DOCSLIB.ORG

Small Launch Vehicles – a 2015 State of the Industry Survey

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Small Launch Vehicles – a 2015 State of the Industry Survey SSC15-II-7 Small Launch Vehicles – A 2015 State of the Industry Survey Carlos Niederstrasser, Warren Frick Orbital ATK, Inc. 45101 Warp Drive, Dulles, VA 20166 USA; 703-406-5000 [email protected] ABSTRACT The first half of the 2010’s has seen a dramatic increase in potential small launch vehicle contenders, defined as rockets capable of carrying at most 1000 kg to Low Earth Orbit. Spurred on by government programs such as FALCON, SALVO, RASCAL, SWORDS, NEXT, and VCLS and the rapid proliferation of CubeSats and nanosatellites, more than 15 different commercial, semi-commercial, and government entities worldwide are now working on new entrants of this class. This paper presents an overview of all of the small satellite launch systems under development today We will compare capabilities, stated mission goals, and cost and funding sources where available. We purposely avoid making any judgements on vehicle maturity as we do not have personal insight into the design and development of many of these new entrants. The nature of this survey limited us to publically available information – whether on the web, social media, traditional media, or published papers. The authors welcome any comments, feedback, or corrections. BACKGROUND opportunities available to them. For the past five years, there has been an increasing swell of interest in having The Tradition of Small Launch Vehicles new, lower cost, dedicated small launchers. This has Today’s intermediate and large launch vehicles, - Atlas led to a new wave of proposed small launch vehicles Delta, Falcon and Ariane 5 started their lives in a ranging in capability from a single 3U CubeSat smaller form. The Delta as Thor, growing from an (roughly 5 kg) to larger small launch vehicles reaching Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile with space launch a metric ton. capabilities a bit above a metric ton to the heaviest launch vehicle the US is currently flying. Atlas from an CONTENDERS InterContinental Ballistic Missile with staging engines New Entrants and a pressure stabilized tank to today’s launch vehicle that nearly equals the Delta IV heavy in capability. This survey’s goal was to identify active commercial Ariane V grew from the purpose-designed Ariane I. (or so designated) efforts in the field of small launch Similarly SpaceX’s Falcon 1 was quickly abandoned in vehicles. Before starting the survey we laid down some favor of the larger Falcon 9. Only the Scout stayed requirements for inclusion in the list. This was needed small – limited by its technology and eventually being both to limit the field and to provide some clear replaced by the Pegasus to fulfill NASA’s need for a definition of what an “active effort” entails. These small space launch vehicle. Pegasus has a capacity that requirements are neither scientifically rigorous nor can’t be easily expanded to exceed even a half metric complete; rather they are simply designed to serve as a ton. Athena joined Pegasus and Taurus, and several filtering mechanism. To be included in this list a versions of Minotaur came along to utilize excess launch vehicle under development must meet the government assets in meeting the small space launch following requirements: need, but the low launch rate destined these vehicles to high priced niche fillers. • Have a maximum capability to LEO of 1000 kg (definition of LEO left to the LV provider). The CubeSat Revolution • The effort must be for the development of an Just like ORBCOMM and Iridium led the commercial entire launch vehicle system (with the perception of a need for small launchers in the 1980s exception of carrier aircraft for air launch and 90s (and Pegasus development directly), CubeSats vehicles). are leading the demand now. As CubeSat capability increases, operators are no longer satisfied with the traditional rideshare and secondary payload Niederstrasser 1 29th Annual AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites • Mentioned through a web site, social media, Existing Systems traditional media, conference paper, press Today only two operational systems fit into the release, etc. sometime after 2010. category of “small launch vehicles” as defined by the 1000 kg to LEO limit. To give a baseline metric with • No specific indication that the effort has been the current state of mature small launch vehicles, the cancelled, closed, or otherwise disbanded. Orbital ATK Minotaur I and Pegasus XL will be used to contrast where the new entrants stand compared to • Have a stated goal of completing a fully what is currently available. To date all 11 of the operational space launch (orbital) vehicle. Minotaur I flights and the last 28 flights of Pegasus Funded concept or