Please find below the
Finalist Evaluation
Judges'' ratings
| • | Novelty: | |
| • | Feasibility: | |
| • | Impact: | |
| • | Presentation: |
Judges'' comments
Excellent proposal that presents an actionable technology solution. Congratulations!
Semi-Finalist Evaluation
Judges'' ratings
| • | Novelty: | |
| • | Feasibility: | |
| • | Impact: | |
| • | Presentation: |
Judges'' comments
This is an ambitious proposal, and one that we judges do wish to see advance to the semi-finalist round.
However, we have several suggestions for improvements that would improve the overall proposal:
1) It was an enormous challenge to go through this proposal as it gave far too much detail about how the technical process might work. What we read is more of a technology challenge to the international biofuel industry, along with a heavy focus on international climate negotiations. We feel that we read an original technology and international treaty-centric proposal that had been modified to fit within a U.S. government framework.
2) We would like to challenge the author to improve the accuracy of and better clarify the role that the US would play in international governance of an energy industry innovation such as this. Why is U.S. government action necessary and what opposition do actors in the U.S. have to overcome to act?
2) We also felt we lacked the context of feasibility or data to back up its impact on emissions reductions. It would also help to narrow the steps that need to be taken to specific actions that the federal government/federal agencies will need to take to facilitate MBECS
3) We'd also like to see a better attempt at identifying funding. An R&D need of $750 million is untenable for all but the most popular ideas, especially in a time of constrained budgets.
Good luck!
0comments
Share conversation:
Share via:
No comments have been posted.
