SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “stakeholder expectations”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 73 records · Page 4

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2018

Overview of the Exploration Exercise Device Validation Study Plans

The NASA has determined that a multi-functional exercise device will be developed for use as an exercise device during exploration missions. The device will allow for full body resistance and metabolic exercise necessary to minimize physiological losses during space flight and to maintain fitness necessary to perform critical mission tasks. Prior to implementation as an exercise device on an Exploration vehicle, there will be verification and validation testing completed to determine device efficacy at providing the necessary training stimuli to achieve desired goals. Because the exploration device will be new device that has yet be specified, specific Verification and Validation (V&V) protocols have yet to be developed. Upon delivery of an exploration exercise device training unit, stakeholders throughout NASA will develop V&V plans that include ground-based testing and testing on the International Space Station (ISS). Stakeholders will develop test protocols that include success criterion for the device. Ground tests will occur at NASA Johnson Space Station prior to flight testing. The intents of the ground tests are to allow crew, spaceflight medicine, science, engineering, Astronaut Strength, Conditioning, and Reconditioning staff, and others to gain experience in the best utilization of the device. The goal is to obtain an evidence base for recommending use of the device on the ISS. The developed protocol will be created to achieve multiple objectives, including determining if the device provides an adequate training stimulus for 5th - 95th percentile males and females, allows for exercise modalities that protect functional capability, and is robust and can withstand extensive human use. Although protocols are yet to be determined, current expectations include use of the device by test subjects and current crew in order to obtain quantitative and qualitative feedback. Information obtained during the ground tests may be used to influence device modifications during design iterations. Assuming successful ground tests, the device will be installed on the ISS for testing during space flight. Spaceflight testing is envisioned to include an activation and checkout (ACO) phase and a V&V phase. During the ACO phase, 1-2 crewmembers will exercise with the device to ensure proper function. ACO is expected to last multiple months because of the many modes and methods of exercise that need to be assessed. However, the goal is to complete the ACO as quickly as possible. Once successful ACO occurs, the crew will be free to use the device for normal exercise pending concurrence from stakeholders. V&V tests on the ISS will ideally consist of crew using the device for all of their exercise for an entire mission. Exercise prescriptions will be supplied that replicate expected prescriptions during exploration missions. Crew that are not enrolled in the V&V studies would be also free to use the device as their schedule permits. As experience is gained by users, exercise protocols could change. The intent of all V&V testing is to ensure that all have thorough understanding of experience at optimizing device capability

DeWitt, J. K.↗

DOE OSTI2026

Guideline for Characterizing and Evaluating a Candidate Project Site for Solar Thermal Applications

