Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “cost benefit analysis”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1978

Low energy stage study. Volume 4: Cost benefits analysis and recommendations

The costs and benefits of existing/planned systems, new propulsion concepts, and adaptations of existing/planned systems (as supported by Orbiter interface requirements and operations requirements) were quantified. Scenarios of these propulsion approaches were established which accommodate the low energy regime as defined by the new low energy payload mission model. These scenarios were screened on a cost and then a benefits basis. A propulsion approach comprising existing/planned systems and a new propulsion concept were selected as the most cost effective approach to accommodate the model payloads and the low energy regime they represent. Key cost drivers and sensitivity trends were identified. All costs were derived in 1977 dollars.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1978

Outline of cost-benefit analysis and a case study

The methodology of cost-benefit analysis is reviewed and a case study involving solar cell technology is presented. Emphasis is placed on simplifying the technique in order to permit a technical person not trained in economics to undertake a cost-benefit study comparing alternative approaches to a given problem. The role of economic analysis in management decision making is discussed. In simplifying the methodology it was necessary to restrict the scope and applicability of this report. Additional considerations and constraints are outlined. Examples are worked out to demonstrate the principles. A computer program which performs the computational aspects appears in the appendix.

Kellizy, A.↗
NASA NTRS1976

Benefit cost analysis in federal agency R and D program formulation

Benefit-cost analysis is defined and some government investment criteria are discussed in relation to federal agency research and development program planning. The benefits of applied research and development are examined on the basis of a decision tree approach, and R and D project selection is considered, with attention paid to the multi-attribute problem.

Greenberg, J. S.↗
NASA NTRS1973

On the feasibility of benefit-cost analysis applied to remote sensing projects

The following step-wise procedure for making a benefit-cost analysis of using remote sensing techniques could be used either in the limited context of California water resources, or a context as broad as the making of integrated resource surveys of the entire earth resource complex on a statewide, regional, national, or global basis. (1) Survey all data collection efforts which can be accomplished by remote sensing techniques. (2) Carefully inspect the State of California budget and the Budget of the United States Government to find annual cost of data collection efforts. (3) Decide the extent to which remote sensing can obviate each of the collection efforts. (4) Sum the annual costs of all data collection which can be equivalently accomplished through remote sensing. (5) Decide what additional data could and would be collected through remote sensing. (6) Estimate the value of this information. It is not harmful to do a benefit-cost analysis so long as its severe limitations are recalled and it is supplemented with socio-economic impact studies.

Merewitz, L.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Principles of cost-benefit analysis for ERTS experiments, volumes 1 and 2

The basic elements of a cost-benefit study are discussed along with special considerations for ERTS experiments. Elements required for a complete economic analysis of ERTS are considered to be: statement of objectives, specification of assumptions, enumeration of system alternatives, benefit analysis, cost analysis nonefficiency considerations, and final system selection. A hypothetical cost-benefit example is presented with the assumed objective of an increase in remote sensing surveys of grazing lands to better utilize available forage to lower meat prices.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2016

Cost-Benefit Analysis for the Advanced Near Net Shape Technology (ANNST) Method for Fabricating Stiffened Cylinders

This cost-benefit analysis assesses the benefits of the Advanced Near Net Shape Technology (ANNST) manufacturing process for fabricating integrally stiffened cylinders. These preliminary, rough order-of-magnitude results report a 46 to 58 percent reduction in production costs and a 7-percent reduction in weight over the conventional metallic manufacturing technique used in this study for comparison. Production cost savings of 35 to 58 percent were reported over the composite manufacturing technique used in this study for comparison; however, the ANNST concept was heavier. In this study, the predicted return on investment of equipment required for the ANNST method was ten cryogenic tank barrels when compared with conventional metallic manufacturing. The ANNST method was compared with the conventional multi-piece metallic construction and composite processes for fabricating integrally stiffened cylinders. A case study compared these three alternatives for manufacturing a cylinder of specified geometry, with particular focus placed on production costs and process complexity, with cost analyses performed by the analogy and parametric methods. Furthermore, a scalability study was conducted for three tank diameters to assess the highest potential payoff of the ANNST process for manufacture of large-diameter cryogenic tanks. The analytical hierarchy process (AHP) was subsequently used with a group of selected subject matter experts to assess the value of the various benefits achieved by the ANNST method for potential stakeholders. The AHP study results revealed that decreased final cylinder mass and quality assurance were the most valued benefits of cylinder manufacturing methods, therefore emphasizing the relevance of the benefits achieved with the ANNST process for future projects.

