WO2012005640A1

WO2012005640A1 - Method and device for comparing two products or services or solutions

Info

Publication number: WO2012005640A1
Application number: PCT/SE2010/050788
Authority: WO
Inventors: Charlotta Barthelson; Maria Sahlin; Fredik Hillbom; Mårten KIHLSTRÖM
Original assignee: Saab Ab
Priority date: 2010-07-06
Filing date: 2010-07-06
Publication date: 2012-01-12

Abstract

The present invention relates to a method and device for comparing a first product or service or solution with a second product or service or solution with regard to at least environmental impact during a selected time frame. The device comprises a tool (100) connected to a user input device (101). The tool comprises information related to a plurality of activities having an environmental impact related to the first product or service or solution. The activities are selectable by means of the user input device (101). The tool comprises processing means arranged to determine at least one indicator value related to at least environmental impact for each selected activity of the first product or service or solution based on data stored in the tool and based on data fetched from databases. The tool comprises information related to a plurality of activities having an environmental impact related to the second product or service or solution, said activities being selectable by means of the user input device (101) The processing means are further arranged to determine at least one indicator value related to at least environmental impact for each selected activity of the second product or service or solution based on the data stored in the tool and based on the data fetched from databases. The processing means are further arranged to compare the indicator values for the first and second solutions.

Description

Method and device for comparing two products or services or solutions TECHNICAL FIELD

The present invention relates to a method and device for comparing a first product or service or solution with a second product or service or solution with regard to at least environmental impact during a selected time frame.

BACKGROUND ART US 2009/0210313 describes a method for environmentally-friendly shipping. The method comprises identifying available shipping options, analyzing the available shipping options, presenting available shipping options, selecting one of the available shipping options and shipping the goods via the selected available shipping option.

In one example, the available shipping options are presented. Fore example, one shipping option may minimize delivery time but the cost for the option is high. Another shipping option may minimize the cost but the delivery time is long. A third option may minimize adverse environmental impact but the costs are perhaps higher and the delivery time is perhaps longer.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

One object of the invention is to an improved way of evaluating environmental impact.

This has in one example been achieved by means of a method for comparing a first product or service or solution with a second product or service or solution with regard to at least environmental impact during a selected time frame and for a plurality of selected areas. The selected areas comprise at least two areas within a group comprising transports, energy with regard to infrastructure, energy with regard to product use, energy with regard to maintenance and/or repair, air emissions, water consumption, water pollutant emissions, waste, phase out and/or hazardous substances. The method comprises

-determining a set of activities for the selected areas related to the first prod uct or service or solution during said time frame having an environmental impact,

- determining at least one indicator value related to at least environmental impact for each activity in the selected areas of the first product or service or solution,

-determining a set of activities for the selected areas related to the second product or service or solution during said time frame having an environmental impact,

- determining at least one indicator value related to at least environmental impact for each activity in the selected areas of the second product or service or solution, and

- comparing the at least one indicator value related to at least environmental impact for the first and second solutions.

Thereby, it is enabled to compare entire products, solutions and services with each other. It is also possible to identify activities which with advantage are substituted with alternative activities. The method is flexible and evaluation of the products, services or solutions are performed based on environmetal impact but can also be performed based on additional indicators such as costs.

In one option, the step of determining at least one indicator value for each activity in the selected areas of the first product or service or solution and/or determining at least one indicator value for each activity in the selected areas of the second product or service or solution comprises fetching data from one or a plurality of databases. In one option, the second product or service or solution represents so called best green practice and wherein after comparing the indicator impact values for the first and second solutions, one or a plurality of activities of the first product or service or solution are selected to be substituted with activities relating to the second prod uct or service or sol ution based on the comparison.

Alternatively, the first or second product or service or solution is determined as preferred based on the comparison of the indicator values for the first and second products or services or solutions.

