An updated comprehensive techno-economic analysis of algae biodiesel

Algae biodiesel is a promising but expensive alternative fuel to petro-diesel. To overcome cost barriers, detailed cost analyses are needed. A decade-old cost analysis by the U.S. National Renewable Energy Laboratory indicated that the costs of algae biodiesel were in the range of $0.53–0.85/L (2012 USD values). However, the cost of land and transesterification were just roughly estimated. In this study, an updated comprehensive techno-economic analysis was conducted with optimized processes and improved cost estimations. Latest process improvement, quotes from vendors, government databases, and other relevant data sources were used to calculate the updated algal biodiesel costs, and the final costs of biodiesel are in the range of $0.42–0.97/L. Additional improvements on cost-effective biodiesel production around the globe to cultivate algae was also recommended. Overall, the calculated costs seem promising, suggesting that a single step biodiesel production process is close to commercial reality.

Comparative cost-effectiveness analyses of cardiovascular magnetic resonance and coronary angiography combined with fractional flow reserve for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: According to recent guidelines, patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) should undergo revascularization if significant myocardial ischemia is present. Both, cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) allow for a reliable ischemia assessment and in combination with anatomical information provided by invasive coronary angiography (CXA), such a work-up sets the basis for a decision to revascularize or not. The cost-effectiveness ratio of these two strategies is compared. METHODS: Strategy 1) CMR to assess ischemia followed by CXA in ischemia-positive patients (CMR + CXA), Strategy 2) CXA followed by FFR in angiographically positive stenoses (CXA + FFR). The costs, evaluated from the third party payer perspective in Switzerland, Germany, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US), included public prices of the different outpatient procedures and costs induced by procedural complications and by diagnostic errors. The effectiveness criterion was the correct identification of hemodynamically significant coronary lesion(s) (= significant CAD) complemented by full anatomical information. Test performances were derived from the published literature. Cost-effectiveness ratios for both strategies were compared for hypothetical cohorts with different pretest likelihood of significant CAD. RESULTS: CMR + CXA and CXA + FFR were equally cost-effective at a pretest likelihood of CAD of 62% in Switzerland, 65% in Germany, 83% in the UK, and 82% in the US with costs of CHF 5'794, euro 1'517, £ 2'680, and $ 2'179 per patient correctly diagnosed. Below these thresholds, CMR + CXA showed lower costs per patient correctly diagnosed than CXA + FFR. CONCLUSIONS: The CMR + CXA strategy is more cost-effective than CXA + FFR below a CAD prevalence of 62%, 65%, 83%, and 82% for the Swiss, the German, the UK, and the US health care systems, respectively. These findings may help to optimize resource utilization in the diagnosis of CAD.

Etudes Coût-efficacité: ce que devraient retenir les médecins [Cost-effectiveness analyses: what doctors should know]

The resources of our heath care system are limited. Choices in the attribution of resources are necessary to ensure its stability. A cost-effectiveness analysis compares the effects of one health intervention to another, taking into account the costs (including the saved costs) and the saved life years, adjusted for the quality of life (cost-utility). Cost-effectiveness analyses should take the societal perspective and the studied intervention should be compared to a relevant intervention actually in use. Physicians, at the interface between patients and payers, are in an ideal position to interpret, or even perform cost-effectiveness analysis, and to promote the interventions that are most effective and that have a reasonable cost.

Cost-plus-loss analyses of forest inventory strategies based on kNN-assigned reference sample plot data

Abstract

Cost-effectiveness analysis of universal childhood hepatitis A vaccination in Brazil: Regional analyses according to the endemic context

Objective: To To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of a universal childhood hepatitis A vaccination program in Brazil. Methods: An age and time-dependent dynamic model was developed to estimate the incidence of hepatitis A for 24 years. The analysis was run separately according to the pattern of regional endemicity, one for South + Southeast (low endemicity) and one for the North + Northeast + Midwest (intermediate endemicity). The decision analysis model compared universal childhood vaccination with current program of vaccinating high risk individuals. Epidemiologic and cost estimates were based on data from a nationwide seroprevalence survey of viral hepatitis, primary data collection, National Health Information Systems and literature. The analysis was conducted from both the health system and societal perspectives. Costs are expressed in 2008 Brazilian currency (Real). Results: A universal immunization program would have a significant impact on disease epidemiology in all regions, resulting in 64% reduction in the number of cases of icteric hepatitis, 59% reduction in deaths for the disease and a 62% decrease of life years lost, in a national perspective. With a vaccine price of R$16.89 (US$7.23) per dose, vaccination against hepatitis A was a cost-saving strategy in the low and intermediate endemicity regions and in Brazil as a whole from both health system and society perspective. Results were most sensitive to the frequency of icteric hepatitis, ambulatory care and vaccine costs. Conclusions: Universal childhood vaccination program against hepatitis A could be a cost-saving strategy in all regions of Brazil. These results are useful for the Brazilian government for vaccine related decisions and for monitoring population impact if the vaccine is included in the National Immunization Program. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Quantifying uncertainty in cost effectiveness analyses