Stoner, Mary Cecilia↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Cost Benefit Analysis of Space Debris Remediation

These slides provide a high-level summary of a cost-benefit analysis of approaches for debris remediation, which is defined as any action taken to reduce the risks posed by orbital debris by moving, removing, or reusing it. A better understanding of the near-term costs and benefits of the different approaches to remediation can support decision-making about R&D investment and policy creation in this area.

Tom Colvin↗
NASA NTRS1976

Cost-benefit analysis of space technology

A discussion of the implications and problems associated with the use of cost-benefit techniques is presented. Knowledge of these problems is useful in the structure of a decision making process. A methodology of cost-benefit analysis is presented for the evaluation of space technology. The use of the methodology is demonstrated with an evaluation of ion thrusters for north-south stationkeeping aboard geosynchronous communication satellites. A critique of the concept of consumers surplus for measuring benefits is also presented.

Hein, G. F.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Health Monitoring System Technology Assessments: Cost Benefits Analysis

The subject of sensor-based structural health monitoring is very diverse and encompasses a wide range of activities including initiatives and innovations involving the development of advanced sensor, signal processing, data analysis, and actuation and control technologies. In addition, it embraces the consideration of the availability of low-cost, high-quality contributing technologies, computational utilities, and hardware and software resources that enable the operational realization of robust health monitoring technologies. This report presents a detailed analysis of the cost benefit and other logistics and operational considerations associated with the implementation and utilization of sensor-based technologies for use in aerospace structure health monitoring. The scope of this volume is to assess the economic impact, from an end-user perspective, implementation health monitoring technologies on three structures. It specifically focuses on evaluating the impact on maintaining and supporting these structures with and without health monitoring capability.

Kent, Renee M.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Cost-Benefit Analysis for the Advanced Near Net Shape Technology (ANNST) Method for Fabricating Stiffened Cylinders

Low Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) and high levels of uncertainty make it challenging to develop cost estimates of new technologies in the R&D phase. It is however essential for NASA to understand the costs and benefits associated with novel concepts, in order to prioritize research investments and evaluate the potential for technology transfer and commercialization. This paper proposes a framework to perform a cost-benefit analysis of a technology in the R&D phase. This framework was developed and used to assess the Advanced Near Net Shape Technology (ANNST) manufacturing process for fabricating integrally stiffened cylinders. The ANNST method was compared with the conventional multi-piece metallic construction and composite processes for fabricating integrally stiffened cylinders. Following the definition of a case study for a cryogenic tank cylinder of specified geometry, data was gathered through interviews with Subject Matter Experts (SMEs), with particular focus placed on production costs and process complexity. This data served as the basis to produce process flowcharts and timelines, mass estimates, and rough order-of-magnitude cost and schedule estimates. The scalability of the results was subsequently investigated to understand the variability of the results based on tank size. Lastly, once costs and benefits were identified, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was used to assess the relative value of these achieved benefits for potential stakeholders. These preliminary, rough order-of-magnitude results predict a 46 to 58 percent reduction in production costs and a 7-percent reduction in weight over the conventional metallic manufacturing technique used in this study for comparison. Compared to the composite manufacturing technique, these results predict cost savings of 35 to 58 percent; however, the ANNST concept was heavier. In this study, the predicted return on investment of equipment required for the ANNST method was ten cryogenic tank barrels when compared with conventional metallic manufacturing. The AHP study results revealed that decreased final cylinder mass and improved quality assurance were the most valued benefits of cylinder manufacturing methods, therefore emphasizing the relevance of the benefits achieved with the ANNST process for future projects.

Ivanco, Marie L.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Cost-Benefit Analysis for Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes

NASA and Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) have similar missions and therefore similar facilities and structures in similar environments. The standard practice for protecting metallic substrates in atmospheric environments is the application of an applied coating system. The most common topcoats used in coating systems are polyurethanes that contain isocyanates. Isocyanates are classified as potential human carcinogens and are known to cause cancer in animals. The primary objective of this effort was to demonstrate and validate alternatives to aliphatic isocyanate polyurethanes resulting in one or more isocyanate-free coatings qualified for use at AFSPC and NASA installations participating in this project. This Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) quantifies the estimated capital and process costs of coating alternatives and cost savings relative to the current coatings. The estimates in this CBA are to be used for assessing the relative merits of the selected alternatives. The actual economic effects at any specific facility will depend on the alternative material or technology implemented, the number of actual applications converted, future workloads, and other factors . The participants initially considered eighteen (18) alternative coatings as described in the Potential Alternatives Report entitled Potential Alternatives Report for Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes, prepared by ITB. Of those, 8 alternatives were selected for testing in accordance with the Joint Test Protocol entitled Joint Test Protocol for Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes, and the Field Test Plan entitled Field Evaluations Test Plan for Validation of Alternatives 10 Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes, both of which were prepared by ITB. A joint Test Report entitled Joint Test Report for Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes, prepared by ITB, documents the results of the laboratory and field testing, as well as any test modifications made during the execution of the testing. The coatings selected for evaluation in this CBA are shown in the table below. Only one control coating system is considered in this analysis. These coatings were either downselected for Phase II or performed well enough to be included in the Qualified Products List in the NASA technical standard NASA-STD-5008, Protective Coating of Carbon Steel, Stainless Steel, and Aluminum on Launch Structures, Facilities, and Ground Support Equipment.