feasibility studies by have been successful. government agencies, patents for new launch methods, etc., do not qualify. Small Space Launch Systems The philosophy behind the guidelines to be considered For our market survey, Table 1 represents an “active” is based on the fact many of these efforts alphabetical roster of the name of the organization and require some amount of confidentiality and launch vehicles that the organization plans on offering secretiveness or may go dormant as a result of funding for commercial service. It also includes the published gaps. Therefore we do not consider the absence of new date of first launch (if available), and country(s) of information (in the last five years) to be indicative of origin. For simplicity sake, future references will only the project standing down. refer to the launch vehicle name, as each launch vehicle has individual characteristics, whereas some organizations have multiple launch vehicles. When an organization has multiple variants of a launch vehicle, only the smallest will be considered.. Table 1: Space Launch Systems Organization Launch Vehicle Name Country of Origin Current First Launch Date Boeing ALASA USA Q1 2016 Lockheed Martin Athena Ic USA After contract award zero2infinity Bloostar Spain CubeCab CubeCab USA July 2017 Scorpius Space Launch Company Demi-Sprite USA Rocket Lab Electron USA/New Zealand 2015 Firefly Firefly α USA 2017 Generation Orbit GO Launcher 2 USA Q4 2016 ARCA Space Corporation Haas 2C Rumania/USA Virgin Galactic LauncherOne USA Q4 2016 XCOR Aerospace Lynx Mark III USA 2017+ MISHAAL Aerospace M-OV USA Orbital ATK Minotaur I USA 2000 Garvey Spacecraft Corporation Nanosat Launch Vehicle USA Interorbital Systems NEPTUNE N5 USA Q4 2015 Open Space Orbital Neutrino I Canada Orbital ATK Pegasus XL USA 1990 Celestia Aerospace Sagitarius Space Arrow Spain Q1 2016 Ventions SALVO USA 2015 Swiss Space Systems SOAR Switzerland 2017 U. Hawaii, Aerojet Rocketdyne, Sandya Super Strypi USA October 2015 Lin Industrial Таймыр Russia MARKET SURVEY parameters. Not all companies will be listed in all We conducted a market survey to identify a variety of tables, as some information may not be published. performance, design, and financial parameters. Each of the following sections presents a subset of these Niederstrasser 2 29th Annual AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites Launch Method/Location oxide and acetylene. A key requirement of the ALASA To start the characterization of the launch system, we program is that the carrier aircraft must be unmodified will start with the fundamental base – how/where the (or still able to fulfill its original mission). Unique to space launch system starts its journey to space. For Boeing’s design is a tractor propulsion system for stage many of the launch systems, this has not been 1, allowing both stages to share engines, thereby designated at this time – simply the launch mode will reducing cost. The rocket uses four canted fixed be designated – ground, air, or water. Table 2 lists nozzles on each stage, achieving attitude control details of how the space launch system starts its journey through differential thrust. upward. Athena Ic – The latest generation of Lockheed Martin’s Athena I vehicle utilizes two solid stages, a Table 2: Launch Method and Location liquid third stage (that can be replaced with an optional Launch vehicle Launch Launch Location dual mode bipropellant third stage). The Athena Ic Name Method ALASA Air Global capitalizes on previous Athena designs and Lockheed Athena Ic Land 4 US Spaceports Martin’s long history of experience in launch vehicles, Bloostar Balloon Int'l Water only upgrading its obsolete second stage solid motor CubeCab Air Int'l Water with a currently available solid motor. Demi-Sprite Land Electron Land Birdling’s Flat, NZ Bloostar – Zero2Infinty offers a unique launch vehicle Firefly α Land Kodiak preferred design that is lofted via high altitude balloon before GO Launcher 2 Air USA, PR, UK Haas 2C Land being air launched. Since the powered flight occurs in LauncherOne Air Int'l Water the upper atmosphere where atmospheric density is Lynx Mark III Land/Suborbital KSC or Mojave negligible, the Bloostar utilizes three concentric, M-OV Land toroidal stages rather than traditional elongated, in-line Minotaur I Land VAFB, KLC, WFF, stages. All stages utilize liquid cryogenic propellants CCAFS Nanosat Launch Land and identical engines – varying the number of engines Vehicle per the stage requirements. NEPTUNE N5 Land Intl’ Water Neutrino I Land CubeCab – CubeCab’s small launch vehicle is Pegasus XL Air Int’l Water – Multiple optimized for launching a 3U CubeSat. The CubeCab locations demonstrated Sagitarius Space Air Int'l Water is launched from an F-104 fighter yet. Details on the Arrow rocket design are not publically available. SALVO Air CCAFS SOAR Air/Suborbital Demi-Sprite – The Scorpius Space Launch Company Super Strypi Land Hawaii (sister company of Microcosm) is developing the Demi- Таймыр Land Sprite as part of its line of modular Scorpius vehicles. The Demi-Sprite is one of the smallest vehicles in the Vehicle Technology line. The vehicle uses six identical cores for the first Many of the new entrant launch vehicles have a stage with a seventh core as a second stage.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ariane-5 Completes Flawless Third Test Flight