This document presents a structured procedure for characterizing and evaluating candidate project sites for concentrating solar power (CSP) and solar heat for industrial processes (SHIP) applications. The objective is to provide project developers, researchers, and other stakeholders with a consistent, technology-agnostic framework for early-stage site assessment, enabling informed decision-making prior to significant investment in project development. Site selection is a critical factor in project success or failure for both CSP and SHIP projects. Key factors such as solar resource availability, land characteristics, environmental and regulatory constraints, infrastructure availability, and community context are determined by the choice of project site and can materially impact project performance, cost, schedule, and overall viability. This procedure is designed to systematically evaluate these factors, identify potential fatal flaws, and prioritize the most favorable candidate sites for further development. The process begins with rapid screening-level evaluation, using publicly available data to assess solar resource, land availability and suitability, zoning and land-use compatibility, and exclusion zones such as protected lands or sensitive habitats. Sites that meet the minimum screening criteria advance to a more detailed characterization. Subsequent sections of this report provide guidance for a next-level assessment of the most important technical and environmental parameters, including: 1) Solar resource quality, variability, and uncertainty using multiyear datasets and, where appropriate, on-site measurement campaigns; 2) Meteorological conditions such as wind, temperature, extreme weather events, and soiling impacts; 3) Land characteristics including slope, shading, and geotechnical conditions; and 4) Environmental and regulatory considerations, including permitting processes, endangered species, cultural resources, and visual impacts. The procedure also addresses infrastructure and integration considerations, including: 1) Grid interconnection requirements for CSP power generation projects; 2) Electrical and operational integration for SHIP facilities; 3) Water availability, quality, and permitting constraints, which are particularly critical for CSP in arid regions; and 4) Site access, construction logistics, and availability of workforce and supporting services. Recognizing the importance of social and economic context, the procedure includes evaluation of community engagement factors, such as stakeholder sentiment, proximity to sensitive visual receptors, workforce development opportunities, and local economic incentives. The outputs of these assessments are synthesized in a cost and risk evaluation, translating site characteristics into expected impacts on capital cost, operating cost, schedule, and technical risk. This is complemented by screening-level performance modeling, including 8760 simulations and long-term projections, to quantify expected energy or thermal output, assess variability thereof, and support comparison between candidate sites. Finally, the procedure provides high-level guidance on a structured go/no-go decision framework, categorizing sites based on identified risks and constraints, and outlining a clear path forward to feasibility studies and front-end engineering design for viable projects. By standardizing the site characterization process across both CSP and SHIP applications, this guideline aims to: 1) Improve consistency and transparency in early-stage project evaluation; 2) Reduce development risk and avoid investment in nonviable project sites; 3) Support collaboration between developers, researchers, and public agencies; and 4) Accelerate successful deployment of concentrating solar technologies for both power generation and industrial process heat.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Nuclear Physics Network Requirements Review (Final Report)

The Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) is the high-performance network user facility for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science (SC) and delivers highly reliable data transport capabilities optimized for the requirements of data-intensive science. In essence, ESnet is the circulatory system that enables the DOE science mission by connecting all its laboratories and facilities in the US and abroad. ESnet is funded and stewarded by the Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program and managed and operated by the Scientific Networking Division at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL). ESnet is widely regarded as a global leader in the research and education networking community. ESnet interconnects DOE national laboratories, user facilities, and major experiments so that scientists can use remote instruments and computing resources as well as share data with collaborators, transfer large datasets, and access distributed data repositories. ESnet is specifically built to provide Between July 2023 and October 2023, ESnet and the Nuclear Physics program (NP) of the DOE SC organized an ESnet requirements review of NP-supported activities. Preparation for these events included identification of key stakeholders: program and facility management, research groups, and technology providers. Each stakeholder group was asked to prepare formal case study documents about its relationship to the NP program to build a complete understanding of the current, near-term, and long-term status, expectations, and processes that will support the science going forward.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

NASA NTRS2014

UAS NAS IHITL Test Readiness Review (TRR)

Requesting release of IHITL test readiness review (TRR) charts to ensure UAS-NAS project primary stakeholders, the Federal Aviation Administration through the RTCA special committee -228 and the Office of the Secretary of Defense Sense and Avoid Science and Research Panel, are well informed on the IHITL test plan and expected outcomes as they relate to their needs to safely fly UAS in the NAS.

Unmanned↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Long-Term Health Metric Development Effort