Lewis, Pattie↗
NASA NTRS2007

Cost-Benefit Analysis For Alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/ Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel

Stennis Space Center (SSC), Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) identified particulate emissions and waste generated from the depainting process of steel structures as hazardous materials to be eliminated or reduced. A Potential Alternatives Report, Potential Alternatives Report for Validation of Alternative Low Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel, provided a technical analyses of identified alternatives to the current coating removal processes, criteria used to select alternatives for further analysis, and a list of those alternatives recommended for testing. The initial coating removal alternatives list was compiled using literature searches and stakeholder recommendations. The involved project participants initially considered approximately 13 alternatives. In late 2003, core project members selected the following depainting processes to be further evaluated: (1) Plastic Blast Media-Quickstrip(R)-A. (2) Hard Abrasive-Steel-Magic(R). (3) Sponge Blasting-Sponge-Jet(R). (4) Liquid Nitrogen-NItroJet(R). (5) Mechanical Removal with Vacuum Attachment-DESCO and OCM Clean-Air (6) Laser Coating Removal Alternatives were tested in accordance with the Joint Test Protocol for Validation of Alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel, and the Field Evaluation Test Plan for Validation of Alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel. Results of the testing are documented in the Joint Test Report. This Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) focuses on the three alternatives (Quickstrip(R)-A, SteelMagic (R), and Sponge-Jet(R)) that were considered viable alternatives for large area operations based on the results of the field demonstration and lab testing. This CBA was created to help participants determine if implementation of the candidate alternatives is economically justified. Each of the alternatives examined reduced Environmental Activity (EA) Costs-those costs associated with complying with environmental regulations. One alternative, Steel-Magic(R), also showed reduced Direct Costs and reduced total costs.

Lewis, Pattie↗
NASA NTRS2008

Volume Averaged Height Integrated Radar Reflectivity (VAHIRR) Cost-Benefit Analysis

Lightning Launch Commit Criteria (LLCC) are designed to prevent space launch vehicles from flight through environments conducive to natural or triggered lightning and are used for all U.S. government and commercial launches at government and civilian ranges. They are maintained by a committee known as the NASA/USAF Lightning Advisory Panel (LAP). The previous LLCC for anvil cloud, meant to avoid triggered lightning, have been shown to be overly restrictive. Some of these rules have had such high safety margins that they prohibited flight under conditions that are now thought to be safe 90% of the time, leading to costly launch delays and scrubs. The LLCC for anvil clouds was upgraded in the summer of 2005 to incorporate results from the Airborne Field Mill (ABFM) experiment at the Eastern Range (ER). Numerous combinations of parameters were considered to develop the best correlation of operational weather observations to in-cloud electric fields capable of rocket triggered lightning in anvil clouds. The Volume Averaged Height Integrated Radar Reflectivity (VAHIRR) was the best metric found. Dr. Harry Koons of Aerospace Corporation conducted a risk analysis of the VAHIRR product. The results indicated that the LLCC based on the VAHIRR product would pose a negligible risk of flying through hazardous electric fields. Based on these findings, the Kennedy Space Center Weather Office is considering seeking funding for development of an automated VAHIRR algorithm for the new ER 45th Weather Squadron (45 WS) RadTec 431250 weather radar and Weather Surveillance Radar-1988 Doppler (WSR-88D) radars. Before developing an automated algorithm, the Applied Meteorology Unit (AMU) was tasked to determine the frequency with which VAHIRR would have allowed a launch to safely proceed during weather conditions otherwise deemed "red" by the Launch Weather Officer. To do this, the AMU manually calculated VAHIRR values based on candidate cases from past launches with known anvil cloud LLCC violations. An automated algorithm may be developed if the analyses from past launches show VAHIRR would have provided a significant cost benefit by allowing a launch to proceed. The 45 WS at the ER and 30th Weather Squadron (30 WS) at the Western Range provided the AMU with launch weather summaries from past launches that were impacted by LLCC. The 45 WS provided summaries from 14 launch attempts and the 30 WS fkom 5. The launch attempts occurred between December 2001 and June 2007. These summaries helped the AMU determine when the LLCC were "red" due to anvil cloud. The AMU collected WSR-88D radar reflectivity, cloud-to-ground lightning strikes, soundings and satellite imagery. The AMU used step-by-step instructions for calculating VAHIRR manually as provided by the 45 WS. These instructions were used for all of the candidate cases when anvil cloud caused an LLCC violation identified in the launch weather summaries. The AMU evaluated several software programs capable of visualizing radar data so that VAHIRR could be calculated and chose GR2Analyst from Gibson Ridge Software, LLC. Data availability and lack of detail from some launch weather summaries permitted analysis of six launch attempts from the ER and none from the WR. The AMU did not take into account whether or not other weather LCC violations were occurring at the same time as the anvil cloud LLCC since the goal of this task was to determine how often VAHIRR provided relief to the anvil cloud LLCC at any time during several previous launch attempts. Therefore, in the statistics presented in this report, it is possible that even though VAHIRR provided relief to the anvil cloud LLCC, other weather LCC could have been violated not permitting the launch to proceed. The results of this cost-benefit analysis indicated VAHIRR provided relief from the anvil cloud LLCC between about 15% and 18% of the time for varying 5-minute time periods based on summaries fkom six launch attempts and would have allowed launch to proceed that were otherwise "NO GO" due to the anvil cloud LLCC if the T-0 time occurred during the anvil cloud LLCC violations.

