Thomas Wiersberg

Disclaimer

This transcript is based on a video-recorded interview deposited at MarE3, JAMSTEC (Yokosuka, Japan).

The transcripts of the research project Oral Histories of Scientific Ocean Drilling are polished representations of oral conversations, and are intended solely for the purpose of preserving and documenting personal accounts and memories. They are not a literary product, and are not intended to exhibit literary qualities.

The primary goal of this transcript is to capture the spoken words and memories of the interviewee as accurately as possible. Minor editing and polishing works have been performed to enhance clarity and readability while maintaining the authenticity of spoken discourse, including non-standard grammar, inconsistencies, repetitions, and pauses.

The reader must be aware that memories of an event can vary between individuals and may evolve over time due to various factors, such as subsequent experiences, interactions with others, and personal emotions.

Use and citation

This transcript is the property of JAMSTEC and is subject to its regulations. Quoting, reproducing, or distributing this transcript for non-commercial purposes is allowed with due attribution.

Please cite the interview as:

Interview of Thomas Wiersberg by Beatriz Martinez-Rius on 2025 April 30, Vienna International Center (Austria). [link]

Beatriz Martinez-Rius (BMR): Let’s start. Today is April 30th of 2025. I am with Thomas Wiersberg at EGU, International Center of Vienna. Thank you very much. Can you please tell me your name, affiliation and position?

Thomas Wiesberg (TW): My name is Thomas Wiersberg, and I’m with the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program. I have the honor and the pleasure to be the head of a group which is called the Operational Support Group. The principal task of the Operation Support Group is to provide, as the name says, support to drilling projects – continental drilling projects, scientific continental drilling projects. The ways to support are, on the one hand, financial support; and on the other hand, operational support. Operation support includes, for instance, different kind of services, training, equipment, support in planning projects, and things like that. We have a team of 14 people, and I’m the head of that group.

BMR: For how long have you been involved in ICDP, in continental drilling?

TW: During my PhD thesis I got first in touch with geosciences. My PhD thesis was about noble gases and noble gas analytics of mantle rocks from the Eastern Baltic Shield. So, I have some background in gas analytics. And it turned out that this knowledge, this know-how, would also be useful for continental drilling projects in order to get information on the gas composition during the drilling. I was asked, at the end of my PhD thesis, if I would be interested to do some gas monitoring during a drilling project. It was an ICDP drilling project in California. That was my first contact with the ICDP. From that time on, I was for ten years involved in different ICDP and later also in one IODP project as a scientists, doing gas monitoring while drilling.

BMR: How old was ICDP when you started?

TW: ICDP was funded 1996, and that was in the year 2002. If I would calculate that, I would say it’s 6 years.

BMR: So, it was relatively young, but at the same time well-established.

TW: ICDP was already established. It was a kind of an offspring from the KTB experience – I don’t know if you’re familiar with KTB. KTB is a super deep hole in Germany that was drilled and finished  about 30 years ago. And for the KTB drilling there was a lot of international experience needed, and many, many international researchers were invited to and involved in the KTB. At the end of the KTB operations, there was a discussion to continue and bundle this experience. Having gained that experience, which was important to get the KTB thing done successfully, we should continue with that, and we should keep the momentum somehow. That was the spark to install an international program to support further continental scientific drilling projects. ICDP was funded then in 1996 and we are now 28 years old. We’re a little bit younger than IODP – well, because IODP is, you know better than I do, it’s over more than 50 years old. So, it’s pretty much have half the age of IODP.

BMR: Why gas monitoring is important? Why ICDP needed to have someone external, from the geochemistry community, in the program?

TW: Well, at that time, again, I was a scientist involved in ICDP projects. I was not directly with the ICDP program at that time. I was an early career scientist conducting my research, at an ICDP drill site. Something similar was already done by others at the KTB. And it turned out that it’s a very useful technique. The idea was also to install that technique, or use that technique, at other boreholes, at other drill sites. I did that in California, for instance, for drilling through the San Andreas Fault. And I did it at the gas hydrate drilling in the Northwest Territories of Canada; installed it also in China for a project… And, well, at the end, when I heard about the Chikyu, and that the Chikyu will have a riser, and that the riser will enable mud circulation, I became interested together with my advisor at that time, Jörg Erzinger, to install that one also on the Chikyu. That was my first time where I really got in touch with IODP.

