Michigan ap wake forest 2012 neg speeches round 2 neg v george washington bs 1nc Off

The counterplan conducts R&D through DOD programs without procurement. Solves the entire aff without increasing incentives

Download 0.64 Mb.
Size0.64 Mb.
1   ...   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   ...   232

The counterplan conducts R&D through DOD programs without procurement. Solves the entire aff without increasing incentives

Marqusee 2012 – Executive Director of the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program and the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program at the DOD (March, Jeffrey, Energy Innovation at the Department of Defense: Assessing the Opportunities, White Paper, “Military installations and energy technology innovation”, http://bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/Energy%20Innovation%20at%20DoD.pdf, WEA) *note a typo, this dude’s last name is actually spelled Marqusee…
DoD and Environmental Technology: A Successful Innovation Model

The impediments that new facilities energy technologiesface today are very similar to those that confronted new ¶ environmental technologies in the mid-to-late 1990s—¶ namely, a highly distributed and risk-averse market in whichtechnologies were judged primarily on their perceivedcosts, often in the absence of reliable data on actual costs. ¶ To overcome those challenges, DoD created two programs: ¶ the Strategic Environmental R&D Program (SERDP), whichsupports the development of technology to meet DoD’s highpriority environmental requirements; and the EnvironmentalSecurity Technology Certification Program, which supports the ¶ demonstration and validation of environmental technologies—¶ including, but not limited to, technologies developed withSERDP funding.

SERDP and ESTCP have amassed a very successful track record in the last fifteen years of advancing environmental ¶ science and engineering, and also transitioning technologies across DoD. For example, they have transformed how DoDremediates its contaminated groundwater sites. Technologiesdeveloped and demonstrated by SERDP and ESTCP are nowused across DoD, and have become the standard of practice ¶ across the country for Superfund sites. As discussed below, ¶ DoD’s efforts to foster innovation in facilities energy are limited ¶ to demonstration and validation because (in contrast to the ¶ environmental area) there is ample support for science and ¶ engineering in industry and the DOE. In other words, DoD’s ¶ facilities energy effort replicates ESTCP but not SERDP. However, ¶ because the two programs are so closely intertwined, it is useful ¶ to look at them together.

Environmental technologies developed and demonstrated bySERDP and ESTCP are deployed on almost every DoD weapons ¶ system platform, are used in almost every DoD cleanup, and are ¶ part of the management of most installations across the services. ¶ These innovative technologies do not lead to new acquisitionsystems (although they are contained in many), nor are theyadopted by initiating a new procurement program. They aretypically transitioned through the commercial sector and boughtback as services for environmental management; or they becomepart of new standards, specifications, or installation managementprocedures; or they are included through upgrades to existingsystems during depot-level maintenance. As with energy, ¶ environmental issues are ubiquitous; it is assumed they can be ¶ managed (or worked around) rather than addressed through ¶ technological innovation; and decisions to deploy technologies ¶ are driven heavily by cost considerations and regulations. Yet ¶ improvements in environmental performance have significantlyreduced DoD’s costs and improved its mission performance, ¶ while allowing DoD to meet its environmental goals. Similar ¶ results are expected if DoD improves its energy performance.¶ SERDP’s and ESTCP’s effectiveness derives partly from ¶ structural factors (i.e., how the programs are organized), and ¶ partly from their approach to the problems and the linking ¶ of research and development investments to real world ¶ demonstrations. Officially, SERDP and ESTCP programs are ¶ structured as shown in figure 3.6.

This flow chart shows the classic one-way linear progression ¶ from basic research to implementation. Its roots date back to ¶ Vannevar Bush’s classic paper, Science, The Endless Frontier, which ¶ influenced the structure and funding process for many federal ¶ R&D programs. Many have noted that this model neither fits the ¶ way research and development actually occurs, nor necessarily ¶ supports a robust innovation system.¶ 84¶ Although the above is¶ the official structure for the program, it does not reflect how ¶ innovation is supported and fostered within SERDP and ESTCP. ¶ Structurally, SERDP and ESCTP have some unique elements, ¶ some of which were planned and some of which came ¶ about through circumstance rather than design. Having two ¶ programs—SERDP for the science and technology phase, and ¶ ESTCP for demonstration—under the same leadership has been ¶ important. The two programs are integrated in their goals and ¶ objectives but independent in their funding processes. Each ¶ program conducts independent reviews of proposals, but the ¶ reviews of active projects are conducted jointly, and findings arereported to a single director.

SERDP also has a unique authority in funding research anddevelopment. Although it is classified by DoD as a 6.3 program ¶ (which is typically associated with advanced development), it has statutory authority to address the full spectrum of science and technology development, from basic through applied and ¶ advanced development. This flexibility allows SERDP to avoid the ¶ artificial distinction between “basic” and “applied” research and ¶ development; SERDP does not subdivide the two activities. For ¶ the issues that SERDP and ESTCP address, fundamental sciencecan and should be applied science. Even in the early stages ofresearch, it is advantageous to be mindful of the likely “in-thefield” applications of the work and the technical and economic ¶ requirements, and structure a “basic” research project to addressthose “applied” concerns from the beginning. SERDP funds basic ¶ science, but in a way that ensures that key questions that relate ¶ to real DoD needs are addressed.

Directory: download -> Michigan -> Allen-Pappas+Neg
Michigan -> The interest convergence framework is offense against their movements claims at all levels of analysis—the Black Panthers proves. Delgado ’02
Michigan -> Interpretation – Financial incentives must be positively linked to rewards – they cannot be negative Harris, 89
Michigan -> R8 neg v michigan state cz 1nc
Michigan -> Doubles—Neg vs Wake lw 1NC
Michigan -> Round 1—Neg vs nyu gz 1NC
Michigan -> Indefinite detention means holding enemy combatants until the cessation of hostilities – authority for it is codified in the ndaa
Michigan -> Round 2 v. Wake 1nc
Michigan -> Global nuclear expansion now – dozens of countries
Allen-Pappas+Neg -> Michigan ap – nu 2013 r1 neg v concordia nw
Allen-Pappas+Neg -> Speech docs – michigan ap – ndt 2013 r1 neg v louisville vw

Download 0.64 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   ...   232

The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2023
send message

    Main page