Bauman, William H., III↗
NASA NTRS1976

Cost benefit analysis of space communications technology: Volume 1: Executive summary

The questions of (1) whether or not NASA should support the further development of space communications technology, and, if so, (2) which technology's support should be given the highest priority are addressed. Insofar as the issues deal principally with resource allocation, an economics perspective is adopted. The resultant cost benefit methodology utilizes the net present value concept in three distinct analysis stages to evaluate and rank those technologies which pass a qualification test based upon probable (private sector) market failure. User-preference and technology state-of-the-art surveys were conducted (in 1975) to form a data base for the technology evaluation. The program encompassed near-future technologies in space communications earth stations and satellites, including the noncommunication subsystems of the satellite (station keeping, electrical power system, etc.). Results of the research program include confirmation of the applicability of the methodology as well as a list of space communications technologies ranked according to the estimated net present value of their support (development) by NASA.

Holland, L. D.↗
NASA NTRS1977

Cost benefit analysis of the transfer of NASA remote sensing technology to the state of Georgia

The author has identified the following significant results. First order benefits can generally be quantified, thus allowing quantitative comparisons of candidate land cover data systems. A meaningful dollar evaluation of LANDSAT can be made by a cost comparison with equally effective data systems. Users of LANDSAT data can be usefully categorized as performing three general functions: planning, permitting, and enforcing. The value of LANDSAT data to the State of Georgia is most sensitive to the parameters: discount rate, digitization cost, and photo acquisition cost. Under a constrained budget, LANDSAT could provide digitized land cover information roughly seven times more frequently than could otherwise be obtained. Thus on one hand, while the services derived from LANDSAT data in comparison to the baseline system has a positive net present value, on the other hand if the budget were constrained, more frequent information could be provided using the LANDSAT system than otherwise be obtained.

Zimmer, R. P.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Methodology Report of Cost Benefit Analysis of Space Based Solar Power

Space-based solar power (SBSP) is the concept of gathering power in space and transmitting it wirelessly to users on Earth or elsewhere in space. SBSP has seen renewed interest from governments, businesses, and universities for reasons including persistent operations in space, achieving carbon neutrality targets, and more. Several major government agencies in Europe, Asia, and the Americas have renewed their SBSP investigations, and hundreds of millions of dollars have been donated to universities to advance the technical state of the art. Given the renewed interest, this study will identify and update some key system parameters to current performance levels. This paper presents the methodology and approach to identify the fiscal and environmental costs and benefits of SBSP when compared to other sustainable and grid-scale energy sources. From these divergent angles the models evaluate fiscal and environmental impacts, identify the state of the most sensitive parameters of the designs, and seek to provide context to leadership on the relative value of pursuing SBSP related technologies.

Space-based solar power↗
NASA NTRS1978

The value of information as applied to the Landsat Follow-on benefit-cost analysis

An econometric model was run to compare the current forecasting system with a hypothetical (Landsat Follow-on) space-based system. The baseline current system was a hybrid of USDA SRS domestic forecasts and the best known foreign data. The space-based system improved upon the present Landsat by the higher spatial resolution capability of the thematic mapper. This satellite system is a major improvement for foreign forecasts but no better than SRS for domestic forecasts. The benefit analysis was concentrated on the use of Landsat Follow-on to forecast world wheat production. Results showed that it was possible to quantify the value of satellite information and that there are significant benefits in more timely and accurate crop condition information.

Wood, D. B.↗