The present invention further comprises a device for comparing a first product or service or solution with a second product or service or solution with regard to at least environmental impact during a selected time frame. The device comprises a tool connected to a user input device. The tool comprises information related to a plurality of activities having an environmental impact related to the first product or service or solution, said activities being selectable by means of the user input device. The tool comprises processing means arranged to determine at least one indicator value related to at least environmental impact for each selected activity of the first product or service or solution based on data stored in the tool and based on data fetched from databases. Further, the tool comprises information related to a plurality of activities having an environmental impact related to the second product or service or solution, said activities being selectable by means of the user input device. The processing means are further arranged to determine at least one indicator value related to at least environmental impact for each selected activity of the second product or service or solution based on the data stored in the tool and based on the data fetched from databases, and to compare the indicator values for the first and second solutions. In one option, the processing means are arranged to substitute one or a plurality of activities of the first product or service or solution with activities relating to the second product or service or solution constituting a so called best green practice based on the comparison between the indicator values for the first and second solutions.

In one option, the processing means are arranged to form at least one first summarized indicator value for the first product or service or solution based on the values for the selected activities of the first product or service or solution, to form at least one second summarized indicator value for the second product or service or solution based on the values for the selected activities of the second product or service or solution, to compare the first and second summarized indicator values and to select the first or second product or service or solution based on the comparison.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Fig 1 shows a tool for developing environmentally sustainable solutions with associated equipment.

Fig 2 is a flow chart showing an example of a method for developing environmentally sustainable solutions.

Fig 3 is a flow chart showing an alternative example of a method for developing environmentally sustainable solutions.

Fig 4 illustrates schematically an example of a data used in evaluating alternative solutions.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION In Fig 1 , a tool 100 for developing environmentally sustainable solutions is interacting with one or a plurality of internal or external databases 102. The tool 100 is arranged to provide a result based on analysis performed by the tool based on user input data by means of one or a plurality of input devices 101 and based on information available in the database(s). The result is in one example presented on a presentation device 103 such as a display or in a report. The tool 100 comprises a processing unit 105 and memory 104. The tool can be used in evaluating products, services or projects, and for a preset election of steps in the life cycle of the product, service or project. Steps in the life cycle may include production, use, maintenance/repair, and phase out.

The aim of the tool is to enable identification of improvement and efficiency potentials.

The basis for analysis performed by the tool is based on numerical data for environmental indicators (e.g. emission data) and can also be based on costs and/or estimates of time and/or availability. The tool is arranged to analyse data regarding for example transports, energy, air emission, water consumption, water pollutant emissions, waste, phase out and hazardous substances. The tool can be used in development of more environmentally sustainable solutions.

In Fig 2, a method 200 for developing environmentally sustainable solutions comprises a number of steps so as to provide an indication of where to take measurements so as to provide the environmentally sustainable solution. The method is performed using the above described tool 100 wherein the processing means are arranged to perform the calculations described below based on data retrieved from the memory, the database(s) and the user input device. In the illustrated example, the method comprises the following steps. In a first step 205, a number of activities associated to preselected step(s) of the life cycle product, project or service is fed into the tool. The life cycle steps may include production, use, maintenance/repair, and/or phase out.

In a subsequent step 210, a subset of the activities inputted in the preceding step is selected for further analysis. The selection is based on an environmental impact indicator. The value for the environmental impact indicator is determined so as to provide the activities having the most important environmental impact. Thus, a rough estimation of the environmental impact indicator is performed so as to enable ranking the importance of the activities with regard to environmental impact.

In a following step 215, additional indicator(s) for evaluation are selected. The additional indicator(s) comprises a Key Performance Indicator such as cost, time and/or availability.

In detail, there is a wide range of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). The purpose of these KPIs is to enable measurement of efficiency in different areas of project operations and/or services. The KPIs may have different purposes and apply to different areas of a project and/or service. In one example, two types of KPIs are defined, customer-facing and internal-facing. The difference between these two groups is that customer facing KPIs are focusing on time and availability aspects; the customer service expressed from the customer apprehension and desire regarding delivery time and availability of products, services and support. Internal-facing KPIs concentrates on costs; and the relationship between costs and revenue and profit margin, or assets; and its influence on the capital turnover. All in all KPIs can be used to steer operations of the product/project/service and create the prerequisite necessary to achieve the company goals. A few examples of applications of KPIs follow.

- KPIs used to measure how effective assets are being used in order to produce profit, - KPIs used to show upon investments in working capital and assets needed to sustain on-going operations,

-KPIs used to secure that investments in long-term profitable assets are carried out

Thus, KPIs are identified and data acquisition is performed so as to enable use of KPIs on activity level.