Jörg contacted Nobu [Eguchi], at the time to ask if there would be a possibility to install this gas monitoring also on the Chikyu. I was invited to do that. That was in 2009. And so, we installed that system on Chikyu, and I think it was successful because at the end, the output was that it was decided to make it a permanent installation, not just a third party tool that came for one expedition.

BMR: Because what is exactly the system that you installed? I mean, what’s the alternative if you don’t install a gas monitoring system into Chikyu?

TW: When you drill a hole, you create little rock chips and material while you are drilling, and you need to get that material out of the borehole. And for that purpose, you have a drill string. The drill string is hollow, and at the top of the drill system, there’s the drill bit.

The drilling is done in a way that you provide rotation to the drill string and the drill bit makes the drilling. While drilling, mud that you pump through that drill string will enter the borehole at the drill bit and will go back to the surface, it will rise up to the surface carrying  the cuttings. But at the same time, the gases that entering the borehole at the bottom rising back to the surface with the mud. You may say, “Maybe the gases are coming from the entire borehole, and not just from the bottom”. But there are good reasons to believe that it is very, very unlikely that the entire borehole will be the source of the gas.

Once you have the gas-loaded drilling mud coming back to the surface, it runs through a tank and gas is extracted mechanically. We then measuring in real time the composition of the gas, and if the gas composition is interesting for further analysis, like for instance for isotopes — we cannot do the isotopes in the field — we take samples and we bring them also to the laboratory, where we can do the isotope studies.

BMR: This system only works, if I understand correctly, with the riser.

TW: Yes, that’s absolutely correct. You need a circulating drilling mud; otherwise, you cannot use it.

Images of the gas monitoring room on Chikyu, and Thomas working on gas monitoring. Photos by Yukari Kido, JAMSTEC/IODP.

BMR: And how was your first experience onboard as compared to drilling on land?

TW: To be onboard is, of course, something which is different from drilling on land. On land — and I had to learn that — you know that you can always, if there is a reason for it, you can always go. If you’re being on a ship, you can’t – okay, in the very worst case, you could, but you don’t. So, you are being together with a team, and you don’t really know these people beforehand. So, it’s important that there is a good team spirit and you have good interaction with the others.

On our expedition, expedition 319, we had a very good time. I remember it very, very positively. And from the technical point, there’s not so much difference. So, we have the circulating drilling mud, and we do the gas monitoring, we interpreting the data… So, from that point on, from a technical standpoint, it’s not so much different.

BMR: How about the logistics? I mean in the ship, in Chikyu in particular, you have a crew of, I don’t know, 60 people just working to operate the rig. How is it like in ICDP? I have no idea of the dimensions of the rigs or systems you are using on land.

TW: There is a difference between continental drilling and ocean drilling, in a way that, of course, on the Chikyu or a the drillship like the JR, you have those people who are doing the field measurements or the measurements at site. For a continental drilling, you may decide upfront, “Do we need to measure this at the site or not? Or shall we bring directly the core to the core repository, or bring it somewhere else to make the measurements there?”. When you’re drilling on the drill ship, you perform a lot of the measurements already on the ship.

Generally, at the continental drill site, you have a handful of people who do the drilling, and then you have some scientists who, for instance, take the core, described the core, prepare the core for storage and for transportation. And you may do some first core analyzes, optically, physically. And you have maybe people doing downhole logging, once there is no drilling going on. And people doing, for instance, data management. But these are all scientists who are involved in the project in some way, and they are not that many. So, at the end, you in average have something like 10 to 15 scientists running around at the continental drill site.

But this depends also on the drilling project itself, of course. If you have a very big project, then there are probably more people. And for instance, if you have a project where you receive core from which you know you cannot open it in the field, you just have to bring it to somewhere else to make the studies, there you probably just have a handful of people to take the core and then prepare it for transportation. So, it’s really different. In some, cases you have up to, I would say, 15 to maybe 20 scientists at the drill site, but that generally it can also be five or 6 or 7, depending on the project.

BMR: Yeah. So as, you say, even though you organize a science party also for ICDP projects, the interaction with that team is very different from being on the on the ship. Why a chemist decides to stay with geologists for all his career? What was attractive?

TW: Well, I would say that the career path in science in general, and according to my experience in earth sciences in particular, is not always straight forward. When I studied chemistry, I never thought to join an international program, to support scientists who have a need for scientific drilling. At that point, where I was doing my diploma thesis, for instance, that was not clear. I did some studies on crystal surfaces where I was using noble gases as a kind of – let’s call it tracer. And just by a pure coincidence, I heard about a PhD thesis at the GFZ, the institute where I’m still now, in Potsdam. I’ve never have heard about that institute before. It was really pure coincidence that somebody told me, “Oh, there is a PhD call and they’re looking for somebody having experience in noble gas analytics”. And I thought, “Okay, I can try. I have no clue about the geological background and the aim of the project, but probably I can do the analytics”.