INTRODUCTION Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) is a methodology applied when high-stakes decisions need to be made about complex systems. PRA often uses risk minimization to aid decision making, such as when establishing vehicle requirements or resource allocations. The NASA Human System Risk Board (HSRB) maintains the human spaceflight risk postures, many of which have in-mission medical outcomes, but the full risk set also includes performance and Long-Term Health (LTH) outcomes. An effort is underway to determine the dependencies between LTH risk outcomes and mission characteristics and to identify metrics for quantifying LTH outcomes. The LTH metrics will be incorporated into future PRA tools currently under development to support crew health and performance decision making. LONG-TERM HEALTH (LTH) RISK LTH risk encompasses the timeframe from immediately post-flight, through the rest of an astronaut’s career, through retirement, and until death. LTH outcomes include the time and interventions needed for the astronaut to return to preflight physiological states after experiencing spaceflight hazards and recovery from any in-mission medical events that persist into the post-flight timeframe. It includes chronic complications that may arise due to experiencing in-flight medical conditions or injuries and medical conditions that occur later in life with a higher probability of occurrence or with more severity because of their spaceflight exposure. Finally, LTH outcomes can also include a reduction in life expectancy due to spaceflight exposures. Eighteen of the HSRB risks contain an LTH component, each with a unique incidence rate and consequence severity. ON-GOING LTH METRIC DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS Based on guidance from a stakeholder workshop held on June 1, 2023, only LTH outcomes with causes tied to spaceflight experience that are significantly different from normal healthy aging and which can be affected by changes in in-mission resources are targeted for inclusion within the PRA modeling efforts. Current on-going efforts include a sensitivity analysis of potential in-flight medical conditions to determine which conditions may persist into post-flight and how the consequences may be affected by in-mission medical resources. Also underway is determination of differences in the time for a return to preflight physiological baselines when in-flight countermeasures are available versus when they are not. Analyses performed with publicly available astronaut data and collaborations with the Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health team are being designed to understand which LTH outcomes differ significantly from natural healthy aging. Information exchanges are also occurring with LTH risk custodians to understand how they quantify outcomes. FUTURE PLANS Risk characteristics will be determined for each LTH risk that meets our inclusion criteria and the dependencies of their outcomes to in-mission resources and mission characteristics will be established. The individual risks will be integrated together into one or more high level LTH metrics for inclusion in the PRA tool, so that LTH risks can be considered along with in-mission risks during crew health and performance system decision support trade studies.

B. E. Lewandowski↗

NASA NTRS2024

NPCC4: New York City Climate Risk Information 2022—Observations and Projections

New York City (NYC) faces many challenges in the coming decades due to climate change and its interactions with social vulnerabilities and uneven urban development patterns and processes. This New York City Panel on Climate Change (NPCC) report contributes to the Panel’s mandate to advise the city on climate change and provide timely climate risk information that can inform flexible and equitable adaptation pathways that enhance resilience to climate change. This report presents up-to-date scientific information as well as updated sea level rise projections of record. We also present a new methodology related to climate extremes and describe new methods for developing the next generation of climate projections for the New York metropolitan region. Future work by the Panel should compare the temperature and precipitation projections presented in this report with a subset of models to determine the potential impact and relevance of the “hot model” problem. NPCC4 expects to establish new projections-of-record for precipitation and temperature in 2024 based on this comparison and additional analysis. Nevertheless, the temperature and precipitation projections presented in this report may be useful for NYC stakeholders in the interim as they rely on the newest generation of global climate models.

NPCC4↗

DOE OSTI2025

Overcoming Challenges to Nuclear-Maritime Applications

This report is the fifth deliverable in a series of reports set forth by the Department of Energy (DOE), led by the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), for the research award titled “Accelerating Commercial Maritime Demonstration Projects for Advanced Nuclear Reactor Technologies.” The report highlights guidance to bridge the gaps between innovative nuclear technologies and their practical implementation in maritime environments. The previous reports discussed specific technical, economic and regulatory challenges that may be expected when developing and establishing advanced nuclear technologies for commercial maritime applications. This report supports the mission of the U.S. National Reactor Innovation Center (NRIC) to demonstrate projects with industry and acts as a resource for the various stakeholders associated with the development of novel applications for advanced reactors. The previous reports discuss the interest in nuclear technology applications for decarbonized energy and identify the potential demands in nuclear energy supply and price. The work in these reports supports the recently issued nuclear Executive Orders (EOs). Specifically, EO 14299, “Deploying Advanced Nuclear Reactor Technologies for National Security”, and EO 14300, “Ordering the Reform of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,” by ensuring the rapid development, deployment, and use of advanced nuclear technologies; and increasing the deployment of new nuclear reactor technologies, such as Generation III+ and IV reactors, modular reactors, and microreactors to support America leading the commercialization of affordable and abundant nuclear energy.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) State-of-Industry Report: State of SAF Production Process

