(Classes 6 through 8)
APPLICATION: Financial Analysis Software Systems and Tools
Software Systems | Software Based (Y/N) | Applica- tiona |
Cost of Productb | Applica- bilityc |
Cost Estimation Method | Other Characteristics |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Costing and Financial Analysis of Pollution Prevention Projects (p. 4-172) | N | F,W | L | GG | Costs estimated by multiplying wage rate by the number of hours spent on the P2 activity and number of occurrences of the activity. | Training manual and instructors' guide. Case studies and spreadsheet formats. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of P2 projects. Social costs not included. |
2. Economic Analysis for Pollution Prevention (p. 4-175) | N | F,C | L | GG | Costs estimated by users for specific activities. Recommends differential accounting, inclusion of labor hours, extended time frames, and modified financial criteria. |
Information fact sheet. Cost analysis spreadsheet formats and activities for analysis. No consideration of environmental impacts. Too simplistic risk weighting approach. |
3. *PAPA Investment Model (p. 4-187) | Y | F,A | Info not available | FF, GG | Costs are estimated by users from all available sources, including hazardous waste minimization reports, databases, etc. | The program is built around Army/DOD goals and evaluates investment strategies in
support of environmental policy and program requirements. Types of costs include procurement, facility modification, labor costs, and recurring costs. |
4. P2/FINANCE (p. 4-178) | Y | F,C,A | L-M | SI, GG | Operating costs entered for both current and alternative processes. Capital costs entered for alternative processes. |
Embedded cost list, along with examples of additional cost items in user's guide. Not limited to analysis of P2 projects. Versions tailored to specific industry sectors available. No additional rows or columns, or algorithms can be added. |
5. Pollution Prevention Benefits Manual (p. 4-181) | N | F,W,C | L | GG | Generation and management costs, and less tangible benefits estimated by users for
prompted activities. Cost equations provided for estimating future liabilities using suggested values. |
Tiered approach for cost estimation, providing a progression of detail. Hidden regulatory costs cover six acts: RCRA, CERCLA, Superfund, CAA, CWA, and OSHA. No consideration of material procurement or use. Consideration of environmental impacts limited to post-disposal. |
6. PRECOSIS (p. 4-184) | Y | F,A | L | GG | Estimated by users for current and alternative practices. Cost data are grouped into three categories: resource effects, revenue or value effects, and waste management effects. |
Can compare up to 5 waste reduction alternatives. No consideration of material procurement, environmental impacts, or future liability. Methodology and structure need to be understood prior to use. |
APPLICATION: Environmental Life-Cycle Costing and Impact Analysis Software Systems and Tools
Software Systems | Software Based (Y/N) | Applica- tiona |
Cost of Productb | Applica- bilityc |
Cost Estimation Method | Other Characteristics |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. *Abridged LCA Matrix (p. 4-220) | N | I,W,A | N/A | GG | Costs are not estimated or included in the analysis. | Developed by AT&T to facilitate semi-quantitative, quicker assessments of
manufactured products or industrial processes. Uses a scoring system and expert knowledge of users to compare phases. |
2. APACS Life Cycle Cost Software Demonstration (p. 4-189) | Y | F,A | L | SI, GG | Consists of Excel files that list input variables and default cost data. It uses unit costs and time, or data plugged into list estimates. | Developed for all purposes to compare the APACS system with other computer control
systems. Not a commercial product. Includes default values related to the APACS system and examples for the calculation of safety and reliability metrics. Calculates the present value of costs. |
3. *ASEAM (p. 4-221) | Y | F,W,A | L | FF | Users supply costs. ASEAM is compatible with BLCC, which can be used to calculate LCCs. | Calculation of annual and monthly energy requirements for buildings and evaluation of
options for energy conservation. ASHRAE maintained national weather data included in software. |
4. *BLCC (p. 4-222) | Y | F,W,C,E ,A | L | FF, SI | Users supply costs of options. BLCC also contains an economic database. | Evaluation of LCC of a building and impact of energy cost savings on LCCs. Comparison of LCC of various energy conservation measures. |
5. EcoSys (p. 4-192) | Y | I,A | M | FF, GG | No actual "costs," only environmental impacts estimated. Weighting method of cost estimation based on 5 environmental paradigms discussed, 3 of the paradigms used in EcoSys. EcoSys uses 3 databases: Process knowledge, Material information, and Impact models. |
EcoSys performs impact analyses of product design and manufacturing processes using
the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), using 3 environmental management paradigms. EcoSys materials library has over 400 single and multi-component materials. EcoSys currently being tested, demonstration disk available. |
