457 research outputs found

    Scientific and Legal Perspectives on Science Generated for Regulatory Activities

    Get PDF
    This article originated from a conference that asked “Should scientific work conducted for purposes of advocacy before regulatory agencies or courts be judged by the same standards as science conducted for other purposes?” In the article, which focuses on the regulatory advocacy context, we argue that it can be and should be. First, we describe a set of standards and practices currently being used to judge the quality of scientific research and testing and explain how these standards and practices assist in judging the quality of research and testing regardless of why the work was conducted. These standards and practices include the federal Information Quality Act, federal Good Laboratory Practice standards, peer review, disclosure of funding sources, and transparency in research policies. The more that scientific information meets these standards and practices, the more likely it is to be of high quality, reliable, reproducible, and credible. We then explore legal issues that may be implicated in any effort to create special rules for science conducted specifically for a regulatory proceeding. Federal administrative law does not provide a basis for treating information in a given proceeding differently depending on its source or the reason for which it was generated. To the contrary, this law positively assures that interested persons have the right to offer their technical expertise toward the solution of regulatory problems. Any proposal to subject scientific information generated for the purpose of a regulatory proceeding to more demanding standards than other scientific information considered in that proceeding would clash with this law and would face significant administrative complexities. In a closely related example, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considered but abandoned a program to implement standards aimed at “external” information

    Towards sustainable agriculture: fossil-free ammonia

    Get PDF
    Citation: Pfromm, P. H. (2017). Towards sustainable agriculture: Fossil-free ammonia. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, 9(3), 034702. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4985090About 40% of our food would not exist without synthetic ammonia (NH3) for fertilization. Yet, NH3 production is energy intensive. About 2% of the world's commercial energy is consumed as fossil fuels for NH3 synthesis based on the century-old Haber-Bosch (H.-B.) process. The state of the art and the opportunities for reducing the fossil energy footprint of industrial H.-B. NH3 synthesis are discussed. It is shown that even a hypothetical utterly revolutionary H.-B. catalyst could not significantly reduce the energy demand of H.-B. NH3 as this is governed by hydrogen production. Renewable energy-enabled, fossil-free NH3 synthesis is then evaluated based on the exceptional and continuing cost decline of renewable electricity. H.-B. syngas (H2, N2) is assumed to be produced by electrolysis and cryogenic air separation, and then supplied to an existing H.-B. synthesis loop. Fossil-free NH3 could be produced for energy costs of about $232 per tonne NH3 without claiming any economic benefits for the avoidance of about 1.5 tonnes of CO2 released per tonne NH3 compared to the most efficient H.-B. implementations. Research into alternatives to the H.-B. process might be best targeted at emerging markets with currently little NH3 synthesis capacity but significant future population growth such as Africa. Reduced capital intensity, good scale-down economics, tolerance for process upsets and contamination, and intermittent operability are some desirable characteristics of NH3 synthesis in less developed markets, and for stranded resources. Processes that are fundamentally different from H.-B. may come to the fore under these specific boundary conditions

    Developing a conceptual framework for an evaluation system for the NIAID HIV/AIDS clinical trials networks

    Get PDF
    Globally, health research organizations are called upon to re-examine their policies and practices to more efficiently and effectively address current scientific and social needs, as well as increasing public demands for accountability

    The Choice between Formal and Informal Intellectual Property: A Review

    Get PDF
    We survey the economic literature, both theoretical and empirical, on the choice of intellectual property protection by firms. Our focus is on the trade-offs between using patents and disclosing versus the use of secrecy, although we also look briefly at the use of other means of formal intellectual property protection. (JEL D82, K11, O31, O34) </jats:p

    Federal R & D funding by budget function.

    No full text
    Latest issue consulted: Fiscal years 2001-03.Imprint varies: Washington, DC, 1978-80-1992-94 ; Arlington, VA, 1993-95-<2002>Distributed to depository libraries in microfiche.Title from cover.Each report covers actual funding of previous fiscal year plus funding estimates for current and next fiscal year.Issue for 1992-94 called also: Data update.Mode of access: Internet.Vols. for <1988-90-1989-91> issued by: National Science Foundation, Directorate for Scientific, Technological, and International Affairs, Division of Science Resources Studies, Government Studies Group; 199 -199 -1992-94 by: Science and Engineering Indicators Program, Division of Science Resources Studies, National Science Foundation; 1993-95-1999-2001 by: Division of Science Resources Studies, Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences, National Science Foundation; 2000-2002- <2001-03> by: Division of Science Resources Statistics, Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences, National Science Foundation.Issues for 1993-95-2002-04 also available online; later issues only available online
    corecore