GHG emissions related to commercial air travel were already significant, at 10% of the domestic transportation emissions and 3% of the global greenhouse gas emissions prior to the pandemic, and are expected to double by 2050, even with modest projected growth in air travel. Since Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) is the only way that medium to long haul commercial aviation can be decarbonized, a US government wide "SAF Grand Challenge" was issued to encourage industry to develop capabilities to produce SAF, to reduce cost, improve sustainability, build value chains, and to scale production capabilities (1). The targets are to expand current domestic SAF 2022 production by 200X to 3 billion gallons per year by 2030, and then further by 12X to 35 billion gallons by 2050, while achieving life cycle GHG reduction of 50% relative to fossil Jet A. Following the SAF Grand Challenge, the DOE, USDA, EPA and FAA collaboratively developed a comprehensive strategy, outlined in the "SAF Grand Challenge Roadmap" (2), to inform stakeholders of the actions necessary to achieve the above volumetric targets. The purpose of this study is to provide an assessment of the current state of the SAF production industry and identify challenges and hurdles that industry may face in delivering the 2030 goals. This assessment is for the potential feedstocks and conversion pathways expected to contribute to 2030 goals and will generally follow action areas in the SAF Grand Challenge: feedstocks, conversion technology, supply chain, and policy & valuation.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Sustainable Aviation Fuel State-of-Industry Report: Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids Pathway

Climate change is a pressing issue that requires immediate and decisive action to ensure a sustainable future. To reduce CO 2 emissions and speed up the transition to net-zero aviation, the Biden administration has launched the "Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAF) Grand Challenge" to scale up production of SAF. The challenge aims to achieve 20% reduction in aviation emissions by producing 3 billion gallons per year (BGPY) of SAF by 2030 and to meet 100% of aviation fuel demand by producing 35 BGPY of SAF by 2050. In this report, we provide an overview of the current state of the hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids (HEFA) SAF industry, guided by the perspectives of the interviewed experts. Currently, the HEFA pathway is the only commercially deployed method to produce significant amounts of SAF. As a result, SAF produced via the HEFA pathway is expected to make the largest contribution to achieving the 2030 production target and play a key role in boosting and establishing the SAF market. Announced SAF's total capacity, including alcohol-to-jet, FT, and power-to-liquid facilities, is expected to reach 2 BGPY by 2030 (1), with the expected from HEFA. Total HEFA capacity, including construction and planned projects, is expected to reach about 9 BGPY by 2030; if completely executed, this would contribute to renewable diesel (RD) and SAF. The production ratio of SAF and RD will depend on market conditions, incentives, and the capabilities of facilities. While some stakeholders believe that the 2030 goal may be achieved solely via HEFA, others believe that overly relying on HEFA may be detrimental to the development of other necessary pathways to meet 2050 goals. Our conclusion is that the HEFA pathway alone will not be sufficient to reach the 2030 target. It is crucial to implement additional pathways to reach the goal. This report conducts a comprehensive analysis and evaluation of the HEFA SAF value chain. Our aim is to provide current status of the industry and to identify potential challenges that could hinder the commercial production and use of SAF produced through the HEFA pathway. We have had extensive discussions, consultations, and collaborative sessions with stakeholders in the HEFA SAF value chain, including HEFA feedstocks, potential volume of HEFA SAF, economic and sustainability metrics when compared to petroleum, and assessment of the HEFA SAF industry's ability to grow and contribute to achieving the "SAF Grand Challenge." Since the HEFA pathway produces both SAF and RD, this report compares both pathways: HEFA to SAF and HEFA to RD.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Analytical Needs in a Sample Receiving Facility: Input from the MSR Operation Definition Team