6. EE Energy/ Environmental Life-Cycle Assessments (p. 4-196) | N | I,A | Information not available | GG | Valuation of impacts focuses on the use of contingent valuation, travel cost, and hedonic property value techniques. | Attempts to identify and value environmental impacts of energy systems using Total
Energy Cycle Assessments (TECAs). General discussion of methodology and tools, but no actual valuations performed. |
7. EPS Enviro-Accounting Method (p. 4-199) | N | I,A | Information not available | GG | Values for impacts derived from existing contingent valuation studies. | Five safeguard subjects may be used to categorize impacts. Impacts are required as inputs (not determined by the method). |
Software Systems | Software Based (Y/N) | Applica- tiona |
Cost of Productb | Applica- bilityc |
Cost Estimation Method | Other Characteristics |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
8. * FEDS (p. 4-223) | Y | F,W,C, A | L | FF | Users supply energy price data. FEDS contains the economic database used in BLCC. | Forecasting, estimating, and analysis tool used for identifying energy improvements in
buildings that offer maximum savings. Identifies retrofits (technology database included), selects minimum LCCs, determines payback, peak demand modeling, and calculates electrical demand and consumption. |
9. Hazardous Material Life-Cycle Cost Model: System Manager's Guide (p. 4-206) | Y | W,E | L | FF | Users specify values for a number of parameters. Costs based on estimates from Naval databases and catalogs. |
Instruction manual for a computer-based model for the computation of certain LCCs of
use of hazardous materials in construction, maintenance, and repair of US Navy systems and
facilities. Considers R&D costs, and allows user additions of processes and materials, etc. Users cannot add to the database. |
10. HAZMAT (p. 4-202) | Y | W,E,A | L | FF | General and estimate information entered by users. Model algorithms based on data collected for the estimates and are chemical specific. |
Cost trade-off analyses for comparisons between hazardous substances used in weapon
systems. 12 different cost elements, including potential liability based on 12 Federal environmental acts. Calculates the present value of costs. No additional cost categories can be added and cost algorithms cannot be modified. |
11. Life Cycle Costing Program Version 2.0 (p. 4-209) | Y | F,A | L | SI, GG | Users enter data on initial and operating costs, and rates and duration, and the program calculated life-cycle costs. | Developed specifically to compare stainless steel with other material options. Could
be used for other material comparisons as well. Cost detailing is limited, and calculations above 9 digits cannot be handled. Performs sensitivity analysis, and displays and prints cost summaries. Calculates the present value of all cash flows. |
12. Models developed for TSLCC (p. 4-212) | Y | W,E | Information not available | FS | Cost data from DOE sources and reports. | Determination of LCC for the radioactive waste disposal program. Used various integrated models. Not currently being used by the DOE, and application to other areas is unclear. |
Software Systems | Software Based (Y/N) | Applica- tiona |
Cost of Productb | Applica- bilityc |
Cost Estimation Method | Other Characteristics |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
13. TEAM (p. 4-215) | Y | F,E,A | Info not available | SI, GG | All cost data has to be entered into the system by users. | Life-cycle cost and life-cycle assessment software. Modeling tool (no default format) with a comprehensive database on various processes and materials. Inputs and outputs corresponding to costs, natural resources, intermediate/finished products, energy sources, wastes, and environmental releases. |
14. Tellus Packaging Study (p. 4-217) | N | I,W,A | L | GG | Environmental costs estimated using the marginal cost of pollution control as a proxy for social willingness to pay to calculate "pollutant prices" for each pollutant. | Method places monetary values on impacts. Calculates environmental costs of production, conventional costs of disposal, and environmental costs of disposal. Conventional and hidden costs of packaging production not taken into account. |
APPLICATION: Waste Reduction Software Systems and Tools
Software Systems | Software Based (Y/N) | Applica- tiona |
Cost of Productb | Applica- bilityc |
Cost Estimation Method | Other Characteristics |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Avoidable Waste Management Costs at DOE Facilities (p. 4-226) | N | W,E | L | FS | Example costs and DOE cost data sources provided. | Documentation and closure costs considered. Regulatory compliance, liability, and less tangible costs not included in the analysis. DOE is working on another related report: "Baseline Environmental Management Report" (Beamer). The report aims to analyze waste generation over a period of 75 years for different waste types. |
2. *CHRIMP (p. 4-268) | Y | W | N/A | FF | Not applicable. | CHRIMP (consolidated hazardous material reutilization and inventory control program)
was developed by the Navy as a management style to centrally manage and control hazardous
