of probable limits in funding. We felt, therefore, that it would be our responsibility to offer priorities; the priorities were such that drilling was given a second priority. The reason was that we felt the research of the academic community could be strengthened considerably by an aggressive program in dynamics, and by outfitting two modern geophysical ships.
These were the main reasons for our prioritization.
Let me now quickly review what happened since. Please realize that these are strictly my own personal views, and that in that context I don't represent the committee, I am no longer an active member of that committee.
Two new developments are relevant to continental margins.
One is the development of a hydraulic piston device, which has been successful in getting high quality cores and core recoveries from shallow sedimentary layers in the ocean. This is a development scientists have been hoping for; the new coring device now makes very precise analyses of possible events that affect and reflect climatic changes. In other words, the coring device provides a realistic data background for long-term climate modeling and forecasting.
A second aspect relates to the geophysics; I was pleased to hear Mr. Johnson pointing out that NSF had in mind to provide for a new geophysical vessel. This would go a long way to strengthen the grass roots of geophysical oceanography.
Let me conclude that personally I would still stick with the prioritization given on the continental margin panel.
I think some of our original funding fears may have been alleviated by industry contributions, if the explorer program comes to pass I would favor an extension of the Challenger program making use of the hydraulic piston device modes, because it would give us better coverage, and I would like also to encourage NSF to pursue its plans for a new vessel.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Bally, plus questions and answers for the record follows:]
SU:MIARY OF STATE! SENT BY A.1. BALLY, CHAI PMAN
OF THE AD IOC. PANEL TO INVESTIGATE THE
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
The recommendations of the 1979 Continental Margins Report were made in late 1977. I will first discuss key aspects of the Panel's 1977 recommendations and later add my own impressions that are based on what little I know of post-1977 developments.
Our Panel's task was to define geological and geophysical research problems and to provide recommendations for approaching the solutions to such prohlems. We confined our interest to continental margins and did not address research in deep oceans outside continental margins. We also did not address the more general question of possible alternative uses of the Glomar Explorer. Instead, we looked only at the possible use of that vessel for continental margin drilling. Because we anticipated limits to research funding, we ranked our recommendations.
At the time of its deliberations, our Panel emphatically concurred with the FUSOD recommendations for continental margin drilling and adopted much of the FUSOD material in its report. Nevertheless, we gave drilling a second priority because, assuming limited funds, we felt that it was relatively more important for basic research on continental margins to have support for a vigorous sediment dynamics program, an interdisciplinary program of geotraverses across domestic continental margins, and to outfit two modern geophysical research vessels that would also be capah le of operating in Arctic waters.
One or two geophysical vessels, supported with enough funds for processing geophysical data, in our judgment, could lead to a new wave of scientific discoveries on continental margins. Unquestionably, such a program would profit immensely from timely calibration by deep wells. Our point was that the continuation of lively problem definitions based on modern geophysics would form a solid foundation for future drilling plans.
Some members of our Panel were also concerned that assigning a top priority to a drilling program would distort funding of continental margin research to favor projects that would be merely corollary to the drilling projects. The Panel preferred to clearly separate ongoing definition of basic scientific problems from the process that leads to the selection of drilling sites.
Two years have passed since our Panel terminated its project. Since then, I have had only limited contact with former Panel members. i also have only' an acquaintance with recent developments related to the ocean drilling program. Therefore, the following
are my own impressions. They do not necessarily express the current views of former Panel members. The following appear to be significant:
• The successful development of a hydraulic piston coring
Part of the geophysical money assigned to deep-sea drilling together with additional funds from other programs could be used to equip and support one, and possibly later, two modern geophysical vessels for the academic community. These vessels would form the foundation for continental margins research well beyond the new decade.
My judgment is that a drilling program that uses the converted Glomar Explorer on continental margins would be most valuable, Basic problems could be elucidated (e.g., the stratigraphicpaleooceanologic-paleoclimatic evolution, the structural evolutions, and thermal characteristics of continental margins, and the geophysical nature of the continent-ocean transition). Most of these problems fall within the scope of the proposed International Lithosphere Project* and the Drilling Project would, therefore, have high visibility internationally.
*The International Lithosphere Project is a planned proposal to the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) from the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG) and the International Union of the Geological Sciences (IUGS) concerning an international program of interdisciplinary research on the nature, origin, and evolution of the crust and upper mantle in relation to the internal dynamics of the earth--a scientific framework for understanding the resources and natural hazards of the earth.
Finding answers to some of these hasic problems is bound to lead to a better understanding of the genesis and general gcological setting of our resources. This will in turn provide desirable background information for planning resource exploration on continental margins. However, such studies in no way should be viewed as being equivalent to systematic exploration for resources.
The proposed Deep-Sea Drilling Program would be particularly strong if the time needed for the conversion of the Glomar Explorer were used for extensive hydraulic piston coring during a (potential) extension of the Glomar Challenger Program. The acquisition of modern geophysical vessels for the academic community should be considered in connection with the proposed program, but should not be made to be dependent on that program.