National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

PAPERBACK
price:$50.50
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Prospective Evaluation of Applied Energy Research and Development at DOE (Phase Two) (2007)
Board on Energy and Environmental Systems (BEES)

Citation Manager

. "Appendix F Guidance on Prospective Benefits Evaluation." Prospective Evaluation of Applied Energy Research and Development at DOE (Phase Two). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2007.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
96
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Prospective Evaluation of Applied Energy Research and Development at DOE (Phase Two)

FIGURE F-1 Results matrix for evaluating benefits and costs prospectively.

they do not include the benefits of fundamental research sponsored by the Office of Science, health benefits, or other quality of life benefits that could be unintended but real consequences of some applied R&D programs.

SCENARIOS

The benefit of a new technology will often depend on developments quite unrelated to the technology itself. For example, the benefit of energy-efficient lighting will depend on the cost of electricity, which in turn depends on the costs of fuels like natural gas and coal used to generate electricity. Similarly, the economic benefits associated with carbon sequestration will depend on carbon emissions being constrained or taxed and the level of constraint. Thus, assumptions about the future of prices and environmental constraints, among other things, can have a significant effect on the prospective benefits of a technology.

The scenarios in Figure F-1 represent three possible future states of the world that are likely to affect the benefits associated with a wide variety of DOE applied R&D programs. It is recommended that the same three scenarios be used to evaluate all the programs. The use of a common set of scenarios across program evaluations will allow reviewers to consider many programs without having to learn definitions for multiple scenarios and will facilitate comparisons

Page
96