The environmental and economic sustainability of potential bioethanol from willow in the UK.

Life cycle assessment has been used to investigate the environmental and economic sustainability of a potential operation in the UK in which bioethanol is produced from the hydrolysis and subsequent fermentation of coppice willow. If the willow were grown on idle arable land in the UK, or, indeed, in Eastern Europe and imported as wood chips into the UK, it was found that savings of greenhouse gas emissions of 70-90%, when compared to fossil-derived gasoline on an energy basis, would be possible. The process would be energetically self-sufficient, as the co-products, e.g. lignin and unfermented sugars, could be used to produce the process heat and electricity, with surplus electricity being exported to the National Grid. Despite the environmental benefits, the economic viability is doubtful at present. However, the cost of production could be reduced significantly if the willow were altered by breeding to improve its suitability for hydrolysis and fermentation.

Exploring the impacts of the interactions between lifecycles and other dynamics that influence the development of technology-based industries

To address future uncertainty within strategy and innovation, managers extrapolate past patterns and trends into the future. Several disciplines make use of lifecycles, often with a linear sequence of identified phases, to make predictions and address likely uncertainties. Often the aggregation of several cycles is then interpreted as a new cycle - such as product lifecycles into an industry lifecycle. However, frequently different lifecycle terms - technology, product, industry - are used interchangeably and without clear definition. Within the interdisciplinary context of technology management, this juxtaposition of dynamics can create confusion, rather than clarification. This paper explores some typical dynamics associated with technology-based industries, using illustrative examples from the automotive industry. A wide range of dimensions are seen to influence the path of a technology-based industry, and stakeholders need to consider the likely causality and synchronicity of these. Some curves can simply present the aggregation of components; other dynamics incur time lags, rather than being superimposed, but still have a significant impact. To optimise alignment of the important dimensions within any development, and for future strategy decisions, understanding these interactions will be critical. © 2011 IEEE.

Evaluating the impacts of iteration on PD processes by transforming task network models into System Dynamics models

Iteration is unavoidable in the design process and should be incorporated when planning and managing projects in order to minimize surprises and reduce schedule distortions. However, planning and managing iteration is challenging because the relationships between its causes and effects are complex. Most approaches which use mathematical models to analyze the impact of iteration on the design process focus on a relatively small number of its causes and effects. Therefore, insights derived from these analytical models may not be robust under a broader consideration of potential influencing factors. In this article, we synthesize an explanatory framework which describes the network of causes and effects of iteration identified from the literature, and introduce an analytic approach which combines a task network modeling approach with System Dynamics simulation. Our approach models the network of causes and effects of iteration alongside the process architecture which is required to analyze the impact of iteration on design process performance. We show how this allows managers to assess the impact of changes to process architecture and to management levers which influence iterative behavior, accounting for the fact that these changes can occur simultaneously and can accumulate in non-linear ways. We also discuss how the insights resulting from this analysis can be visualized for easier consumption by project participants not familiar with simulation methods. Copyright © 2010 by ASME.