Skip to main content

Environmental Management Technology-Development Program at the Department of Energy 1995 Review (1996) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

CHAPTER 2: IMPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGIES
Pages 7-16

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 7...
... In a previous report by this committee evaluating We development of environmental-management technologies (NRC, 1995) , DOE was encouraged to focus technology development on clearly identified problems and to consider systematic use of comparative risk and risk/benefit assessment in evaluating en~7ironmental-management alternatives that form the basis for technologydevelopment needs.
Read the entire page →
From page 8...
... develop and perform an assessment of needs for a given problem or Issue; · develop a comprehensive set of scenarios for different solutions to each problem or issue, covenug Me major steps from characterization to disposal; . screen He scenarios to a manageable few, iMili~ng appropriate screening cr~tena based on the chosen performance measures; .
Read the entire page →
From page 9...
... Once the technology needs have been identified, evaluated, and pnontized, additional factors on performance measures may be considered in setting priorities among the available technology~evelopment investment options. Additional perfonnance measures could include the likelihood of success and the need for a balanced portfolio of technology-development invesunents (i.e., a mix of near-term, low-risk investments and longer-tem~, highway high-payoffinvestments)
Read the entire page →
From page 10...
... Nevertheless, the lack of such objectives, even if tentative, is adversely affecting attempts to organize and conduct focused and timely technology development. The end points and technologies must be factored into the system early and with reasonable certainty if the program is to be carried out in a cost-effective and timely manner and with the greatest safety to the public.
Read the entire page →
From page 11...
... Remediation efforts now underway are also part of the iterative process of technology development and application, which should be recognized by the focus area groups and the steering committee in their integrated team work efforts, and by feedback mechanisms in the system so that fixture decisions can benefit.ll For elective feedback of lessons learned, progress and results must be doaunented Performance measures are needed for the technical~evelopment program. In a study of best R&D management practices in private industry3, more than 50 percent of the respondents put "Learn from post-project audits" in the top third of R&D practices with the greatest potential gain relative to the effort involved.
Read the entire page →
From page 12...
... that it would be desirable to establish a process "whereby new technology~evelopment efforts and their anticipated results can be taken into account in renegotiating tnparate agreements." The committee believes that the likelihood of acceptance by key outside parties can be enhanced if guy are involved in appropnate ways in the process of selecting technologies for development and, of particular unportance, the process of assessing and evaluating the results of development and demonstration efforts. Recommendation: DOE should develop clear protocols and performance measures for assessing and commenting the effectiveness of technology~evelopment projects and field applications.
Read the entire page →
From page 13...
... The technology review process should be tied to and coordinated with DOE's current system of stages or "gates" that detennine He level of maturation for technology development (see Chapter 3, ~ landfills Focus Area)
Read the entire page →
From page 14...
... These examples illustrate that peer review can be used to help guide environmental technology development throughout the EM program The committee emphasizes that DOE needs an elective external peerreview process and Hat it should be implemented in a uniform, consistent manner. Recommendation: DOE-EM rteeds to develop and uniformly apply a standardized peer-review process designed to assess the following parameters in all five focus areas: the appropriateness of the identified technology needs, the appropriateness of projects to meet specific technology needs, and Me soundness of Me technical approach being used or proposed on sedate projects.
Read the entire page →
From page 15...
... to compare its technology needs to the status of technology, leading to the identification of technology gaps that require development efforts; · to ascertain the extent to which proven technologies that exist in other agencies, the private sector, or overseas might be applicable to a specific problem, thus providing the possibility that fiercer technology development is not required; and . to assess the potential for commercialization and collaborative development of the technologies being considered for development.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • expert elicitation
  • environmental remediation
  • systematic evaluation
  • previous nrc
  • industrial research

  • peer reviewers
  • previous report
  • landfills focus
  • guidance documents
  • specific technology

  • outside parties
  • help guide
  • guide environmental
  • disposal environment
  • environmental technology

  • chosen performance
  • setting priorities
  • explicit quantitative
  • criteria performance
  • focus technology

  • examples illustrate
  • consider systematic
  • scenarios based
  • documented effort
  • focused program

  • required characteristics
  • balanced portfolio
  • seen evidence
  • little evidence
  • develop technologies


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.