The return of scientifically selected samples from Mars would provide a rare opportunity forinvestigation with the full range of the latest technology available, but to take full advantageof this opportunity, it is important to plan ahead to ensure the pristine nature of the samplesupon arrival within the Earth environment until scientific investigations can begin.The NASA/ESA science community-driven MSR Science Planning Group – Phase 2 (MSPG2)delivered recommendations and guidance regarding curation (1) and science (2, 3) activities tobe performed on the samples under containment. High-level requirements for the infrastruc-ture were also developed by MSPG2 (4). In order to prepare infrastructure-targeted input forthe ESA and NASA facility studies planned in the 2022-2023 timeframe, the agency-led MSROperational Scenarios Definition Team (MOSDT) was assembled to conceptualize the sampleoperations that will inform future architecture teams. Emphasis was placed on the respon-sibility of MOSDT to use community-defined requirements and to represent the view of the international scientific community.All necessary and sufficient instruments and analytical needs described in MSPG2 were inte-grated in MOSDT main deliverable, the operational workflow (see Hays et al, this conference).In MSPG2, notional instruments were split between curation analytical needs, and objective-driven (time-sensitive and sterilization-sensitive) science analytical needs. In MOSDT, whilethe first phases of curation, “pre-Basic Characterization” and “Basic Characterization” wererather streamlined and separate from other analytical needs, “Preliminary Examination” and“Science” instruments were not always physically segregated. In addition to the necessary andsufficient instruments described by MSPG2, the MOSDT recommended additional supportequipment for sterilization, cleanliness and contamination monitoring.It was sometimes necessary for the MOSDT to rely on assumptions to integrate instruments inthe activity workflow. In general, the assumptions were very conservative to limit contaminationand cross-contamination risks. It is expected that future work to refine limits of contaminationwill enable optimization of instrumentation.The community was consulted during the course of the MOSDT work. This abstract’s aimis two-fold: on one hand, inform the scientific community and overall MSR stakeholders, tobring their attention on the analytical needs currently considered as necessary and sufficient;on the other hand, to solicit feedback from a larger community audience to optimize and refineanalytical needs during the next phases of MSR ground-segment preparation.Disclaimer: The decision to implement Mars Sample Return will not be finalized until NASA’scompletion of the program’s National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. This docu-ment is being made available for informational purposes only.[1] Tait et al. (2021) Preliminary planning for Mars Sample Return (MSR) curation activities ina Sample Receiving Facility (SRF). Astrobiology in press, doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0105. [2] Toscaet al. (2021) Time-sensitive aspects of Mars Sample Return (MSR) science. Astrobiologyin press, doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0115. [3] Velbel et al. (2021) Planning implications relatedto sterilization-sensitive science investigations associated with Mars Sample Return (MSR).Astrobiology in press, doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0113. [4] Carrier et al. (2021) Science and curationconsiderations for the design of a Mars Sample Return (MSR) Sample Receiving Facility (SRF).Astrobiology in press, doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0110.

Mars Sample Return↗

NASA NTRS2020

Credible practice of modeling and simulation in healthcare: ten rules from a multidisciplinary perspective

The complexities of modern biomedicine are rapidly increasing. Thus, modeling and simulation have become increasingly important as a strategy to understand and predict the trajectory of pathophysiology, disease genesis, and disease spread in support of clinical and policy decisions. In such cases, inappropriate or ill-placed trust in the model and simulation outcomes may result in negative outcomes, and hence illustrate the need to formalize the execution and communication of modeling and simulation practices. Although verification and validation have been generally accepted as significant components of a model’s credibility, they cannot be assumed to equate to a holistic credible practice, which includes activities that can impact comprehension and in-depth examination inherent in the devel-opment and reuse of the models. For the past several years, the Committee on Credible Practice of Modeling and Simulation in Healthcare, an interdisciplinary group seeded from a U.S. interagency initiative, has worked to codify best practices. Here, we provide Ten Rules for credible practice of modeling and simulation in healthcare developed from a comparative analysis by the Committee’s multidisciplinary membership, followed by a large stakeholder com-munity survey. These rules establish a unified conceptual framework for modeling and simulation design, implementation, evaluation, dissemination and usage across the modeling and simulation life-cycle. While biomedical science and clinical care domains have somewhat different requirements and expectations for credible practice, our study converged on rules that would be useful across a broad swath of model types. In brief, the rules are: (1) Define context clearly. (2) Use contextually appropriate data. (3) Evaluate within context. (4) List limitations explicitly. (5) Use version control. (6) Document appropriately. (7) Disseminate broadly. (8) Get independent reviews. (9) Test competing imple-mentations. (10) Conform to standards. Although some of these are common sense guidelines, we have found that many are often missed or misconstrued, even by seasoned practitioners. Computational models are already widely used in basic science to generate new biomedical knowledge. As they penetrate clinical care and healthcare policy, contributing to personalized and precision medicine, clinical safety will require established guidelines for the credible practice of modeling and simulation in healthcare.

