SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND TECHNOLOGY
Blowout of the Deepwater Horizon
In the weeks following the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig and subsequent spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the U.S. Department of the Interior asked the National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council to examine the possible causes of the accident and identify ways to prevent such a catastrophic event from happening again.
Interim Report on Causes of the Deepwater Horizon Oil Rig Blowout and Ways to Prevent Such Events says that the numerous technical and operational breakdowns that contributed to the accident suggest the lack of a suitable approach for managing the inherent risks, uncertainties, and dangers associated with deepwater drilling operations. The events also suggest insufficient checks and balances for considering well safety and for making critical decisions affecting the schedule for "temporarily abandoning" -- or sealing for later use -- the Macondo exploratory well. The report cites various questionable decisions, such as continuing abandonment operations at the site despite tests that indicated the cement put in place to temporarily seal the well was not an effective barrier to prevent gases from entering it. In addition, several clear failures in monitoring the well appear to have contributed to its blowout.
For its final report, due in 2011, the study committee will examine deepwater drilling regulatory and oversight practices and identify measures for preventing similar incidents in the future.
The study is being funded by the U.S. Department of the Interior.
Priorities for Astronomy and Astrophysics
For more than 50 years, the National Research Council's influential decadal surveys of astronomy and astrophysics have recommended the highest-priority research activities for these fields. The latest of these surveys, New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics, does the same, but for the first time it also takes into account factors such as risks in technical readiness, schedule, and cost. The recommended research activities are motivated by three science objectives: deepening understanding of how the first stars, galaxies, and black holes formed; locating the closest habitable Earth-like planets beyond the solar system for detailed study; and using astronomical measurements to unravel the mysteries of gravity and probe fundamental physics.
The survey identifies space- and ground-based research activities in three categories: large, midsize, and small. For large space activities costing more than $1 billion, an observatory called Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope (WFIRST) should be the top priority. The proposed telescope would help settle fundamental questions about the nature of dark energy and determine the likelihood of other Earth-like planets over a wide range of orbital parameters. At the top of the list for large, ground-based research activities with budgets that exceed $135 million is the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST), a wide-field optical survey telescope that would be used for diverse areas of study such as dark energy, supernovae, and time-variable phenomena.
The study was funded by NASA, the National Science Foundation, U.S. Department of Energy, and a contribution from the Vesto Slipher bequest to the Academies.
Staying on Budget at NASA
NASA's earth and space science missions routinely cost many millions of dollars. In a time of tight budgets, containing costs and staying on schedule are essential for the agency to ensure additional opportunities for future research. Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space Science Missions says that the agency should develop a broad, integrated strategy to control costs and maintain schedules as science missions are planned and designed.
Overly optimistic and unrealistic cost estimates, project and funding instability, problems with development of instruments and other spacecraft technology, and issues with launch services are the most common drivers of cost growth -- mission costs that exceed initial estimates, the report concludes. Problems that delay schedules also contribute to and magnify cost growth. A relatively small number of missions appear to be responsible for most cost overruns.
For budgeting and funding purposes, NASA, Congress, and the Office of Management and Budget should use as a baseline cost estimate that covers the life cycle of the mission from preliminary design review through completion of operations. The report identifies several steps NASA should take to improve its cost-estimate process, and says that NASA should pay particular attention to the cost and schedule of missions that will run $500 million or more. Cost growth in these already expensive missions has a potential to diminish NASA's earth and space science missions as a whole.
The National Research Council study was funded by NASA.
Toward Fuel-Efficient Vehicles
President Obama recently issued an executive order to tighten fuel efficiency standards for cars. Passenger vehicles will be required to meet a combined city and highway fuel economy average of 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016, and the standards may be tightened even more in the years beyond. Also, for the first time, standards are being developed to reduce fuel consumption of buses and trucks of all sizes.
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles reviewed technologies for passenger vehicles powered by three different types of engines: conventional spark-ignition, diesel, and hybrid. Using a 2007 base vehicle, the report estimates the potential fuel savings and costs to consumers of various combinations of commercially available technologies, including improvements to engines and transmissions and lighter materials that reduce vehicle mass.
The least expensive option to reduce fuel consumption of light-duty vehicles is to use modified conventional spark-ignition engines. This could reduce fuel consumption by almost 30 percent compared with a 2007 base medium-sized car and pick-up truck at an additional cost of $2,200 to the consumer. Even more fuel savings would result by replacing the same conventional 2007 engine with diesel or hybrid engines -- as much as 37 percent to 43 percent, respectively. Vehicle purchase costs would rise by approximately $6,000 for these options.
The report focuses on fuel consumption -- the amount of fuel consumed in a given driving distance -- because energy savings are directly related to the amount of fuel used. Vehicle stickers should provide consumers with fuel consumption data in addition to fuel economy information.
Technologies and Approaches to Reducing the Fuel Consumption of Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles estimates the improvements that various technologies and vehicle management approaches could achieve over the next decade in seven vehicle types. Using advanced diesel engines in tractor-trailers, for example, could lower their fuel consumption by up to 20 percent by 2020, and improved aerodynamics could yield an 11 percent reduction. Hybrid powertrains could lower the fuel consumption of vehicles that stop frequently, such as refuse trucks and transit buses, by as much 35 percent in the same time frame.
While the cost of making these improvements would be passed on to vehicle purchasers, the report notes that many of these suites of technologies would pay for themselves even at today's fuel prices. The report also provides advice on how fuel economy standards for these vehicles should be set. Regulating medium- and heavy-duty vehicles will be more complicated than passenger cars because of the variety of vehicles and their differing tasks and terrains, the report concludes, but the barriers are not insurmountable.
Both National Research Council studies were funded by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Engineering a Quieter Nation
Exposure to noise is a fact of life. At high levels, it can damage hearing, and at lower levels it can disrupt sleep patterns, interfere with communications, and even cause accidents. As the population of the United States increases, problems of noise are likely to become more pervasive and could lower our quality of life.
Technology for a Quieter America says the federal government should explore potential engineering solutions along with changes in policy to control negative effects of noise in the workplace, in communities, and at home. These include cost-benefit analysis of noise reduction, especially for road traffic; lower limits for noise exposure in industry; and "buy quiet" programs that promote the procurement of low-noise equipment. The report also calls for improved cooperation between industry and government agencies, particularly the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The U.S. should become more competitive in the production of low-noise technology, both to improve quality of life and to advance innovation. European manufacturers have gained an advantage in meeting demands for low-noise machinery and other products worldwide, in part due to stricter European Union regulations. The report calls for wider use of international standards for noise emissions.
The National Academy of Engineering study was funded by NAE member William W. Lang, the National Academy of Engineering Fund, and the Federal Highway Administration.