material for an entire installation or ship. CHRIMP was electronic information management procedures and the Navy-developed Hazardous Inventory Control System (HICS) computer program. |
3. *D&D Cost Database (p. 4-268) | Y | W,C | Product not released | FF | Not designed for cost estimation. | Being designed to provide cost estimates for D&D using historical cost data from
previous DOE projects. No decision on whether the system will be made available to industry as well. |
Software Systems | Software Based (Y/N) | Applica- tiona |
Cost of Productb | Applica- bilityc |
Cost Estimation Method | Other Characteristics |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4. Eco-AccountingSM (p. 4-229) | Y | F,C,A | Information not available | GG | Users identify costs through interviews and available documentation. | Developed for management of environmental costs and data, includes over 100 standard
activities and 50 performance measures. Sold only as part of a package along with other consulting services. Cost matrix includes costs in five categories, and permits benchmarking of costs for comparisons. Customization options available. |
5. Facility Pollution Prevention Guide (p. 4-231) | N | F,W | L | GG | Estimated by users. | Profitability analysis for a hypothetical waste minimization project, assessment
worksheets, examples, and sources of additional information. No consideration of material procurement, environmental impacts, or future liability. No default sources of cost data, or method of cost estimation provided. General guidance, not intended as a comprehensive P2 guide. |
6. *Greenware Software Products (p. 4-269) | Y | F,W | L-M | SI, GG | Not applicable. | Greenware is a Canadian consulting firm that has software programs and templates that
address different areas, including market audit requirements, contract management,
corporate performance measurement, etc. A paper-based publication on waste management systems is also available. |
7. HCAS (p. 4-234) | Y | C | M | FF, GG | Not designed for cost estimation. Cost data derived from various government agencies. |
Historical cost database of conventional and hidden costs associated with Hazardous,
Toxic, and Radioactive Waste (HTRW). Can be used for rudimentary project management and tracking. Data defined according to a five level hierarchy: Contracts, Projects, Phases, Tasks, and Details. 5-level WBS with predefined categories. New categories can be added with each HCAS revision. Areas for specifying additional items. |
Software Systems | Software Based (Y/N) | Applica- tiona |
Cost of Productb | Applica- bilityc |
Cost Estimation Method | Other Characteristics |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
8. Industrial Waste Prevention (p. 4-237) | N | F,W,E | L | GG | Costs estimated by users for prompted activities. Not meant for detailed cost estimation. | Document contains instructions for developing a waste prevention program and
calculation of waste generation costs. Software for waste prevention will be available in September 1995. Software will feature waste cost and quantity tracking, waste source location and cause information, waste reduction ideas, material balance reports, and an equipment supplier database. |
9. Low-Level and Transuranic Waste Transportation (p. 4-240) | N | E | L | FS | Example costs and DOE cost data sources provided. | Descriptions of transportation, disposal, and D&D LCC considerations. Site restoration to the natural environment considered. Transportation costs are based on waste product densities, with example densities provided. Method includes conventional and some aspects of hidden costs Regulatory and voluntary hidden costs not included. |
10. Model Pollution Prevention Opportunity Assessment (p. 4-242) | N | F,W,A | L | FS, GG | Costs estimated by users. | Pollution prevention opportunity assessments (PPOA) document the amount of material
disposed of as waste during operations. Advise assessment of all releases, not limited to process wastes. No information on methods of cost estimation provided. No consideration of environmental impacts. Software on filemaker pro to complete the worksheets provided to people attending PPOA having class on all. This class is usually restricted to DOE and DOE contractors. |
11. *P2P (p. 4-270) | Y | I, W | L | GG | Not applicable. | Compares pollution generated by original versus modified products by taking one or
more life cycle styles to account. Pre-classified list and information on pollutants in system Effects on 3 media and 3 impact categories are detailed. |
12. *Pollution Prevention (P2) Equipment Program (p. 4-271) | Y | W | N/A | FF, GG | Cost data is compiled from preproduction equipment demonstrations at NELP sites. | The program was designed to provide pre-production equipment to the Navy Environmental
Leadership (NELP) activities to demonstrate and evaluate successful technology transfers
through centralized procurement. Avenues for the maximum immediate and long-term cost savings are assessed. |
Software Systems | Software Based (Y/N) | Applica- tiona |
Cost of Productb | Applica- bilityc |