Credibility↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Operational Workflow in a Sample Receiving Facility: Input from the MSR Operation Definition Team

The return of scientifically selected samples from Mars would provide a rare opportunity for investigation with the full range of the latest technology available. To take full advantage of this opportunity, it is important to plan ahead to ensure the pristine nature of the samples upon arrival within the Earth environment until scientific investigations can begin. The NASA/ESA science community-driven MSR Science Planning Group – Phase 2 (MSPG2) delivered recommendations and guidance regarding curation (1) and science (2,3) activities to be performed on the samples under containment. High-level requirements for the infrastructure were also developed by MSPG2 (4). In order to prepare infrastructure-targeted input for the ESA and NASA facility studies planned in the 2022-2023 timeframe, the MSR agency-led Operational Scenarios Definition Team (MOSDT) was assembled to conceptualize the sample operations that will inform future architecture teams. Emphasis was placed on the responsibility of MOSDT to use community-defined requirements and to represent the view of the international scientific community. The main deliverable of MOSDT was an operational workflow for a Sample Receiving Facility (SRF). Two other deliverables were produced: a report to narrate the workflow, and a list of instruments (see Hutzler et al., this conference). Activities described in the main sequence of the workflow range from engineering operations to curation to science, with the latter term being used here as the science to be done within a SRF. Side sequences (e.g. engineering inspection of hardware, head gas extraction) were also identified, and detailed when they would have a significant impact on the infrastructure of a SRF. It was necessary for the MOSDT to rely on assumptions for some steps and activities, and though these were kept to a minimum (and are described in both the report supporting the workflow and in the full presentation), in general, the assumptions and overall work were very conservative, as the impact of underestimating the scope of the SRF infrastructure was considered more detrimental than overestimating it. It is expected that future work will be able to confirm or inform these assumptions. The community was consulted during the course of the MOSDT work. This abstract’s aim is two-fold: on one hand, inform the scientific community and overall MSR stakeholders, to make the infrastructure studies and trade-off more understandable; on the other hand, to solicit feedback from a larger community audience for the next iterations planning for SRF design and activities.

Mars Sample Return↗

NASA NTRS1999

NASA Educational Product Development and Post-Secondary Program Assessment Planning

Producing "value-added students" involves proactively addressing how successfully students develop their skills, knowledge, and personal, social, and ethical growth due to their association with a program. NASA programs for higher education can certainly be responsive in aiding the academic community strive for quality in terms of "valueadded" students. By identifying essential characteristics of exemplary assessment practices, the standards developed by accrediting agencies serve as guides for developing quality practices and policies. Such a process is an effective tool for communicating the expectations of the educational components of a program to all concerned with the program and its expected results. When standards are connected to student performance, they provide a very compelling argument for refocusing the definition of quality in higher education. By linking standards and performance, student learning and development becomes the starting point for examining program quality. If the multiple stakeholders - faculty, peers, the professional community, addressed assessment issues, then accreditation can be a link among various constituencies, the parties can better understand the needs of each other and develop the necessary trust needed for understanding and support.

Salmons, Phyllis A.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Overcoming Molehills and Mountains Implementing a New Program

This slide presentation reviews some of the challenges and accomplishments of implementing a new program. The purpose of the presentation is to: (1) Share the challenges that were encountered formulating a new program concurrent with formulating & implementing new spacecraft development projects: (a) Immature mission concepts put on the fast track (b) Need to reconcile ambitious objectives with cost and budget reality (c) Changes of major stakeholders (d) Timing, timing, timing (e) Changing ground rules, assumptions, and risk tolerance (f) The role of centers, (2) Share the successes to date despite the challenges (3) Demonstrate how interdependencies between the program, projects, NASA HQ environment, and external political forces affect the process, and how expectations must be managed while dealing with external factors and great change.

