Comments on: Manufacturers Should Consider GHG Emissions on Site-by-Site Basis http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/09/03/manufacturers-should-consider-ghg-emissions-on-site-by-site-basis/ Environmental Leader Fri, 25 May 2012 22:05:52 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Dave Dornfeld http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/09/03/manufacturers-should-consider-ghg-emissions-on-site-by-site-basis/comment-page-1/#comment-145896 Dave Dornfeld Fri, 04 Sep 2009 16:26:33 +0000 http://www.environmentalleader.com/?p=19468#comment-145896 Jack- Thanks for your comments. You are absolutely correct and I do mention the need to consider transportation as part of this later on in the text. This will be considered more completely in later postings (remember - this is a reprint from my blog so for the latest material check that out). Depending on the mode of transportation (that is train, ship, truck, air) the impact of transportation varies tremendously. Specially for production off shore. We recently did a study on the sensitivity of transportation for manufacture of body in white components in one location and assembly in another and sales in a third location. Choices in transportation mode and distance determine the setup with minimum impact. So, for sure, it must be considered. In fact, one's supply chain could be designed to make sure the impact of energy mix, transportation, etc., which can be dominant factors in some products, is minimized. As a result, the distribution network could look very different. Thanks for reading Dave Jack-
Thanks for your comments. You are absolutely correct and I do mention the need to consider transportation as part of this later on in the text. This will be considered more completely in later postings (remember – this is a reprint from my blog so for the latest material check that out). Depending on the mode of transportation (that is train, ship, truck, air) the impact of transportation varies tremendously. Specially for production off shore. We recently did a study on the sensitivity of transportation for manufacture of body in white components in one location and assembly in another and sales in a third location. Choices in transportation mode and distance determine the setup with minimum impact. So, for sure, it must be considered. In fact, one’s supply chain could be designed to make sure the impact of energy mix, transportation, etc., which can be dominant factors in some products, is minimized. As a result, the distribution network could look very different.

Thanks for reading
Dave

]]> By: Jack Pouchet http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/09/03/manufacturers-should-consider-ghg-emissions-on-site-by-site-basis/comment-page-1/#comment-145724 Jack Pouchet Thu, 03 Sep 2009 17:07:07 +0000 http://www.environmentalleader.com/?p=19468#comment-145724 David, You make some very interesting points on the impacts associated with embedded CO2 and GHG from a manufacturing perspective. However in your automobile example the transportation and distribution impacts were not considered. It is quite likely that a car made in Washington State – 100% hydro powered – may have a strong CO2 edge but still lose out in the East Coast market to an auto manufactured in Kentucky or to an Alabama or Texas based manufacture in the South once transportation and distribution are taken into account. This assumes all raw materials carry the same total embedded energy along with land, water, and air use. However this is far from the case. The entire supply chain must be considered not just point of manufacture. Your columns are most enlightening. I look forward to your next installment! Best regards. Jack David,

You make some very interesting points on the impacts associated with embedded CO2 and GHG from a manufacturing perspective. However in your automobile example the transportation and distribution impacts were not considered. It is quite likely that a car made in Washington State – 100% hydro powered – may have a strong CO2 edge but still lose out in the East Coast market to an auto manufactured in Kentucky or to an Alabama or Texas based manufacture in the South once transportation and distribution are taken into account.

This assumes all raw materials carry the same total embedded energy along with land, water, and air use. However this is far from the case. The entire supply chain must be considered not just point of manufacture.

Your columns are most enlightening. I look forward to your next installment!

Best regards.

Jack

]]>