On the issuing policies for perishable items such as red blood cells and platelets in blood service

Red blood cells (RBCs) and platelets are examples of perishable items with a fixed shelf life. Recent studies show that transfusing fresh RBCs may lead to an improvement of patient outcomes. In addition, to better manage their inventory, hospitals prefer to receive fresh RBCs and platelets. Therefore, as well as minimizing outdates and shortages, reducing the average age of issue is a key performance criterion for blood banks. The issuing policy in a perishable inventory system has a substantial impact on the age of issue and outdate and shortage rates. Although several studies have compared the last in first out (LIFO) and the first in first out (FIFO) policies for perishable products, only a few studies have considered the situation of blood banks where replenishment is not controllable. In this study, we examine various issuing policies for a perishable inventory system with uncontrollable replenishment, and outline a modified FIFO policy. Our proposed modified FIFO policy partitions the inventory into two parts such that the first part holds the items with age less than a threshold. It then applies the FIFO policy in each part and the LIFO policy between the parts. We present two approximation techniques to estimate the average age of issue, the average time between successive outdates and the average time between successive shortages of the modified FIFO policy. Our analysis shows in several cases that where the objective function is a single economic function, or it is formulated as a multiobjective model, the modified FIFO policy outperforms the FIFO and LIFO policies.

System boundary selection in life-cycle inventories using hybrid approaches

Life-cycle assessment (LCA) is a method for evaluating the environmental impacts of products holistically, including direct and supply chain impacts. The current LCA methodologies and the standards by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) impose practical difficulties for drawing system boundaries; decisions on inclusion or exclusion of processes in an analysis (the cutoff criteria) are typically not made on a scientific basis. In particular, the requirement of deciding which processes could be excluded from the inventory can be rather difficult to meet because many excluded processes have often never been assessed by the practitioner, and therefore, their negligibility cannot be guaranteed. LCA studies utilizing economic input−output analysis have shown that, in practice, excluded processes can contribute as much to the product system under study as included processes; thus, the subjective determination of the system boundary may lead to invalid results. System boundaries in LCA are discussed herein with particular attention to outlining hybrid approaches as methods for resolving the boundary selection problem in LCA. An input−output model can be used to describe at least a part of a product system, and an ISO-compatible system boundary selection procedure can be designed by applying hybrid input−output-assisted approaches. There are several hybrid input−output analysis-based LCA methods that can be implemented in practice for broadening system boundary and also for ISO compliance.

Using input-output data in life cycle inventory analysis

The impacts on the environment from human activities are of increasing concern. The need to consider the reduction in energy consumption is of particular interest, especially in the construction and operation of buildings, which accounts for between 30 and 40% of Australia's national energy consumption. Much past and more recent emphasis has been placed on methods for reducing the energy consumed in the operation of buildings. With the energy embodied in these buildings having been shown to account for an equally large proportion of a building's life cycle energy consumption, there is a need to look at ways of reducing the embodied energy of buildings and related products. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is considered to be the most appropriate tool for assessing the life cycle energy consumption of buildings and their products. The life cycle inventory analysis (LCIA) step of a LCA, where an inventory of material and energy inputs is gathered, may currently suffer from several limitations, mainly concerned with the use of incomplete and unreliable data sources and LCIA methods. These traditional methods of LCIA include process-based and input-output-based LCIA. Process-based LCIA uses process specific data, whilst input-output-based LCIA uses data produced from an analysis of the flow of goods and services between sectors of the Australian economy, also known as input-output data. With the incompleteness and unreliability of these two respective methods in mind, hybrid LCIA methods have been developed to minimise the errors associated with traditional LCIA methods, combining both process and input-output data. Hybrid LCIA methods based on process data have shown to be incomplete. Hybrid LCIA methods based on input-output data involve substituting available process data into the input-output model minimising the errors associated with process-based hybrid LCIA methods. However, until now, this LCIA method had not been tested for its level of completeness and reliability. The aim of this study was to assess the reliability and completeness of hybrid life cycle inventory analysis, as applied to the Australian construction industry. A range of case studies were selected in order to apply the input-output-based hybrid LCIA method and evaluate the subsequent results as obtained from each case study. These case studies included buildings: two commercial office buildings, two residential buildings, a recreational building; and building related products: a solar hot water system, a building integrated photovoltaic system and a washing machine. The range of building types and products selected assisted in testing the input-output-based hybrid LCIA method for its applicability across a wide range of product types. The input-output-based hybrid LCIA method was applied to each of the selected case studies in order to obtain their respective embodied energy results. These results were then evaluated with the use of a number of evaluation methods. These evaluation methods included an analysis of the difference between the process-based and input-output-based hybrid LCIA results as an evaluation of the completeness of the process-based LCIA method. The second method of evaluation used was a comparison between equivalent process and input-output values used in the input-output-based hybrid LCIA method as a measure of reliability. It was found that the results from a typical process-based LCIA and process-based hybrid LCIA have a large gap when compared to input-output-based hybrid LCIA results (up to 80%). This gap has shown that the currently available quantity of process data in Australia is insufficient. The comparison between equivalent process-based and input-output-based LCIA values showed that the input-output data does not provide a reliable representation of the equivalent process values, for material energy intensities, material inputs and whole products. Therefore, the use of input-output data to account for inadequate or missing process data is not reliable. However, as there is currently no other method for filling the gaps in traditional process-based LCIA, and as input-output data is considered to be more complete than process data, and the errors may be somewhat lower, using input-output data to fill the gaps in traditional process-based LCIA appears to be better than not using any data at all. The input-output-based hybrid LCIA method evaluated in this study has shown to be the most sophisticated and complete currently available LCIA method for assessing the environmental impacts associated with buildings and building related products. This finding is significant as the construction and operation of buildings accounts for a large proportion of national energy consumption. The use of the input-output-based hybrid LCIA method for products other than those related to the Australian construction industry may be appropriate, especially if the material inputs of the product being assessed are similar to those typically used in the construction industry. The input-output-based hybrid LCIA method has been used to correct some of the errors and limitations associated with previous LCIA methods, without the introduction of any new errors. Improvements in current input-output models are also needed, particularly to account for the inclusion of capital equipment inputs (i.e. the energy required to manufacture the machinery and other equipment used in the production of building materials, products etc.). Although further improvements in the quantity of currently available process data are also needed, this study has shown that with the current available embodied energy data for LCIA, the input-output-based hybrid LCIA appears to provide the most reliable and complete method for use in assessing the environmental impacts of the Australian construction industry.