Posted on

Life Cycle Analysis

Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is hard to do. If you Google it, the most popular links are dated. LCA is a good idea that is difficult to manage because supply chains are complex and conflicting criteria must be applied to select the best option in each link of the chain.

The goal of LCA is to compare the full range of environmental effects assignable to products and services by quantifying all inputs and outputs of material flows and assessing how these material flows affect the environment. This information is used to improve processes, support policy and provide a sound basis for informed decisions.

The term life cycle refers to the notion that a fair, holistic assessment requires the assessment of raw-material production, manufacture, distribution, use and disposal including all intervening transportation steps necessary or caused by the product’s existence.

The procedures of life cycle assessment (LCA) are part of the ISO 14000 environmental management standards: in ISO 14040:2006 and 14044:2006. (ISO 14044 replaced earlier versions of ISO 14041 to ISO 14043.) GHG product life cycle assessments can also comply with specifications such as PAS 2050 and the GHG Protocol Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard.[

To implement a sustainable supply chain companies must adopt a holistic systems-based approach in which all the supply chain partners’ activities are integrated throughout the four basic lifecycle stages: pre-manufacturing, manufacturing, use and post-use.

In 2009 Walmart announced its intention to create a new sustainable product index that would establish a single source of data for evaluating the sustainability of products. The company said it would provide initial funding for a consortium of universities, suppliers, retailers, government organizations and NGOs “to develop a global database of information on the lifecycle of products – from raw materials to disposal.”

LCA attempts replace monetary cost with an energy currency. Energy efficiency is only one consideration in deciding which alternative process to employ, and that it should not be elevated to the only criterion for determining environmental acceptability; for example, simple energy analysis does not take into account the renewability of energy flows or the toxicity of waste products; however, the life cycle assessment does help companies become more familiar with environmental properties and improve their environmental footprint.

The literature on life cycle assessment of energy technology has begun to reflect the interactions between the current electrical grid and future energy technology. Some papers have focused on energy life cycle, while others have focused on carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases. The essential critique given by these sources is that when considering energy technology, the growing nature of the power grid must be taken into consideration. If this is not done, a given class of energy technology may emit more CO2 over its lifetime than it mitigates.

A problem the energy analysis method cannot resolve is that different energy forms (heat, electricity, chemical energy etc.) have different quality and value even in natural sciences, as a consequence of the two main laws of thermodynamics. A thermodynamic measure of the quality of energy is exergy. According to the first law of thermodynamics, all energy inputs should be accounted with equal weight, whereas by the second law diverse energy forms should be accounted by different values.

A recent article by López  (López Isabel Noya, 2018) illustrates the complexities and methodologies of LCA.

References

Bredenberg, A. (2012, March 20). Lifecycle Assessment in Sustainable Supply Chains. Retrieved from ThomasNet.com: https://news.thomasnet.com/imt/2012/03/20/lifecycle-assessment-in-sustainable-supply-chains

Florian Suter, B. S. (2016, September 26). Life Cycle Impacts and Benefits of Wood along the Value Chain: The Case of Switzerland. Retrieved from Wiley Online Library: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jiec.12486/full

Gestring, I. (2017). Life Cycle and Supply Chain Management for Sustainable Bins. Retrieved from Science Direct: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.06.041

López Isabel Noya, V. V.-G. (2018, January). An environmental evaluation of food supply chain using life cycle assessment: A case study on gluten free biscuit products. Retrieved from Science Direct: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652617319777

United Nations Environment Programme. (2009). Life Cycle Management. United Nations Environment Programme. Dublin: United Nations Environment Programme. Retrieved from http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/DTIx1208xPA-LifeCycleApproach-Howbusinessusesit.pdf

Wharton. (2010, March 3). The Business Case for Lifecycle Analysis and Building a Green Supply Chain. Retrieved from Knowledge@Wharton: http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/the-business-case-for-lifecycle-analysis-and-building-a-green-supply-chain/

Wikipedia. (2018, January 22). Life-cycle assessment. Retrieved from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-cycle_assessment

 

 

Posted on

education system

“The world economy no longer pays for what people know but for what they can do with what they know.”
– Andreas Schleicher, OECD deputy director for education

[ted id=66]

Sir Ken Robinson makes an entertaining and profoundly moving case for creating an education system that nurtures (rather than undermines) creativity.

http://thelearningcurve.pearson.com/2014-report-summary/

East Asian nations continue to outperform others. South Korea tops the rankings, followed by Japan (2nd), Singapore (3rd) and Hong Kong (4th). All these countries’ education systems prize effort above inherited ‘smartness’, have clear learning outcomes and goalposts, and have a strong culture of accountability and engagement among a broad community of stakeholders.
Scandinavian countries, traditionally strong performers, are showing signs of losing their edge. Finland, the 2012 Index leader, has fallen to 5th place; and Sweden is down from 21st to 24th.
Notable improvers include Israel (up 12 places to 17th), Russia (up 7 places to 13th) and Poland (up four places to 10th).
Developing countries populate the lower half of the Index, with Indonesia again ranking last of the 40 nations covered, preceded by Mexico (39th) and Brazil (38th).

South Korea demonstrates the interplay between adult skills and the demands of employers. In South Korea young people score above average for numeracy and problem-solving skills, but are below average over the age of 30. According to Randall S Jones of the OECD, this skills decline is explained by many graduates “training for white-collar jobs that don’t exist”. This leads to a higher than average proportion failing to secure employment, and a quicker diminishing of their skills.

Developing countries must teach basic skills more effectively before they start to consider the wider skills agenda. There is little point in investing in pedagogies and technologies to foster 21st century skills, when the basics of numeracy and literacy aren’t in place.

Technology can provide new pathways into adult education, particularly in the developing world, but is no panacea. There is little evidence that technology alone helps individuals actually develop new skills.

Lifelong learning, even simple reading at home and number crunching at work, helps to slow the rate of age-related skill decline; but mainly for those who are highly skilled already. Teaching adults does very little to make up for a poor school system.

Making sure people are taught the right skills early in their childhood is much more effective than trying to improve skills in adulthood for people who were let down by their school system. But even when primary education is of a high quality, skills decline in adulthood if they are not used regularly.

In recent years it has become increasingly clear that basic reading, writing and arithmetic are not enough.
The importance of 21st century non-cognitive skills – broadly defined as abilities important for social interaction – is pronounced.

The OECD estimates that half of the economic growth in developed countries in the last decade came from improved skills.

Posted on

改善

Kaizen (改善?), Japanese for “improvement” or “change for the best”, refers to philosophy or practices that focus upon continuous improvement of processes in manufacturing, engineering, business management or any process. It has been applied in healthcare,[1]psychotherapy,[2] life-coaching, government, banking, and other industries. When used in the business sense and applied to the workplace, kaizen refers to activities that continually improve all functions, and involves all employees from the CEO to the assembly line workers. It also applies to processes, such as purchasing and logistics, that cross organizational boundaries into the supply chain.[3] By improving standardized activities and processes, kaizen aims to eliminate waste (seelean manufacturing). Kaizen was first implemented in several Japanese businesses after the Second World War, influenced in part by American business and quality management teachers who visited the country. It has since spread throughout the world[4] and is now being implemented in environments outside of business and productivity.