Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Portfolio”

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.

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

At least 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Modeling and Optimizing Pumped Storage in a Multi-stage Large Scale Electricity Market under Portfolio Evolution

To leverage the fast-ramping capability of resources to provide great value to the grid, electricity system operators such as the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) continue to evolve their approaches for integrating energy storage resources, including pumpedstorage hydro (PSH), into the electricity markets. However, new challenges arise in modeling and optimizing these energy-limited resources across multiple market clearing processes and planning studies with uncertainties and imperfect information. For instance, current market practices of PSH owners specifying pumping/generating hours can result in sub-optimal generation dispatch. Letting grid operators optimize PSH with the consideration of multiple operating modes and energy limitation constraints can potentially bring economic benefits to both the system and the PSH owners. However, in multi-stage clearing process of electricity markets, utilizing the PSH flexibility to deal with realized uncertainties can cause deviation in the multi-stage scheduling processes. The resulting financial risks from the schedule deviation may not be acceptable to PSH owners. In addition, to effectively utilize this energy limited resource, the state of charge (SOC) constraints of PSH needs to be continuously optimized and the marginal cost of deviation need to reflect the expected cost to purchase or sell energy at future times to compensate for deviations. This project aims to develop a prototype enhanced PSH model and improved price signals in the multi-stage market clearing process with proper consideration of the unique characteristics of PSH, in order to better align underlying PSH capabilities with evolving grid needs, particularly including the needs for more frequent and larger cycling to manage variability and uncertainty from renewables.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

An Evaluation of the Patent Portfolio Funded by the U.S. Department of Energy's Critical Materials Innovation Hub

This report describes the results of an analysis of critical materials research funded by the U.S. Department of Energy Critical Materials Innovation Hub (CMI Hub, formerly the Critical Materials Institute). The purpose of the report is to assess various characteristics of patents awarded for CMI Hub-funded innovations in critical materials technology and to determine the extent to which CMI Hub-funded research has influenced subsequent technological developments both within and beyond critical materials.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
NASA NTRS2003

Reaching Mars: multi-criteria R&D portfolio selection for Mars exploration technology planning

The exploration of Mars has been the focus of increasing scientific interest about the planet and its relationship to Earth. A multi-criteria decision-making approach was developed to address the question, Given a Mars program composed of mission concepts dependent on a variety of alternative technology development programs, which combination of technologies would enable missions to maximize science return under a constrained budget?.

R&D technology planning mathematical programming↗
NASA NTRS2006

Analysis of System-Wide Investment in the National Airspace System: A Portfolio Analytical Framework and an Example

In this paper, the authors review the FAA s current program investments and lay out a preliminary analytical framework to undertake projects that may address some of the noted deficiencies. By drawing upon the well developed theories from corporate finance, an analytical framework is offered that can be used for choosing FAA s investments taking into account risk, expected returns and inherent dependencies across NAS programs. The framework can be expanded into taking multiple assets and realistic values for parameters in drawing an efficient risk-return frontier for the entire FAA investment programs.

Bhadra, Dipasis↗
NASA NTRS2004

Toward a Systematic Approach for Selection of NASA Technology Portfolios

There is an important need for a consistent analytical foundation supporting the selection and monitoring of R&D tasks that support new system concepts that enable future NASA missions. This capability should be applicable at various degrees of abstraction, depending upon whether one is interested in formulation, development, or operations. It should also be applicable to a single project, a program comprised of a group of projects, an enterprise typically including multiple programs, and the overall agency itself. Emphasis here is on technology selection and new initiatives, but the same approach can be generalized to other applications, dealing, for example, with new system architectures, risk reduction, and task allocation among humans and machines. The purpose of this paper is to describe one such approach, which is in its early stages of implementation within NASA programs, and to discuss several illustrative examples.

return on investment↗
NASA NTRS2015

Technology Alignment and Portfolio Prioritization (TAPP): Advanced Methods in Strategic Analysis, Technology Forecasting and Long Term Planning for Human Exploration and Operations, Advanced Exploration Systems and Advanced Concepts

The Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) at NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center is expanding its current technology assessment methodologies. ACO is developing a framework called TAPP that uses a variety of methods, such as association mining and rule learning from data mining, structure development using a Technological Innovation System (TIS), and social network modeling to measure structural relationships. The role of ACO is to 1) produce a broad spectrum of ideas and alternatives for a variety of NASA's missions, 2) determine mission architecture feasibility and appropriateness to NASA's strategic plans, and 3) define a project in enough detail to establish an initial baseline capable of meeting mission objectives ACO's role supports the decision­-making process associated with the maturation of concepts for traveling through, living in, and understanding space. ACO performs concept studies and technology assessments to determine the degree of alignment between mission objectives and new technologies. The first step in technology assessment is to identify the current technology maturity in terms of a technology readiness level (TRL). The second step is to determine the difficulty associated with advancing a technology from one state to the next state. NASA has used TRLs since 1970 and ACO formalized them in 1995. The DoD, ESA, Oil & Gas, and DoE have adopted TRLs as a means to assess technology maturity. However, "with the emergence of more complex systems and system of systems, it has been increasingly recognized that TRL assessments have limitations, especially when considering [the] integration of complex systems." When performing the second step in a technology assessment, NASA requires that an Advancement Degree of Difficulty (AD2) method be utilized. NASA has used and developed or used a variety of methods to perform this step: Expert Opinion or Delphi Approach, Value Engineering or Value Stream, Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), Technique for the Order of Prioritization by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), and other multi­‐criteria decision-making methods. These methods can be labor-intensive, often contain cognitive or parochial bias, and do not consider the competing prioritization between mission architectures. Strategic Decision-Making (SDM) processes cannot be properly understood unless the context of the technology is understood. This makes assessing technological change particularly challenging due to the relationships "between incumbent technology and the incumbent (innovation) system in relation to the emerging technology and the emerging innovation system." The central idea in technology dynamics is to consider all activities that contribute to the development, diffusion, and use of innovations as system functions. Bergek defines system functions within a TIS to address what is actually happening and has a direct influence on the ultimate performance of the system and technology development. ACO uses similar metrics and is expanding these metrics to account for the structure and context of the technology. At NASA technology and strategy is strongly interrelated. NASA's Strategic Space Technology Investment Plan (SSTIP) prioritizes those technologies essential to the pursuit of NASA's missions and national interests. The SSTIP is strongly coupled with NASA's Technology Roadmaps to provide investment guidance during the next four years, within a twenty-year horizon. This paper discusses the methods ACO is currently developing to better perform technology assessments while taking into consideration Strategic Alignment, Technology Forecasting, and Long Term Planning.

Funaro, Gregory V.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Cross-Cutting Risk Framework: Mining Data for Common Risks Across the Portfolio

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) defines risk management as an integrated framework, combining risk-informed decision making and continuous risk management to foster forward-thinking and decision making from an integrated risk perspective. Therefore, decision makers must have access to risks outside of their own project to gain the knowledge that provides the integrated risk perspective. Through the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Flight Projects Directorate (FPD) Business Change Initiative (BCI), risks were integrated into one repository to facilitate access to risk data between projects. With the centralized repository, communications between the FPD, project managers, and risk managers improved and GSFC created the cross-cutting risk framework (CCRF) team. The creation of the consolidated risk repository, in parallel with the initiation of monthly FPD risk managers and risk governance board meetings, are now providing a complete risk management picture spanning the entire directorate. This paper will describe the challenges, methodologies, tools, and techniques used to develop the CCRF, and the lessons learned as the team collectively worked to identify risks that FPD programs projects had in common, both past and present.

risk-informed decision making↗