Salute, Joan↗

NASA NTRS2019

Development of a Drought and Yield Assessment System in Kenya

Dependence on rainfed agriculture in a highly variable climate, renders crop and livestock production vulnerable to impacts of drought in Kenya. Stakeholders in the region have highlighted the need for timely and actionable detailed early warning information on drought and its implication on crop productivity. Here we apply the Regional Hydrological Extremes Assessment System (RHEAS) to estimate current and future drought conditions onset, severity, recovery, and duration) and expected productivity outlooks.

Ellenburg, Walter Lee, II↗

NASA NTRS2015

Underestimation of Project Costs

Large projects almost always exceed their budgets. Estimating cost is difficult and estimated costs are usually too low. Three different reasons are suggested: bad luck, overoptimism, and deliberate underestimation. Project management can usually point to project difficulty and complexity, technical uncertainty, stakeholder conflicts, scope changes, unforeseen events, and other not really unpredictable bad luck. Project planning is usually over-optimistic, so the likelihood and impact of bad luck is systematically underestimated. Project plans reflect optimism and hope for success in a supposedly unique new effort rather than rational expectations based on historical data. Past project problems are claimed to be irrelevant because "This time it's different." Some bad luck is inevitable and reasonable optimism is understandable, but deliberate deception must be condemned. In a competitive environment, project planners and advocates often deliberately underestimate costs to help gain project approval and funding. Project benefits, cost savings, and probability of success are exaggerated and key risks ignored. Project advocates have incentives to distort information and conceal difficulties from project approvers. One naively suggested cure is more openness, honesty, and group adherence to shared overall goals. A more realistic alternative is threatening overrun projects with cancellation. Neither approach seems to solve the problem. A better method to avoid the delusions of over-optimism and the deceptions of biased advocacy is to base the project cost estimate on the actual costs of a large group of similar projects. Over optimism and deception can continue beyond the planning phase and into project execution. Hard milestones based on verified tests and demonstrations can provide a reality check.

Cost estimation↗

DOE OSTI2024

Kansas City, Missouri, Streetlight Electric Vehicle Charging: Strategies and challenges for site selection of streetlight electric vehicle infrastructure in Kansas City, Missouri (Final Report)