So, I was invited for a job interview and I still remember quite well that interview. It was on a Friday. During that Friday I got a tour around different laboratories, I spoke with some people. And at the end, when it came to discussion with my later advisor, I said, “Look, I’m a chemist. I think from an analytical standpoint, maybe not today or tomorrow, but in a couple of weeks, I will be able to do perform measurements. I think, from that point of view, it’s possible from my side. But if you need somebody having already some clue about how to interpret the data in a geological context, it would be difficult. If you put me three rocks there, I can say it’s a blue rock, that’s a black rock, that’s a green rock. That’s it”.

And I remember the answer was, “Do you feel like a scientist?”. And my answer was “Yes”. “Do you think you can handle new questions, new objectives, new situations?” And I said, “Yeah, I think I can do that”. “Okay. Thank you very much for the interview. We’ll let you know”. That it was on a Friday afternoon, and Monday morning the telephone was ringing: “You have to start in two weeks from now” (laughs).

BMR: I can imagine you now ask also this type of questions when you are hiring people for ICDP.

TW: To ask them if they are able to learning something new? Yes. Because when you are working in this business, it’s a relatively special. So, you when you make a call for a job, then, of course, we cannot expect that somebody comes in having the great experience in ICDP. So, of course, we are expecting that people will learn about ICDP after a while. And they do.

BMR: How did you relation to IODP continue after this first expedition on Chikyu?

TW: I’ve been in touch with Nobu and with other people from the Chikyu for expedition 319. I was also involved in other IODP projects after that, as on shore scientist. So, I was working together with other scientists who then did the gas monitoring to help them interpreting the data, and we publish the papers together. However, when I was the first time on the Chikyu in 2009, there was also one year later the opportunity for me to change my position. Actually, I wanted to change to become a scientists with permanent position, but there was no possibility for me, because in the group I was working at that time, there were already two scientists with permanent positions: one doing the noble gases, and the other one doing the general gas analytics. So there was actually no space in between for me. On the other hand, during my ten years postdoc, I was already involved in ICDP training courses. At that time, I was asked, “Would you be willing to give a lecture on the gas analytics in an ICDP training courses?”. Training is a very important element in the in the philosophy of ICDP, to provide training and provide to know-how to people involved in upcoming projects. I gave lectures on gas analytics and fluid analytics, in general. I did that for several years.

And then, the person who was organizing the Training was getting retired and the position was popping up. So, I changed and I became the ICDP education and outreach coordinator in 2010, and I did that until 2024. Just last year I changed the position to become the head of the operational support group.

And at that time already, for instance, for the training courses, I was in touch with IODP, particularly with ECORD and ESSO (ECORD Science Support Office), with the people from the UK. So, people from the UK were invited to come to the ICDP training course, to learn about how ICDP works. Also, sometimes to invite them to give lectures and give presentations on IODP. On the outreach level, I was already at that time in very close touch with IODP. At that time, we also had the joint session at the EGU, and I think we also had the very first Townhall Meeting. I think that was all some 20 years ago, now. Must have been around 2005. So, we had already Townhall Meetings together with IODP here in Vienna, at the EGU – I’m not sure if it was in Vienna at that time, but the joint Townhall meetings already, and the joint booth came a little bit later… So, there was already on the outreach level very close cooperation with IODP and with ECORD.

BMR: Before we continue with that – because I really want to continue talking about the organization of ICDP – and just to close the gas analytic operations in Chikyu. I know that Chikyu has had a number of riser operations. Has this system been used in all the riser operations, or only in that one?

TW: So, I came with my own equipment as third party tool…

BMR: Sorry, by your own equipment means…?

TW: Not personally my own equipment, but let’s say the ICDP equipment. So, I came with the equipment to the Chikyu for the 319, it was shipped, and after the expedition, it was brought back to Germany. But obviously it was a success because then it was decided to buy similar equipment and install it at the Chikyu. And then it was used. I’m not sure if it was used for all the riser operations, but at least I know that for NanTroSEIZE once it was used, and for the high temperature and biosphere…

BMR: Limits of Life?

Exactly, that one – it was used there; and I know some useful data came out from that gas monitoring experiment. So, it’s not used all the time, but was used in several IODP projects.