Cost Estimation Method | Other Characteristics |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
13. Process Waste Assessment Guidance Manual (p. 4-245) | N | W,A | L | FS | Cost and technical analyses done as part of the waste minimization opportunities assessment phase. | Background for the evaluation of SNL processes provided. Method consists of four phases: process definition; process characterization; waste minimization opportunities assessment; and project selection, optimization, implementation and tracking. Software product developed for phase 4 of the method. Manual was used only to a limited extent, and is not publicly available. |
14. SCM (p. 4-251) | Y | W,E | L | GG | Costs estimated based on internal cost and schedule data, facility capacity and operating parameters, facility costs, parametric cost/capacity equations, transportation miles and cost, standard operating parameters, and a standard rate table. | Total LCCs calculated in three different modules for treatment and disposal processes
for three waste types: low level, mixed low level, and transuranic waste. 8-element WBS, including pre-operations, facility construction costs, O&M, D&D, contracted services, off-site TSD (DOE), and special site costs. Does not estimate liability and less tangible costs. No waste minimization options generated. |
15. SRS Waste Cost Analysis (p. 4-248) | N | W,E | Not commer- cially available |
FS | Example costs for the SRS site provided. | Costs provided as a basis for comparing seven categories of waste. Purpose of the report was to provide life-cycle costs for a unit volume of waste generated at SRS in 1992. Methodology not currently used at SRSthey are considering a new activity-based methodology. |
16. *Strategic Waste Minimization Initiative (SWAMI) (p. 4-271) | Y | W,A | L | GG | Costs are user-supplied. | Developed to identify P2 opportunities in an industrial setting. Identifies P2 opportunities on a cost and volume basis. Also performs mass balance calculations and draws process flow diagrams. |
17. *Sustainable Building Resource Specifier Database (p. 4-272) | Y | W,A | L | SI | A limited amount of cost data may be found in the database. Else, users can use contact information provided to obtain this data. | CSI categories are used to separate particular building components with information on
its alternatives. Comparative ratings of several characteristics including energy, toxicity, and recycle amount for over 2,000 products. |
Software Systems | Software Based (Y/N) | Applica- tiona |
Cost of Productb | Applica- bilityc |
Cost Estimation Method | Other Characteristics |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
18. Waste Cost Avoidance Model Template (p. 4-255) | N | W,C | L | FF | Provides a framework for accounting of cost elements associated with each waste type and treatability group produced at a site. | Fundamental basis for cost collection that could be applied to other facilities as
well. Simple and straightforward method. Transportation and lag storage between LC stages are considered. Considers conventional costs and hidden costs associated with operation of a waste treatment facility, packaging, waste storage, etc. Liability and less tangible costs not considered. |
19. Waste Life-Cycle Cost (p. 4-257) | N | W,C | L | FF | Estimated by users. | General guidance, assumptions, suggestions. Disposal site closure, and pre and post closure monitoring and surveillance costs are considered. Guidance directed to DOE facilities. |
20. WastePlan (p. 4-260) | Y | F,W,E | M | GG | Conventional cost information estimated and entered into the system by users. | Flexible, generic system for solid waste planning and management, with applications in
policy and aberration analysis. Calculates the NPV of a solid waste plan. Not much default information in system. Only conventional costs are included in the analysis. |
Proprietary Software Systems and Tools | ||||||
21. *Rohm and Haas Environment Cost Model | Y | F,W,A | SI, GG | Costs are estimated by users using a four tiered system proposed in the P2 Benefits Manual and based on 4 types of inputs. | Designed to appraise present and future environmental and waste disposal costs for a
project. Covers conventional, potentially hidden, and liability costs. Inputs are chemical-specific, process-specific, and operational data, and project overview information. The model is structured around a relational database, with 2 levels of detail for process information. |
|
Case Studies | ||||||
22. *Activity-based Economic Evaluation | N | F,A | SI,GG | Costs are allocated toward individual activities performed in an organization. | Paper uses a case study on chlorinated solvent degreasing systems versus an aqueous wash system, to demonstrate the application of an activity-based costing (ABC) methodology. | |
23. *Paperboard versus Polystryrene | N | F,W,A | SI, GG | Technical cost modeling is used to simulate manufacturing costs. Fixed and variable costs are considered. LCCA is used to calculate post production costs. | Use of life cycle cost analysis method to compare paper versus polystyrene containers. |
* Abbreviated profiles
(a) Application:
|
(b) Cost of Product
|
(c) Applicability:
|