Other KPIs which can be used are as stated above for example time and availability. Time and availability can be measured and calculated in many different ways. How time and availability aspects affect the surroundings also varies. For all life cycle phases the following KPIs are identified as relevant and therefore important to take into consideration: - Reliability, i.e. the performance of the company's (business or project) ability in delivering: the correct product, to the correct place, at the correct time, in the correct condition and packaging, in the correct quantity, with the correct documentation, to the correct customer (internal or external). - Responsiveness, i.e. the speed at which a company (business or project) provides products to the customer (internal or external).

- Agility (flexibility/adaptability) of a company (business or project) in responding to marketplace changes to gain or maintain competitive advantage.

All of the three KPIs above are applicable in all phases of a product or service life-cycle. They are customer oriented but since it is the internal and in-house operations being executed that results in the out-come and basis for customer satisfaction it is within the own operations collection of data for measurements and the following efficiency or optimization work is being executed. Consequently it is very often within the in-house operations optimization and streamlining of processes and process activities affecting customer satisfaction can be carried out. As a consequence of this and in order to cover needs of investments in for example new technology and infrastructure it is important to be able to show the customers how they can benefit from the investments in terms of streamlining and optimization; very often translated into time and availability factors.

Another important KPI is cost. A cost should be associated to each activity. The cost is in one example represented as an actual cost. In an alternative example, the cost is represented as a pay-back time. In an alternative example, an operational cost and an investment cost is entered and the tool is arranged to calculate the pay-back time of each activity based on the entered operational cost and investment cost. Further, a time frame for evaluation is set in a step 220 for setting a time frame. The time frame is for example a fixed time period such as a year. Alternatively the time frame is set as the total time for a life cycle step such as production, use, maintenance/repair and/or phase out. Alternatively, the time frame is set as a project life time.

Thereafter data related to the selected activities is collected in a step 225 for collecting data.

The step 225 for collecting data comprises collecting data related to environmental impact and the potential additional indicators for the selected subset of activities and the set time frame. If the time frame has been set to a calendar year, data for a normal year of use for the product/project/service will be collected, e.g. the fuel consumption to generate energy for a specified activity during a year from January through December. The same applies to a running project, where data representing a calendar year of the project is collected. In an alternative example, wherein the time frame is set as the time a project will be running or a product's life time, activity data, e.g. the fuel consumption during the project time from start date to end date or the product's life time will be collected.

In one example some activities with environmental impact data are pre- stored in the tool and present in drop down lists.

It is important that the data entered is of high quality and is provided from reliable sources. The data should be as correct as possible in each case. It should be noted that supplier requirements often are decisive for which data are available. Some data are d ifficult to collect in the plann ing phase. Estimations are in many cases necessary. If estimates would not give representable data, it is better to document that data is missing and therefore not included rather than to make non relevant estimates. In first hand, high quality measured product/project specific data (herein referred to as primary data) is collected. In detail, primary data is activity data or direct emission measurement for a specific process related to the specific product/project/service evaluated. If primary data of good quality is not available, secondary data can be used. Secondary data is defined as generic or average activity data, emission factors or emission measurements, which are representative for processes or activities for the product/project/service evaluated. The generic or average activity data, emission factors or emission measurements are available from databases associated to the tool. For activities with large environmental impact it is of higher importance to use data of high quality than for activities with small environmental impact.

In one example, the collected data is associated to a data quality indication. In one example, the data quality indication is manually set using the user input device or drop down menus provided by the tool. Alternatively, the data quality indication is associated to the data when collected. In one example, the following data quality indications are used.

1 . Primary measured project-/activity-/product specific data. e.g. measured energy consumption from an activity or a calculation based on energy consumption data from supplier

2. Data calculated from secondary data.

3. Data estimated from qualified assumptions.

Primary data is preferred over secondary data and data estimated from qualified assumptions, and secondary data is preferred over data estimated from qualified assumptions.

Data directly connected to each activity is always better than data representing e.g. a whole site that needs to be disaggregated down to activity level in the project or for the product/project/service under study. The aim should therefore always be that data directly connected to the activities related to the product/project/service is used if available or that data on the most disaggregated level available is collected. In many cases it is for example only a percentage of total transports or emissions from maintenance facility that a re d i rectl y co n n ected to a ce rta i n a ct iv i ty i n th e product/project/service under evaluation. In those cases it is necessary to decide which transports or how much of the total emission that is connected to the project or product under study. The allocation should be made in a way th at accu rately reflects th e prod u ct's contribution to th e com mon maintenance emissions for example.