    r bulletin 96 — november 1998 Ariane-5 Completes Flawless Third Test Flight A launch-readiness review conducted on Friday engine shut down and Maqsat-3 was 16 and Monday 19 October had given the go- successfully injected into GTO. The orbital ahead for the final countdown for a launch just parameters at that point were: two days later within a 90-minute launch Perigee: 1027 km, compared with the window between 13:00 to 14:30 Kourou time. 1028 ± 3 km predicted The launcher’s roll-out from the Final Assembly Apogee: 35 863 km, compared with the Building to the Launch Zone was therefore 35 898 ± 200 km predicted scheduled for Tuesday 20 October at 09:30 Inclination: 6.999 deg, compared with the Kourou time. 6.998 ± 0.05 deg predicted. On 21 October, Europe reconfirmed its lead in providing space Speaking in Kourou immediately after the flight, transportation systems for the 21st Century. Ariane-5, on its third Fredrik Engström, ESA’s Director of Launchers qualification flight, left no doubts as to its ability to deliver payloads and the Ariane-503 Flight Director, confirmed reliably and accurately to Geostationary Transfer Orbit (GTO). The new that: “The third Ariane-5 flight has been a heavy-lift launcher lifted off in glorious sunshine from the Guiana complete success. It qualifies Europe’s new Space Centre, Europe’s spaceport in Kourou, French Guiana, at heavy-lift launcher and vindicates the 13:37:21 local time (16:37:21 UT). technological options chosen by the European Space Agency.” This third Ariane-5 test flight was intended ESA’s Director
    [Show full text]
  • Call for M5 Missions
    ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use M5 Call - Technical Annex Prepared by SCI-F Reference ESA-SCI-F-ESTEC-TN-2016-002 Issue 1 Revision 0 Date of Issue 25/04/2016 Status Issued Document Type Distribution ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use Table of contents: 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Scope of document ................................................................................................................................................................ 3 1.2 Reference documents .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 List of acronyms ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3 2 General Guidelines ................................................................................................................ 6 3 Analysis of some potential mission profiles ........................................................................... 7 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................. 7 3.2 Current European launchers ...........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Launch and Deployment Analysis for a Small, MEO, Technology Demonstration Satellite
    46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit AIAA 2008-1131 7 – 10 January 20006, Reno, Nevada Launch and Deployment Analysis for a Small, MEO, Technology Demonstration Satellite Stephen A. Whitmore* and Tyson K. Smith† Utah State University, Logan, UT, 84322-4130 A trade study investigating the economics, mass budget, and concept of operations for delivery of a small technology-demonstration satellite to a medium-altitude earth orbit is presented. The mission requires payload deployment at a 19,000 km orbit altitude and an inclination of 55o. Because the payload is a technology demonstrator and not part of an operational mission, launch and deployment costs are a paramount consideration. The payload includes classified technologies; consequently a USA licensed launch system is mandated. A preliminary trade analysis is performed where all available options for FAA-licensed US launch systems are considered. The preliminary trade study selects the Orbital Sciences Minotaur V launch vehicle, derived from the decommissioned Peacekeeper missile system, as the most favorable option for payload delivery. To meet mission objectives the Minotaur V configuration is modified, replacing the baseline 5th stage ATK-37FM motor with the significantly smaller ATK Star 27. The proposed design change enables payload delivery to the required orbit without using a 6th stage kick motor. End-to-end mass budgets are calculated, and a concept of operations is presented. Monte-Carlo simulations are used to characterize the expected accuracy of the final orbit.
