Comparison of eco-efficiency Sample Clauses

Comparison of eco-efficiency. In this study eco-efficiency is defined as ‘emissions per unit of output’, as in line with the definition made by the World Business Council (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1992). This represents the environmental intensity of production, thus the lower the eco-efficiency number the better the performance. The total output is defined as the total of all values (summation of the market prices of all the products, expressed in dollar) derived from the refinery. As we account for the total production from the refinery, no allocation of emissions is needed among products. However, for the ‘cradle’ of the analysis, agricultural production, all inputs and emissions need to be allocated between corn and ▇▇▇▇▇▇, and in this case economic allocation is applied, as is usual in managerial cost allocation as well. A research question is raised as ‘How are the economic feasibility and environmental performance compared to a single product ethanol production plant?’ In order to project the environmental potential of such a refinery system, the results of eco- efficiency of the biorefinery were compared with the ones from the ethanol plant designed by ▇▇▇▇ et al. from NREL (Aden et al., 2002). In the ethanol plant corn ▇▇▇▇▇▇ is converted to ethanol using advanced cellulosic technology, and the steam and electricity required is generated from lignin and wastes. There is no co-product or surplus of electricity; hence ethanol is the only product. In both the biorefinery designed in this study and the ethanol plant designed in NREL advanced technologies have been used and the processes have been optimized. As the capacity of the biorefinery in terms of feedstock handling is twice as high as for the ethanol plant, the capital investment and operating cost of the biorefinery are much higher resulting in incomparable NPV. Nevertheless, the values of IRR from both systems are well comparable. As blends of ethanol and gasoline with different percentage are already used in practice as transport fuels, it is important to also compare the eco-efficiency of biorefinery and ethanol plant with the gasoline refinery. The current market price of gasoline is around $2.70/gallon including excises (EIA). In this comparative study the use phases of all the products are not taken into account.
View Source

Related to Comparison of eco-efficiency

  • Performance Expectations The Charter School’s performance in relation to the indicators, measures, metrics and targets set forth in the CPF shall provide the basis upon which the SCSC will decide whether to renew the Charter School’s Charter Contract at the end of the charter term. This section shall not preclude the SCSC from considering other relevant factors in making renewal decisions.

  • Covenants of Performance Measurement No interference. Registry Operator shall not interfere with measurement Probes, including any form of preferential treatment of the requests for the monitored services. Registry Operator shall respond to the measurement tests described in this Specification as it would to any other request from an Internet user (for DNS and RDDS) or registrar (for EPP). ICANN testing registrar. Registry Operator agrees that ICANN will have a testing registrar used for purposes of measuring the SLRs described above. Registry Operator agrees to not provide any differentiated treatment for the testing registrar other than no billing of the transactions. ICANN shall not use the registrar for registering domain names (or other registry objects) for itself or others, except for the purposes of verifying contractual compliance with the conditions described in this Agreement. PUBLIC INTEREST COMMITMENTS Registry Operator will use only ICANN accredited registrars that are party to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement approved by the ICANN Board of Directors on 27 June 2013 in registering domain names. A list of such registrars shall be maintained by ICANN on ICANN’s website. (Intentionally omitted. Registry Operator has not included commitments, statements of intent or business plans provided for in its application to ICANN for the TLD.) Registry Operator agrees to perform the following specific public interest commitments, which commitments shall be enforceable by ICANN and through the Public Interest Commitment Dispute Resolution Process established by ICANN (posted at ▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇/en/resources/registries/picdrp), which may be revised in immaterial respects by ICANN from time to time (the “PICDRP”). Registry Operator shall comply with the PICDRP. Registry Operator agrees to implement and adhere to any remedies ICANN imposes (which may include any reasonable remedy, including for the avoidance of doubt, the termination of the Registry Agreement pursuant to Section 4.3(e) of the Agreement) following a determination by any PICDRP panel and to be bound by any such determination. Registry Operator will include a provision in its Registry-Registrar Agreement that requires Registrars to include in their Registration Agreements a provision prohibiting Registered Name Holders from distributing malware, abusively operating botnets, phishing, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement, fraudulent or deceptive practices, counterfeiting or otherwise engaging in activity contrary to applicable law, and providing (consistent with applicable law and any related procedures) consequences for such activities including suspension of the domain name. Registry Operator will periodically conduct a technical analysis to assess whether domains in the TLD are being used to perpetrate security threats, such as pharming, phishing, malware, and botnets. Registry Operator will maintain statistical reports on the number of security threats identified and the actions taken as a result of the periodic security checks. Registry Operator will maintain these reports for the term of the Agreement unless a shorter period is required by law or approved by ICANN, and will provide them to ICANN upon request. Registry Operator will operate the TLD in a transparent manner consistent with general principles of openness and non-discrimination by establishing, publishing and adhering to clear registration policies.

  • Revenue Metering The Connecting Transmission Owner’s revenue metering will be located on the generator side of the 115kV breaker at the ▇▇▇▇▇ Solar Collector Substation and will consist of: • three (3) combination current/voltage transformer (“CT/VT”) units (manufacturer and model ABB/▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ KXM-550, GE Grid Solutions KOTEF ▇▇▇.▇▇, or other equivalent specified by Connecting Transmission Owner); and • one (1) revenue meter. The ratios of the CTs and VTs will be provided by Connecting Transmission Owner upon its review of the Interconnection Customer’s design documents. (Note: Connecting Transmission Owner’s revenue metering CTs and VTs cannot be used to feed the Interconnection Customer’s check meter.) SERVICE AGREEMENT NO. 2556

  • Mileage Measurement Where required, the mileage measurement for LIS rate elements is determined in the same manner as the mileage measurement for V&H methodology as outlined in NECA Tariff No. 4.

  • Performance Measurement The Uniform Guidance requires completion of OMB-approved standard information collection forms (the PPR). The form focuses on outcomes, as related to the Federal Award Performance Goals that awarding Federal agencies are required to detail in the Awards.