The tool described in relation to fig 1 interacts with the database(s), internal or external, or other sources so as to provide the data. In one example, a part of the data is stored locally in the tool.

After the data collecting step 225, it is identified in which areas most efficient measurements can be taken in a step 230 for identification. The identification step comprises selecting those activities associated to the highest emissions and costs in order to identify in which activities the most efficient measures can be taken to lower the environmental impact based on the collected data associated to each activity.

Thereafter, alternative solutions for the activities identified in the preceding step 230 are fetched in a step 235 for fetching alternative solutions. In one example the alternative solution is an alternative and more environmentally sustainable solution, such as a so called Green Best Practice solution.

In a next step 240, data is collected representing activities of the alternative solution. The collection step for collecting activity data relating to the alternative solution is equivalent to the data collection performed in the previous collecting step 225.

Thereafter, the activities associated to the activities with highest emissions and costs identified in step 230 are compared to the alternative solutions provided in step 235. In one example, the collected data related to emissions for each pair of activity and alternative activity is compared. In one example also the costs for each pair of activity and alternative activity is compared. In yet another or complementary example, other KPIs for the original solution and the alternative solution are compared. The other KPIs are for example time for delivery and availability, as described above. The comparison between the activity and the alternative activity results in a relation value, one for environmental impact, possibly one for the cost and possible one or more for other KPIs. In one example the relation value is a difference value. In an alternative example, the relation value is a quotient.

Alternatively a weight is associated to each indicator (wherein one indicator is environmental impact, one indicator is cost and yet other indicator(s) are other KPIs) and a total relation value is automatically provided for each activity based on the weighted indicators. Thereafter, the effect of substituting the respective activities with an associated alternative is compared in an activity comparison step 250. In the example, wherein the activities relates to comparison with a best practice solution, the effect of substituting the respective activities with an associated alternative is compared in the activity comparison step 250 so as to generate the measures to be taken having the most effective impact. Thus, one or a plurality of activities is finally elected, wherein the alternative solution is preferred. In the example, wherein a total relation value is provided in the preceding step, the election is based on a comparison of the total relation values relating to the respective activities and associated alternative activities. Thus, the or those total relation value(s) indicating that the substitution to the alternative have the most preferred environmental impact, is associated to the lowest cost and have the most preferred impact based on the other KPIs is/are elected.

In one example, the summarized result is aggregated in the following environmental impact performance indicators (one set for each solution). - Carbon dioxide emissions

- Other Air Pollutant emissions

- Emissions of Water Pollutants

- Waste Generated

- Material recycled waste and waste to energy recovery

- Hazardous Substances

- Recyclable material in product

- Water consumption

- Cost for activities studied. Finally, the results and/or summarized result from the evaluation are stored in a storing step 255. Thereby, experiences and data can be made available for use in later studies. The results can also be presented by means of the presentation device for example.

In Fig 3, a method 300 for developing environmentally sustainable solutions comprises a number of steps so as to provide an indication of where to take measurements so as to provide the environmentally sustainable solution. The method is performed using the above described tool 100 wherein the processing means are arranged to perform the calculations described below based on data retrieved from the memory, the database(s) and the user input device. In the illustrated example, the method comprises the following steps.

In a first step 305, a number of activities associated to preselected step(s) of the life cycle of a first product, project or service is fed into the tool. The life cycle steps may include production, use, maintenance/repair, and/or phase out.

In a subsequent step 310, a subset of the activities inputted in the preceding step is selected for further analysis. The selection is based on an environmental impact indicator. The value for the environmental impact ind icator is determined so as to provide the activities having the most important environmental impact for the first product, project or service. Thus, a rough estimation of the environmental impact indicator is performed so as to en a bl e ra n ki ng the i m porta nce of th e activities with reg ard to environmental impact for the first product, project or service.

