Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

5 Results of Applying the Methodology
Pages 38-47

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 38...
... The logical and economic success of the various lighting R&D projects under current funding projections. Insofar as poscharge to the panels was to complete the preliminary pro sible, it shall also examine alternative funding levels and spective benefits matrix using the guidance from the com resulting changes in the rates of progress and the probability mittee set forth in Chapter 3 and Appendix E
From page 39...
... DOE also ran because of its high energy demand. Reducing the electricity this analysis and calculated benefits relative to this surroneeded for lighting should provide economic benefits, de- gate.
From page 40...
... Allocation of Benefits The lighting panel also notes that there might be other posi The lighting panel combined the results of the analyses of tive benefits that are not incorporated in the NEMS economic benefits and probabilities to determine the share of benefits analysis, such as the possibility that air conditioning loads
From page 41...
... Environmental benefits include savings in carbon emis- National security benefits stem from reducing natural gas sions from power plants due to lower electricity use, esti- imports, which reduces U.S. vulnerability to disruptions in mated in million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCe)
From page 42...
... DOE's input to NEMS did not adequately reflect likely Benefits Calculation Method developments in competing technologies or in conventional The primary task of the benefits assessment subpanel was lighting, nor did it reflect SSL work in other countries. Even to develop a method for calculating the economic benefits of the full DOE budget would supply only a fraction of the the DOE Carbon Sequestration Program.
From page 43...
... While it was not Results and Discussion possible to sum the individual project probabilities to arrive at a probability for the entire program, the evaluation of indi- The panel concluded that the technology developed by vidual project probabilities provided background informa- the Carbon Sequestration Program would be deployed only tion, helping the panel make judgments about the entire pro- under the Carbon Constrained scenario, so it did not perform gram. The panel also recognized that the base program any analyses under the other two scenarios.
From page 44...
... Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, "Fuel Cell Subprogram," Presentation to the Panel consistently. on Benefits of Fuel Cell R&D for the Committee on Prospective Benefits of It is important that all DOE programs use a consistent DOE's Energy Efficiency and Fossil Energy R&D Programs, Washington, benefits calculation method, perhaps one related to NEMS.
From page 45...
... , the benefits of fuel cell vehicles were based on the lion, 2.76 million metric tons carbon equivalent (MMTCe) , savings of the fuel cell portion of the market versus a baseline and 50 million barrels of imported oil offset.
From page 46...
... Economic benefits were calculated by the subpanel for the three global scenarios -- Reference Case, High Oil and Gas Prices, and Carbon Constrained. The natural gas price is 11In the market segment of less than 1 MW, fuel cells having a capital assumed to be $4.6 per million Btu in the Reference Case.
From page 47...
... Once erence Case, $23.3 billion to $35.7 billion for the High Oil these data are obtained, it should be a relatively simple matand Gas Prices scenario, and $20.5 billion to $31.7 billion ter to complete the matrix. Most of this activity could be for the Carbon Constrained scenario.


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.