    [Show full text]
  • By Tamman Montanaro
    4 Reusable First Stage Rockets y1 = 15.338 m m1 = 2.047 x 10 kg 5 y2 = 5.115 m m2 = 1.613 x 10 kg By Tamman Montanaro What is the moment of inertia? What is the force required from the cold gas thrusters if we assume constancy. Figure 1. Robbert Goddard’s design of the first ever rocket to fly in 1926. Source: George Edward Pendray. The moment of inertia of a solid disk: rper The Rocket Formula Now lets stack a bunch of these solid disk on each other: Length = l Divide by dt Figure 2: Flight path for the Falcon 9; After separation, the first stage orientates itself and prepares itself for landing. Source: SpaceX If we do the same for the hollow cylinder, we get a moment of inertia Launch of: Specific impulse for a rocket: How much mass is lost? What is the mass loss? What is the moment of inertia about the center of mass for these two objects? Divide by m Figure 3: Falcon 9 first stage after landing on drone barge. Source: SpaceX nd On December 22 2015, the Falcon 9 Orbcomm-2 What is the constant force required for its journey halfway (assuming first stage lands successfully. This is the first ever orbital- that the force required to flip it 90o is the equal and opposite to class rocket landing. From the video and flight logs, we Flip Maneuver stabilize the flip). can gather specifications about the first stage. ⃑ How much time does it take for the first stage to descend? We assume this is the time it takes � Flight Specifications for the first stage to reorientate itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Support to Commercial Space Launch
    The Space Congress® Proceedings 2019 (46th) Light the Fire Jun 4th, 3:30 PM Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Support to Commercial Space Launch Thomas Ste. Marie Vice Commander, 45th Space Wing Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings Scholarly Commons Citation Ste. Marie, Thomas, "Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Support to Commercial Space Launch" (2019). The Space Congress® Proceedings. 31. https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings/proceedings-2019-46th/presentations/31 This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Space Congress® Proceedings by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Support to Commercial Space Launch Colonel Thomas Ste. Marie Vice Commander, 45th Space Wing CCAFS Launch Customers: 2013 Complex 41: ULA Atlas V (CST-100) Complex 40: SpaceX Falcon 9 Complex 37: ULA Delta IV; Delta IV Heavy Complex 46: Space Florida, Navy* Skid Strip: NGIS Pegasus Atlantic Ocean: Navy Trident II* Black text – current programs; Blue text – in work; * – sub-orbital CCAFS Launch Customers: 2013 Complex 39B: NASA SLS Complex 41: ULA Atlas V (CST-100) Complex 40: SpaceX Falcon 9 Complex 37: ULA Delta IV; Delta IV Heavy NASA Space Launch System Launch Complex 39B February 4, 2013 Complex 46: Space Florida, Navy* Skid Strip: NGIS Pegasus Atlantic Ocean: Navy Trident II* Black text – current programs;
    [Show full text]
  • This Boeing Team's Skills at Producing Delta IV Rocket Fairings Helped
    t’s usually the tail end of the rocket that gets all the early atten- other work. But they’d jump at the chance to work together again. tion, providing an impressive fiery display as the spacecraft is Their story is one of challenges and solutions. And they attribute hurled into orbit. But mission success also depends on what’s their success to Lean+ practices and good old-fashioned teamwork. Ion top of the rocket: a piece of metal called the payload fairing “The team took it upon themselves to make an excellent that protects the rocket’s cargo during the sometimes brutal ride product,” said program manager Thomas Fung. “We had parts to orbital speed. issues and tool problems, but the guys really stepped up and took “There’s no room for error,” said Tracy Allen, Boeing’s manu- pride and worked through the issues.” facturing production manager for a Huntington Beach, Calif., team The aluminum fairing team went through a major transition that made fairings for the Delta IV. The fairing not only protects the when Boeing merged its Delta Program with Lockheed Martin’s payload from launch to orbit but also must jettison properly for Atlas Program to form United Launch Alliance in 2006. deployment of the satellite or spacecraft. “There were a lot of process changes in the transition phase Allen and his colleagues built the 65-foot-long (20-meter-long) because we were working with a new company,” Fung said. “We aluminum isogrid fairings for the Delta IV heavy-lift launch vehicle. had part shortages because of vendor issues, and that caused The design was based on 41 similar fairings Boeing made for the an impact to the schedule.