Thereafter, the same procedure is performed for a second product, project or service Accordingly, In a third step 315, a number of activities associated to preselected step(s) of the life cycle of the second product, project or service is fed into the tool. The life cycle steps may include production, use, maintenance/repair, and/or phase out. In a subsequent step 320, a subset of the activities inputted in the preceding step is selected for further analysis. The selection is based on an environmental impact indicator. The value for the environmental impact indicator is determined so as to provide the activities having the most important environmental impact for the second product, project or service. Thus, a rough estimation of the environmental impact indicator is performed so as to enable ranking the importance of the activities with regard to environmental impact for the second product, project or service.

Further, a time frame for evaluation is set in a step 325 for setting a time frame. The time frame is for example a fixed time period such as a year. Alternatively the time frame is set as the total time for a life cycle step such as production, use, maintenance/repair and/or phase out. Alternatively, the time frame is set as a project life time.

In a following step 330, additional indicators for evaluation are selected. The additional indicator(s) comprises a Key Performance Indicator such as cost, time and/or availability, as described in relation to Fig 2.

Thereafter data related to the selected activities for the first and second solutions is collected in a step 335 for collecting data. As described in relation to Fig 2, the step 335 for collecting data comprises collecting data related to environmental impact and data related to one or a plurality of additional indicators for the selected subset of activities and for the set time frame.

Thereafter, the activities associated to the first and second solutions are compared in step 340. The comparison between the first and second solution results in a summarized relation value (for all activities), one for environmental impact, and one for each additional indicator. In one example the summarized relation value is a difference value. In an alternative example, the summarized relation value is a quotient.

A weight can be associated to each indicator (wherein one indicator is environmental impact, one indicator is for example cost and yet other indicator(s) are other KPIs) and a total relation value is automatically provided for each activity based on the weighted indicators.

Thereafter a preferred solution is determined in a step 345. In one example the determination of preferred solution is based on the summarized, weighted relation value.

Finally, the result and/or summarized result from the evaluation are stored in a storing step 350.

To sum up, by using the methods described above implemented in the above described tool, comparisons on environmental performance, costs and other KPI between an original and an alternative solutions can be provided. The comparison can be made in total and/or activity by activity. The tool and parts of the method can also be used to compare two different equipments without doing a complete evaluation. In a case wherein the evaluation is performed for more than one life cycle step, the results provides information on which parts of the project or service or within the life cycle stages that generate most environmental impact and thereby which part that is most important to focus on.

The activities evaluated herein can originate from a number of areas such as transports, energy (infrastructure), energy (product use), energy (maintenance/repair), air emissions, water consumption, water pollutant emissions, waste, phase out and/or hazardous substances. For each area, a number of activities can be selected associated to the solution under evaluation and associated to the alternative solution.

In fig 4, a set of tables 300 are stored in a memory of the tool. Each table represents one area for example as defined above. In the shown example a first table related to transports 404 comprises a plurality of activities related to a first solution (denoted original solution above) and a second solution (denoted alternative solution above). For each activity a set of indicator values have been determined. One of the indicators is environmental impact. Another indicator is in one example cost. In one example yet another indicator is another selected Key Point indicator. A table 405 for a second area is also shown in the figure, wherein activities and indicator values are listed also for this second area. A table 406 for a third area is also shown in the figure, wherein activities and indicator values are listed also for this third area With reference to the area transports, all transports may be included in the evaluation connected to the project/service/product or product under study. The tool is in one example connected to a database or other source of information related to emissions from transports. The transportation requirements are defined by a number of activities and the emissions related to each activity is determined so as to provide an indicator value related to emissions. Further also a cost value is determined and possible an additional Key Point Indicator values is derived related to each defined transport activity. In one example, the activities related to transports can be selected in a list such as a drop down list.

With reference to the area energy (infrastructure), activities related to for example heating and cooling of buildings/camps and energy for lighting are listed. The energy (infrastructure) table can be used both for own facilities for e.g. maintenance and repair as well as for buildings built (e.g. sustainable cities) or delivered as part of the project (e.g. camps). Energy consuming activities can be chosen in a list such as a drop down list along with the energy source. For a number of energy sources there are different ways of providing the energy. For example, the energy source can be used in gas turbine/diesel power generation. In another example, the energy source is used in power plants and district heating. In yet another example, the energy source is used in industry. Alternatively, the energy source is used in residents or for other consumption. Each used source is listed as an activity and a quantity is associated to each source. Based on this emission is calculated by the tool based on and presented in an associated table based on known emission factors (for example provided from an external source such as database). A cost value is in one example also associated to each activity in the area energy (infrastructure). In one example, another KPI is associated to the activities in the area energy (infrastructure). The KPI relates for example to reliability, responsiveness and/or agility,

With reference to the area energy (product use), activities related to energy consumption of a product, equipment or system during its use phase are listed in the associated table and indicators related to these activities are measured and entered in the table. The same applies to activities related to for example energy (maintenance / repair), air emissions, water consumption, water pollutant emissions, waste, phase out and/or hazardous substances.

