Technology Assessment at the Congressional Research Service
The elimination of the congressional Office of Technology Assessment in 1995 was a self-inflicted wound that left Congress with diminished capacity to evaluate the challenging scientific and technological issues that continue to confront it. But the need for such an enterprise to support the legislative process has not gone away, and to a limited extent it is now being addressed by the Congressional Research Service (as well as the Government Accountability Office).
Last month, CRS completed a substantial 139 page report entitled Energy Storage for Power Grids and Electric Transportation: A Technology Assessment. At first glance, it looks like an informative piece of work.
“This report attempts to summarize the current state of knowledge regarding energy storage technologies for both electric power grid and electric vehicle applications. It is intended to serve as a reference for policymakers interested in understanding the range of technologies and applications associated with energy storage, comparing them, when possible, in a structured way to highlight key characteristics relevant to widespread use.”
Two other recent CRS reports discuss the implications of hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” the controversial technology for injecting fluids into underground wells to stimulate oil and gas production. See Hydraulic Fracturing and Safe Drinking Water Act Issues, April 10, 2012, and Hydraulic Fracturing: Chemical Disclosure Requirements, April 4, 2012.
Some other newly updated CRS reports that Congress has declined to make available to the public include the following.
Defining Homeland Security: Analysis and Congressional Considerations, April 3, 2012
Small Business Size Standards: A Historical Analysis of Contemporary Issues, April 10, 2012
Medicare Trigger, April 9, 2012
Western Sahara, April 5, 2012
Yemen: Background and U.S. Relations, April 10, 2012
As the United States continues nuclear modernization on all legs of its nuclear triad through the creation of new variants of warheads, missiles, and delivery platforms, examining the effects of nuclear weapons production on the public is ever more pressing.
“The first rule of government transformation is: there are a lot of rules. And there should be-ish. But we don’t need to wait for permission to rewrite them. Let’s go fix and build some things and show how it’s done.”
To better understand what might drive the way we live, learn, and work in 2050, we’re asking the community to share their expertise and thoughts about how key factors like research and development infrastructure and automation will shape the trajectory of the ecosystem.
Recognizing the power of the national transportation infrastructure expert community and its distributed expertise, ARPA-I took a different route that would instead bring the full collective brainpower to bear around appropriately ambitious ideas.