This study compared four alternative approaches (Taylor, Fieller, percentile bootstrap, and bias-corrected bootstrap methods) to estimating confidence intervals (CIs) around cost-effectiveness (CE) ratio. The study consisted of two components: (1) Monte Carlo simulation was conducted to identify characteristics of hypothetical cost-effectiveness data sets which might lead one CI estimation technique to outperform another. These results were matched to the characteristics of an (2) extant data set derived from the National AIDS Demonstration Research (NADR) project. The methods were used to calculate (CIs) for data set. These results were then compared. The main performance criterion in the simulation study was the percentage of times the estimated (CIs) contained the “true” CE. A secondary criterion was the average width of the confidence intervals. For the bootstrap methods, bias was estimated. ^ Simulation results for Taylor and Fieller methods indicated that the CIs estimated using the Taylor series method contained the true CE more often than did those obtained using the Fieller method, but the opposite was true when the correlation was positive and the CV of effectiveness was high for each value of CV of costs. Similarly, the CIs obtained by applying the Taylor series method to the NADR data set were wider than those obtained using the Fieller method for positive correlation values and for values for which the CV of effectiveness were not equal to 30% for each value of the CV of costs. ^ The general trend for the bootstrap methods was that the percentage of times the true CE ratio was contained in CIs was higher for the percentile method for higher values of the CV of effectiveness, given the correlation between average costs and effects and the CV of effectiveness. The results for the data set indicated that the bias corrected CIs were wider than the percentile method CIs. This result was in accordance with the prediction derived from the simulation experiment. ^ Generally, the bootstrap methods are more favorable for parameter specifications investigated in this study. However, the Taylor method is preferred for low CV of effect, and the percentile method is more favorable for higher CV of effect. ^

Diagnostic motor vehicle inspection demonstration projects, program engineering support. Volume 6 - appendix E: technical basis for cost benefit analyses. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Analyses of selected automotive parts and assemblies for cost and material impacts. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C.

Determining comparable firms for divisional cost of capital analyses in regulated industries /

"June 1985." -- Cover.

Military base closures : lack of data inhibits cost-effectiveness analyses of privatization-in-place initiatives : report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Military Readiness, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives /

"B-283515"--P. 3.

Cost-benefit analyses for your group and yourself: The rationality of decision-making in conflict

Two studies in the context of English-French relations in Québec suggest that individuals who strongly identify with a group derive the individual-level costs and benefits that drive expectancy-value processes (rational decision-making) from group-level costs and benefits. In Study 1, high identifiers linked group- and individual-level outcomes of conflict choices whereas low identifiers did not. Group-level expectancy-value processes, in Study 2, mediated the relationship between social identity and perceptions that collective action benefits the individual actor and between social identity and intentions to act. These findings suggest the rational underpinnings of identity-driven political behavior, a relationship sometimes obscured in intergroup theory that focuses on cognitive processes of self-stereotyping. But the results also challenge the view that individuals' cost-benefit analyses are independent of identity processes. The findings suggest the importance of modeling the relationship of group and individual levels of expectancy-value processes as both hierarchical and contingent on social identity processes

Normative influence and rational conflict decisions: Group norms and cost-benefit analyses for intergroup behavior

The present paper articulates a model in which ingroup and outgroup norms inform 'rational' decision-making (cost-benefit analysis) for conflict behaviors. Norms influence perceptions of the consequences of the behavior, and individuals may thus strategically conform to or violate norms in order to acquire benefits and avoid costs. Two studies demonstrate these processes in the context of conflict in Quebec. In the first study, Anglophones' perceptions of Francophone and Anglophone norms for pro-English behaviors predicted evaluations of the benefits and costs of the behaviors, and these cost-benefit evaluations in turn mediated the norm-intention links for both group norms. In the second study, a manipulated focus on supportive versus hostile ingroup and outgroup norms also predicted cost-benefit evaluations, which mediated the norm-intention relationships. The studies support a model of strategic conflict choices in which group norms inform, rather than suppress, rational expectancy value processes. Implications for theories of decision-making and normative influence are discussed.