    [Show full text]
  • Douglas Missile & Space Systems Division
    ·, THE THOR HISTORY. MAY 1963 DOUGLAS REPORT SM-41860 APPROVED BY: W.H.. HOOPER CHIEF, THOR SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AEROSPACE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING DOUGLAS MISSILE & SPACE SYSTEMS DIVISION ABSTRACT This history is intended as a quick orientation source and as n ready-reference for review of the Thor and its sys­ tems. The report briefly states the development of Thor, sur'lli-:arizes and chronicles Thor missile and booster launch­ inGs, provides illustrations and descriptions of the vehicle systcn1s, relates their genealogy, explains sane of the per­ fon:iance capabilities of the Thor and Thor-based vehicles used, and focuses attention to the exploration of space by Douelas Aircraf't Company, Inc. (DAC). iii PREFACE The purpose of The Thor History is to survey the launch record of the Thor Weapon, Special Weapon, and Space Systems; give a systematic account of the major events; and review Thor's participation in the military and space programs of this nation. The period covered is from December 27, 1955, the date of the first contract award, through May, 1963. V �LE OF CONTENTS Page Contract'Award . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 Background • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • l Basic Or�anization and Objectives • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 Basic Developmenta� Philosophy . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2 Early Research and Development Launches • • • ·• • • • • • • • • • 4 Transition to ICBM with Space Capabilities--Multi-Stage Vehicles . 6 Initial Lunar and Space Probes ••••••• • • • • • • •
    [Show full text]
  • 6. the INTELSAT 17 Satellite
    TWO COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITES READY FOR LAUNCH Arianespace will orbit two communications satellite on its fifth launch of the year: INTELSAT 17 for the international satellite operator Intelsat, and HYLAS 1 for the European operator Avanti Communications. The choice of Arianespace by leading space communications operators and manufacturers is clear international recognition of the company’s excellence in launch services. Based on its proven reliability and availability, Arianespace continues to confirm its position as the world’s benchmark launch system. Ariane 5 is the only commercial satellite launcher now on the market capable of simultaneously launching two payloads. Arianespace and Intelsat have built up a long-standing relationship based on mutual trust. Since 1983, Arianespace has launched 48 satellites for Intelsat. Positioned at 66 degrees East, INTELSAT 17 will deliver a wide range of communication services for Europe, the Middle East, Russia and Asia. Built by Space Systems/Loral of the United States, this powerful satellite will weigh 5,540 kg at launch. It will also enable Intelsat to expand its successful Asian video distrubution neighborhood. INTELSAT 17 will replace INTELSAT 702. HYLAS 1 is Avanti Communications’ first satellite. A new European satellite operator, Avanti Communications also chose Arianespace to orbit its HYLAS 2 satellite, scheduled for launch in the first half of 2012. HYLAS 1 was built by an industrial consortium formed by EADS Astrium and the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), using a I-2K platform. Fitted with Ka-band and Ku-band transponders, the satellite will be positioned at 33.5 degrees West, and will be the first European satellite to offer high-speed broadband services across all of Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts: Vehicles, Technologies and Spaceports
    Commercial Space Transportation 2006 Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts: Vehicles, Technologies and Spaceports January 2006 HQ003606.INDD 2006 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts About FAA/AST About the Office of Commercial Space Transportation The Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA/AST) licenses and regulates U.S. commercial space launch and reentry activity, as well as the operation of non-federal launch and reentry sites, as authorized by Executive Order 12465 and Title 49 United States Code, Subtitle IX, Chapter 701 (formerly the Commercial Space Launch Act). FAA/AST’s mission is to ensure public health and safety and the safety of property while protecting the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States during commercial launch and reentry operations. In addition, FAA/AST is directed to encour- age, facilitate, and promote commercial space launches and reentries. Additional information concerning commercial space transportation can be found on FAA/AST’s web site at http://ast.faa.gov. Federal Aviation Administration Office of Commercial Space Transportation i About FAA/AST 2006 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts NOTICE Use of trade names or names of manufacturers in this document does not constitute an official endorsement of such products or manufacturers, either expressed or implied, by the Federal Aviation Administration. ii Federal Aviation Administration Office of Commercial Space Transportation 2006 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts Contents Table of Contents Introduction . .1 Significant 2005 Events . .4 Space Competitions . .6 Expendable Launch Vehicles . .9 Current Expendable Launch Vehicle Systems . .9 Atlas 5 - Lockheed Martin Corporation .