BMR: If they want to use this system, do they need to invite someone who is an expert in gas analytics, or is it something that just provides a data, and any kind of staff scientist or member of the science party can interpret?

TW: At the at the beginning, I think it was a little learning curve for Chikyu or the Chikyu staff, to operate it – how to operate it, how to use it. But we were in contact and helped a little bit. But I think that’s all something which the staff scientists at Chikyu know, meanwhile, and so they can do it and they do it very well.

BMR: I find it really interesting because it’s a transference of technology between drilling on land and drilling at sea. Is the industry also using this kind of analytical systems?

TW: It comes from the industry. So, it’s not that we have developed it or we have created it. You use that generally for safety purpose, because when you are drilling for oil and for gas, you need to know if gas is entering the borehole in higher concentrations, which could cause some hazards or are dangerous, like H2S, like hydrocarbons, like CO2… You need to know that. So, in the gas industry or in the oil industry, when you’re drilling a well into an oil or gas reservoir, and hydrocarbon reservoir in general, then you’re using some kind of such technique. You see on the one hand where your reservoir is, because the gas is higher, and you also see, okay, if the gas is too high, we have to take actions. Circulating a little bit lower, or increase the weight of the drilling mud… Any things like that, just to make sure that there’s no risk for the people at the at the drill site.

So, let’s say it’s a technique that comes from the oil and gas industry, who are doing it for let’s say, safety purpose. And we have expanded that a little bit, not measuring just those combustible gases of gases which are poisons, but also gases like, for instance, helium or radon, which is, from a hazard point of view, not really relevant — although radon could be a little bit relevant because it’s radioactive. But there’s a much higher scientific, let’s say, potential in these gases. So, we are not only measuring these hydrocarbons, we’re measuring also other gases and hope to get a scientific story at the end of that.

BMR: Let’s talk now about ICDP and its organization, the relation to IODP… But before moving there, is there something about ocean drilling and this system that you’d like to add?

 TW: Not necessarily. I think we can also speak about ICDP and the IODP and ICDP relations, the model of land to sea drilling, and how we both programs work together. I think that’s a very important and very interesting topic, as well.

BMR: For the last fifteen years, you have been actively involved in the development of ICDP. What have been the biggest challenges for ICDP to move forward?

TW: Well, to be honest, when I started with ICDP and how I see it right now, it has it became bigger. The numbers of projects are increasing, and so the community is taking advantage of what we are providing. This year, for instance, we had a new record in proposals we received. Of course, during corona time [Covid-19 pandemic], we had to face the fact that not so many projects were running, simply for the fact that you cannot go at the site to do the drilling, and you can also not do the pre-site studies, because before you start drilling, you need to do a site study. If you want to drill with ICDP support, we want to know where you want to drill, and that you have identified the best possible location. For that you need pre-site studies — in most cases it’s seismic – but during Corona time, you could also not go out to do the seismic studies. So, during and after Corona time is a little bit to bump in terms of numbers of proposals. So, it’s obvious that, during corona time, that was the challenge. But, to be honest, that’s the only challenge I would really say that we have faced.

BMR: And how about economic support? How does it compare to IODP? And specifically, I’m thinking how ICDP gets economic and political support.

 TW: In our case – well, both programs, from a scientific point of view, are very similar. So, we are both addressing very similar scientific questions about geohazards, understanding of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, or volcanic processes; about paleoclimate studies and paleoclimate processes; on geodynamics, and themes like deep biosphere… So, there is very, very broad, let’s say match between the scientific targets of IODP and ICDP.

The way how the programs are working is a little bit different, because in ICDP, we are not drilling for the scientists. We help them to drill. We are providing, as I’ve mentioned, operational support, and we are providing also financial support. And this financial support comes from the ICDP membership fee. We have currently 22 membership member countries at ICDP, and they paying an annual fee based on their economics situation. This membership fee creates the annual budget of ICDP, and about 90% of the money is flowing back into the scientific community, for drilling and for holding workshops, and things like that. But we are drilling for the scientists, which means they have the full responsibility and also the full control about the project – Of course, with our support, with our help. For example, as a scientist, you generally do not know so much about drilling. That’s why we do have a drilling engineer with us. We have that knowledge with us. We help you.

BMR: So, who selects the platform, for example? – do you call it platform, as well?