Public streetlight charging, whether on streets in central business districts or residential areas, provides easy charging access for apartment residents and homeowners alike. While most electric vehicle (EV) drivers charge at home, they do so in garages or on driveways they own. For renters and residents of multifamily housing (MFH), however, this may not be an option. EVs have a lower cost of ownership compared to conventional vehicles, and a used EV may be an affordable option for a lower-income household. But without easy access to charging, even a low-cost used EV may not be an option for a prospective buyer. An affordable curbside charging network has the potential to expand EV adoption into neighborhoods that have to date seen minimal interest and uptake of the technology and associated charging infrastructure. Streetlight charging networks can provide an economical, scalable, and effective approach to providing equitable and convenient charging. Metropolitan Energy Center (MEC) is dedicated to the mission of creating resource efficiency, environmental health, and economic vitality in the Kansas City region and beyond. Since 1983, MEC has provided resources, outreach, and training to make alternative fuels and energy efficiency commonplace. MEC led a streetlight charging pilot project that installed limited EV charging infrastructure on the streetlight system in Kansas City, Missouri, to demonstrate and test the benefits of curbside charging for EVs at existing on-street parking locations. The project aimed to cost-effectively expand the charging network in Kansas City to support residential charging and provide infrastructure in one or more charging deserts throughout the city. This pilot evaluates the impact and overall success of streetlight charging based on community feedback, utilization of charging infrastructure, technical feasibility, and cost. The project has pursued a data- and community-driven site selection process designed to identify sites with high demand and high opportunity for EV charging. This project was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and awarded to MEC through a competitive proposal process. The novelty and complexity of this project required an organization that could facilitate collaboration across levels of government, community members, and industry partners. For the past 25 years, through Kansas City Regional Clean Cities, MEC has worked with numerous public and private fleets on a variety of projects to improve the environmental performance and efficiency of the regional vehicle fleet. To advance affordable, efficient, and clean transportation efforts, DOE Clean Cities and Communities coalitions create local networks of public and private sector stakeholders and engage communities. Rooted within their local communities, the coalitions serve as experts and ambassadors, bringing to bear the collective knowledge, experience, and practical know-how of the entire network from within DOE, its national laboratories, and diverse stakeholders in the field. MEC and its project partners made in-kind contributions to leverage federal dollars for the benefit of the Kansas City community. Findings from this project will help determine the best applications for streetlight charging technologies to maximize funding impact and serve community needs. The team evaluated locations based on expected charging demand, technical feasibility, safety considerations, and enhanced charging network siting needs. Throughout the project, the team gathered feedback and evaluated ways to make public charging for EVs available to all community members. The insights will help Kansas City and other communities streamline future efforts to support EV drivers through public charging in the city right-of-way. Furthermore, this project will inform citywide guidance for future installations. MEC is committed to a transparent and publicly accessible approach that encourages the collaborative evaluation of streetlight charging. The project has engaged the community to proactively identify and evaluate the benefits and impacts of streetlight charging. It was a priority for the project to ensure the benefits of this pilot are distributed equitably to all members of the Kansas City community and that new charging opportunities and associated resources are available in diverse neighborhoods across the city. The charging infrastructure supports an affordable curbside charging network that will enable more drivers to choose EVs and provide easy charging access for all community members interested in driving an EV. The community feedback received through this project informed future resources and opportunities to make EVs more accessible to all members of the Kansas City community. MEC worked with several community partners on this project, including Missouri University of Science and Technology (MST), Pennsylvania State University (Penn State), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL); the city of Kansas City, Missouri; Evergy; Black and McDonald (B&M); LilyPad EV; EVNoire; and Westside Housing Organization (WHO). Project partners contributed to the cost match required for DOE grants through capital expenditures, personnel, and other in-kind contributions. Detailed descriptions of project team organizations can be found in Appendix A. Project Partners. Analysts at NREL and MST/PennState developed site maps based on demand and equity considerations. MEC conducted outreach to community members to garner input on project design and site selection, and received approval from the Missouri Public Service Commission (PSC) for Evergy’s EV charging station ownership. MEC worked with all partners to gather additional siting criteria and developed a site selection evaluation checklist, and partners conducted site visits to proposed installation sites. Next, B&M, Evergy, and the city executed all site agreements, conducted site-specific engineering design, acquired associated permits, and issued notices to proceed site by site or in small batches. Finally, from January to April 2023, the project team installed 23 EV charging stations built on Kansas City’s streetlight system in six council districts. Evergy will own, operate, and monitor the stations for 10 years, sharing charging data with MEC for at least 1 year.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

NASA NTRS2012

Developing Culture-Adaptive Competency Through Experiences with Expressive Avatars

Modern Warfighters often find themselves in a variety of non-combat roles such as negotiator, peacekeeper, reconstruction, and disaster relief. They are expected to perform these roles within a culture alien to their own. Each individual they encounter brings their own set of values to the interaction that must be understood and reconciled. To navigate the human terrain of these complex interactions, the Warfighter must not only consider the specifics of the target culture, but also identify the stakeholders, recognize the influencing cultural dimensions, and adapt to the situation to achieve the best possible outcome. Vcom3D is using game-based scenarios to develop culturally adaptive competency. The avatars that represent the stakeholders must be able to portray culturally accurate behavior, display complex emotion, and communicate through verbal and non-verbal cues. This paper will discuss the use of emerging game technologies to better simulate human behavior in cross-cultural dilemmas. Nomenclature: culture, adaptive, values, cultural values dimensions, dilemmas, virtual humans, non-verbal communications

Silverglate, Daniel S.↗