In one example, one of the compared solutions is a so called best green practice solution. Activities and environmental impact and costs and other KPIs can for example be fetched from external sources such as external databases. Alternatively, the best green solution is derived based on previously maed evaluations.

The environmental performance indicators (emissions etc.) calculated by the tool are analysed and used to form an optimized environmentally sustainable solution. Costs, time and availability are in one example also considered when forming the alternative solution. Thereby, support is provided for decisions regarding development of new products or projects or services as well as for changes in existing products or projects and services.

The tool and method also provides information on which activities in the project or service or within the product's life cycle stages that generate most environmental impact. These activities may have the largest efficiency improvement potentials.

Claims

A method (200, 300) for comparing a first product or service or solution with a second product or service or solution with regard to at least environmental impact during a selected time frame and for a plurality of selected areas, said selected areas comprises at least two areas within a group comprising transports, energy with regard to infrastructure, energy with regard to product use, energy with regard to maintenance and/or repair, air emissions, water consumption, water pollutant emissions, waste, phase out and/or hazardous substances , said method comprises

-determining a set of activities (210, 310) for the selected areas related to the first product or service or solution during said time frame having an environmental impact,

- determining at least one indicator value (225, 335) related to at least environmental impact for each activity in the selected areas of the first product or service or solution,

-determining a set of activities (235, 320) for the selected areas related to the second product or service or solution during said time frame having an environmental impact,

- determining at least one indicator value (240, 335) related to at least environmental impact for each activity in the selected areas of the second product or service or solution,

- comparing (245, 340) the at least one indicator value related to at least environmental impact for the first and second solutions.

A method according to claim 1 , wherein the step of determining at least one indicator value for each activity in the selected areas of the first product or service or solution and/or determining at least one indicator value for each activity in the selected areas of the second product or service or solution comprises fetching data from one or a plurality of databases. A method according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the second product or service or solution represents so called best green practice and wherein after comparing the indicator impact values for the first and second solutions, one or a plurality of activities of the first product or service or solution are selected to be substituted with activities relating to the second product or service or solution based on the comparison.

A method according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the first or second product or service or solution is determined as preferred based on the comparison of the indicator impact values for the first and second solutions.

A device for comparing a first product or service or solution with a second product or service or solution with regard to at least environmental impact during a selected time frame, said device comprising a tool (100) connected to a user input device (101 ),

-said tool comprising information related to a plurality of activities having an environmental impact related to the first product or service or solution, said activities being selectable by means of the user input device (101 ),

- said tool comprising processing means (105) arranged to determine at least one indicator value related to at least environmental impact for each selected activity of the first product or service or solution based on data stored in the tool and based on data fetched from databases,

- said tool comprising information related to a plurality of activities having an environmental impact related to the second product or service or solution, said activities being selectable by means of the user input device (101 ),

- said processing means (105) further being arranged to determine at least one indicator value related to at least environmental impact for each selected activity of the second product or service or solution based on the data stored in the tool and based on the data fetched from databases, and

- said processing means (105) further being arranged to compare the indicator values for the first and second solutions.

A device according to claim 5, wherein the processing means are arranged to substitute one or a plurality of activities of the first product or service or solution with activities relating to the second product or service or solution constituting a so called best green practice based on the comparison between the indicator values for the first and second solutions.

A device according to claim 5, wherein the processing means are arranged to form at least one first summarized indicator value for the first product or service or solution based on the values for the selected activities of the first product or service or solution, to form at least one second summarized indicator value for the second product or service or solution based on the values for the selected activities of the second product or service or solution, to com pare the first and second summarized indicator values and to select the first or second product or service or solution based on the comparison.