TW: Well, in ICDP you would say the drill rig. What you need to do already during the proposal process, if you plan to submit a drilling proposal to ICDP, for instance, is that you would need to provide quotes from drilling companies. And often, scientists asking us, “Do you have some names of drilling companies?”, or “we do have some quote here and can you have a look on that one?”, “Does that make sense or is that something that try to pull us over the table, so to speak?”. And you need that experience from somebody who knows about drilling, because these are drilling companies and they want to make money, which is fair enough. You would need to somebody having the knowledge about drilling and speaking their language, but sitting on your side of the table. That’s one aspect how we help the scientists. We help them to select the drilling company, and we can also help with other things like logging, for instance. We have a team of people performing downhole logging. But we can also help you to find somebody to do the logging, for instance.

BMR: How the relationship with IODP has evolved over the last fifteen years?

TW: One important aspect in this context, I would say, was what at the beginning was called the “amphibious proposals” or “amphibious projects” – what is now called the “Land-to-Sea Drilling Projects”. I believe that in both programs there was, and there is, the understanding that such joint drilling on land and at the sea can address questions that we could not address before. So, this L2S concept really has really great potential to understand the Earth system much better than before, by simply drilling on land, or drilling in the ocean.

However, drilling on land and drilling in the ocean do also target different aspects. Continents are much older than the oceans, they can reach back billions of years. Ocean drilling can’t do that – I’m sorry, but that’s how geology is. But you can address other questions with ocean drilling that we can’t address with continental drilling. And there are a lot of questions where you need both, and  here is where the Land to Sea idea comes into play.

BMR: What have been the most important kind of benefits of this collaboration for ICDP?

TW: It is for us important to be in touch with our friends from Ocean Drilling to learn from each other. For instance, what just came into my mind, that we are in very close contact for download investigations. ICDP is in contact with people from Montpellier who are doing downhole logging for IODP projects, and we are exchanging information. The idea is, “okay, if we need a tool, can we borrow it from you?”, and vice versa. So, not also on this land to sea level or on the outreach level, but also on this level, we start to collaborate closer and closer, and that will continue in the future.

BMR: Is there any particular case of this collaboration, for example in terms of community?

TW: Well, for instance, when we are speaking about the community, we have the town hall meetings at the conferences, at EGU, where we have kind of a joint event to inform the community. We have a joint journal, Scientific Drilling, and that’s the program journal for both programs, for IODP and ICDP. That’s one way to spread word into the community about latest achievements in continental and scientific drilling; but also about, let’s say, calls for workshops, training courses, conference actions, and these things.

BMR: Have you seen lot of transferences from IODP to ICDP?

TW: I’ve heard an interesting story about the Land to Sea project we have currently in the pipeline, in the way that it was drilled already on the sea with the JR, while the land drilling is still in preparation: the IMMAGE Project. And the idea of the PIs was, before we start drilling with the JR, we should have a joint workshop with the continental community and the ocean community. I believe that for both communities this was an eye opener to see what the others are doing. Some of the researchers, of course, know both programs; but several of them did not know that there is another program. Of course, most ICDP people know about IODP; but not everybody from IODP knows about ICDP. So, it was for both programs, for both scientific communities of the programs, an eye opener to understand, “Oh, they’re doing pretty much the same what we are doing”. Or, “They have also other, let’s say, ways to address the scientific question”. And so, they learned a lot from each other. The idea of doing things together, I think, is very important. Because from a scientific standpoint – again, I mentioned it already – the scientific targets and the societal needs that needs to be, let’s say, addressed by scientific drilling, are the same.

There is one very big difference that IODP scientists often do not have in mind when you’re drilling on land: you’ll need to convince local communities. You need to get permits. Whatever you’re doing, it needs to be of benefit for the society, and you need to talk to people about that one beforehand. You cannot go somewhere and say, “Okay, here I am. That’s my drill rig. Let’s start drilling”.

This is also, for IODP scientists, something – which is sometimes my impression – they don’t know. IODP has an outreach program or outreach programs, but that’s more a scientific outreach to reach out into the scientific community. In our case, we have outreach programs doing both, reaching out in the community, in scientific community, but also reaching out to local people or the local stakeholders, in order to say, “Look, what we are doing is not something against you. We are not stealing your resources. We don’t spoil the underground. We are doing it for a scientific purpose, because we would like to help understanding questions which are also relevant for you. Understanding earthquakes, understanding climate evolution, and things like that”.

BMR: That’s great because many times, especially in the ocean drilling, people don’t really understand what’s the ship doing over there. As you said, people are not seeing the ship. So yeah, it’s a great opportunity to make outreach, to show the people and to communicate what’s this science about.