    [Show full text]
  • L AUNCH SYSTEMS Databk7 Collected.Book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM Databk7 Collected.Book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM
    databk7_collected.book Page 17 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS databk7_collected.book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM databk7_collected.book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS Introduction Launch systems provide access to space, necessary for the majority of NASA’s activities. During the decade from 1989–1998, NASA used two types of launch systems, one consisting of several families of expendable launch vehicles (ELV) and the second consisting of the world’s only partially reusable launch system—the Space Shuttle. A significant challenge NASA faced during the decade was the development of technologies needed to design and implement a new reusable launch system that would prove less expensive than the Shuttle. Although some attempts seemed promising, none succeeded. This chapter addresses most subjects relating to access to space and space transportation. It discusses and describes ELVs, the Space Shuttle in its launch vehicle function, and NASA’s attempts to develop new launch systems. Tables relating to each launch vehicle’s characteristics are included. The other functions of the Space Shuttle—as a scientific laboratory, staging area for repair missions, and a prime element of the Space Station program—are discussed in the next chapter, Human Spaceflight. This chapter also provides a brief review of launch systems in the past decade, an overview of policy relating to launch systems, a summary of the management of NASA’s launch systems programs, and tables of funding data. The Last Decade Reviewed (1979–1988) From 1979 through 1988, NASA used families of ELVs that had seen service during the previous decade.
    [Show full text]
  • Privacy Statement Link at the Bottom of Aerojet Rocketdyne Websites
    Privacy Notice Aerojet Rocketdyne – For external use Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 3 Why we collect personal information? ............................................................................. 3 How we collect personal information? ............................................................................. 3 How we use information we collect? ............................................................................... 4 How we share your information? .................................................................................... 4 How we protect your personal information? ..................................................................... 4 How we collect consent? .............................................................................................. 4 How we provide you access? ........................................................................................ 4 How to contact Aerojet Rocketdyne privacy?.................................................................... 5 Collection of personal information .................................................................................. 5 Disclosure of personal information.................................................................................. 5 Sale of personal information .......................................................................................... 6 Children’s online privacy ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Evidence Review – Environmental Innovation Prizes for Development
    Evidence Review – Environmental Innovation Prizes for Development DEW Point Enquiry No. A0405 A Report by Bryony Everett With support from Chris Barnett and Radha Verma Peer Review by William Masters July 2011 Acknowledgements We would like to thank all the interviewees detailed in Annex 1 for their time and support in providing us with their insights and information, without which we would not have been able to produce this report. Particular thanks go to Erika, Jaison and Will. Disclaimer This report is commissioned under DEW Point, the DFID Resource Centre for Environment, Water and Sanitation, which is managed by a consortium of companies led by Harewelle International Limited1. Although the report is commissioned by DFID, the views expressed in the report are entirely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent DFID’s own views or policies, or those of DEW Point. Comments and discussion on items related to content and opinion should be addressed to the author, via the “Contact and correspondence” address e-mail or website, as indicated in the control document above. 1 Consortium comprises Harewelle International Limited, DD International, Practical Action Consulting, Cranfield University and AEA Energy and Environment Table of Contents Evidence Review – Environmental Innovation Prizes for Development Summary .................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]