Reviewer Comments - EERE

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2011 Algae Platform Review – Reviewer Comments Reviewer Comments are direct transcripts of commentary and material provided by the Platform’s Review Panel. They have not been edited or altered by the Biomass Program. Care should be taken in presenting results as a tornado diagram (sensitivity diagram), because 1 factor at a time sensitivity analysis can be misleading. Presenter Response Project: 9.6.5.2 Argonne National Lab Title: Algae Life Cycle Assessment with GREET Presenter: Ed Frank Presentation Date: Thursday, April 07, 2011 Criteria Avg Score Std Deviation Count Approach 7.29 0.70 7 Progress 6.86 0.35 7 Relevance 7.29 0.88 7 Critical Success Factors 6.71 0.45 7 1. Project Approach The project performers have implemented technically sound research, development, and deployment approaches and demonstrated necessary results to meet their targets The project performers have identified a project management plan that includes well-defined milestones and adequate methods for addressing potential risks. Reviewer Comments Reviewer: 1 Criteria Score: 8 The Approach has been quite good, based on the earlier work with the GREET model. Each additional study improves the work. Reviewer: 2 Criteria Score: 7 This project is building an algal process model (APM) to extend GREET, which has been used for other energy sources (fossil fuels and others). Such a model is needed. Reviewer: 3 Criteria Score: 7 – Using GREET ensures accurate, consistent comparison with previous and other OBP LCA assessments – Providing an algae LCA framework is an effective strategy to obtain comparable, transparent, reproducible analysis and to increase data accretion and availability. – Objectives are associated with metrics, tasks, and dates. Reviewer: 4 Criteria Score: 6 See Overall Impressions text. Reviewer: 5 Criteria Score: 8 The project goal is to create an LCA tool as well as to conduct a specific LCA for current schemes of algal biofuel production. The goals are technically sound and well defined. Reviewer: 6 Criteria Score: 7 Page 50 of 223
2011 Algae Platform Review – Reviewer Comments Reviewer Comments are direct transcripts of commentary and material provided by the Platform’s Review Panel. They have not been edited or altered by the Biomass Program. Reviewer: 7 Criteria Score: 8 Consistent approach with other GREET modeling. Presenter Response Thank you very much. We hope that with the GREET LCA framework, researchers and stakeholders will be able to evaluate algae pathways with other biofuel and transportation pathways consistently. 2. Technical Progress and Accomplishments Please evaluate the degree to which the project has made progress in its objectives and stated project management plan has met its objectives in achieving milestones and overcoming technical barriers Reviewer Comments Reviewer: 1 Criteria Score: 7 Progress has been commensurate with the lifetime of the project. Reviewer: 2 Criteria Score: 7 This study is 75% complete. Presentor cites difficulties with lack of validated data and the fact that some required data are "proprietary". Despite this, complete initial APM is in hand with an extended GREET. Reviewer: 3 Criteria Score: 7 – The LCI inventory is diverse and open, covers many scenarios and a large fraction of the cumulative energy demand. – Early analysis results demonstrate ability to evaluate many scenarios. Reviewer: 4 Criteria Score: 6 See Overall Impressions text. Reviewer: 5 Criteria Score: 7 The project has met its milestones. A prototype was developed and described, a sensitivity analysis is underway and on time for summer 2011 deadline. Reviewer: 6 Criteria Score: 7 Reviewer: 7 Criteria Score: 7 Baseline scenarios near completion, but value of project is for evaluation of other scenarios. Presenter Response We agree that the project value will be increased by evaluating new scenarios. With completion of the technology options and scenarios currently under evaluation, we anticipate increased effort in this regard in the coming year. 3. Project Relevance The project both identifies with and contributes to meeting the platform goals and objectives of the Biomass Program Multi-Year Program Plan The project has considered applications of the expected outputs Page 51 of 223
Page 1 and 2: 2011 Biomass Program Algae Platform
Page 3 and 4: 2011 Algae Platform Review - Review
Page 49: 2011 Algae Platform Review - Review
Page 101 and 102:
2011 Algae Platform Review - Review
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223:
show all

Reviewer Comments - EERE

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?