TW: I need just to make another point here: We are paid by taxpayers’ money. They want to know what happens with their money, and they have the right to know what happens with their money. So, I think that’s important to tell them. And we have a story to tell: “Look, it’s for your benefit”.

BMR: In terms of program organization, what do you think it’s the strongest point of ICDP in comparison to IODP?

TW: One of our previous executive directors once said we are “lean and mean”. We are a very small organization. The number of people who are permanently working for ICDP is less than 20. This is the operational support group. We have, of course, the panels who decide about proposals and, let’s say, ICDP strategies, and things like that. But they’re coming together once a year. And first, we have a group that is called the SAG, which is similar to SEP [Science Evaluation Panel] of IODP.  They discuss about proposals from a scientific standpoint. Then, we have an Executive Committee which is the managing agency or managing panel, and we have the Assembly of Governors who is supervising the ICDP. But they all not working permanently for ICDP. The only group of people who’s working permanently for ICDP is the Operational Support Group.

So, from the organization point of view, we are different. In our case, for ICDP projects, the researchers and the PIs have – as I mentioned already – way more responsibilities in a project. It’s not just responsibility for the science. They also have to think about hiring a company to do the drilling, thinking about data management, thinking about sample management; where to put the core at the end, and all these relevant questions.

BMR: Where are the people working full-time for ICDP based at? Germany?

TW: The Operational Support Group, yes, are these fourteen people which are based in Helmholtz Centre – GFZ in Potsdam. And that has historical reasons because the GFZ is also an institute which is a spin-off of the KTB. So, that KTB drilling had two offspring’s, one the German one, which was the GFZ, and one, the international one, which is the ICDP. The scientific director of KTB, the scientific founding director of GFZ, and the first director of ICDP were one and the same person.

BMR: Who’s that?

TW: Rolf Emmermann.

BMR: Let me ask a last question. Now you are director of ICDP…

TW: I’m not the director; I’m heading the Operational Support Group. ICDP has also an executive director, that’s Marco Bohnhoff. He is representing ICDP to the outside world and also supervising the OSG (Operational Support Group) activities. I am the head of the OSG.

BMR: Oh, sorry about that.

TW: No, it’s okay.

BMR: So, as head of the OSG, what is your vision? Where do you want to bring ICDP, from that position?

TW: It’s interesting because I was asked the same question when I took over my position. What is your vision? Well, we are helping and supporting scientists. Of course, if there are new developments, we have to keep that in mind, for instance; how to use AI and data management for scientific drilling projects. And we have also — and that’s something just recently — we have to reach out to the early career community. This is extremely important. The last two days before starting the EGU, we had an early career workshop, just to invite the early careers because they are the next generations and they need to know what both programs, IODP and ICDP, are doing and how they can support their scientific careers. There are early careers that didn’t know so much about the programs. When you tell them we are from ICDP, “Where are you from?” But once you explain them what we are doing, then they are becoming interested. We had a very, very nice workshop. A very good workshop.

BMR: Yeah, actually, I usually feel like one of the keys of survival of the scientific drilling programs is that they are constantly feeding early careers into the system, so to speak.

TW: Yes, but these early careers, they’re advised by PIs. A PI maybe has a postdoc or a PhD student, and then she or he says, “Okay, I’m now a PI of an ICDP project, but I need somebody to do the work at the drill site”. So, you’re going to join the drilling, you apply for that training course, the PI writes support letter, then you’re going to apply for the training course, you get the training, then you learn about ICDP and these things… But it’s not something you learn if you don’t have somebody with you who’s kind of mentoring you, like an advisor. So, it’s equally important that we make sure that also people who don’t have a mentor who is already in ICDP have a chance to learn about ICDP.  

BMR: I agree, that’s a good way to go. So, to wrap up, is there something you’d like to add that we have not talked about?

TW: Not really… But let me say that, in the last 15 years with the ICDP, it was always a pleasure for me to work together with IODP on different fields. Might be on the scientific one; might be in the outreach field; might also be in the proposal field – with the Land to Sea, for instance… And, I’m looking forward to see IODP3 being implemented, and working together with IODP3 and the other parts of IODP, as well, of course. It was a great time in the past, and I think that we also have quite some works to do in the future, and we will do that together. And I’m very sure we’re going to have great success.

BMR: I’m sure of that, too. Thank you very much. That was so good.

TW: thank you, thank you.