Trending Now

Building a Resilient Supply Chain with Advanced Predictive…

New Articles

Next Generation Supply Chain – Building The Circular Economy

circular economy
Archives, Global Logistics, Global Trade Daily, International Trade

Next Generation Supply Chain – Building The Circular Economy

Leave a comment

It might be dismaying, if not shocking, to learn that humanity’s demand for natural resources far exceeds what the planet is capable of regenerating. We currently consume the equivalent of around 1.7 earths every year. With global demand increasing, it is expected by 2050 that we will need the equivalent of 3 earths. Our current resource consumption rates are obviously unsustainable, and if we continue on our current trajectory, we’ll inevitably deplete all of the planet’s resources.

As the global population continues to grow and the demand for goods increases in-kind, there’s mounting pressure on companies to produce more, and more quickly, in order to stay relevant. To meet this fevered demand, humanity has relied on linear ‘take‑make‑waste’ supply chains and disposable-economy models. Products get thrown away and become landfills. Yet more are produced to meet an ever-growing need.

Electronic equipment waste, in particular, represents one of the most glaring threats to our planet’s long-term stability. The United Nations estimates that the current 53 million tonnes of e-waste generated every year will double by 2050, making it the world’s fastest-growing waste stream. Likewise, global plastics production currently totals over 360 million metric tons per year. 50% of those are single-use plastics–they’re produced, used once, and thrown away. The cumulative total of plastics produced is now over 8-billion tons worldwide, with around 10 million of those tons ending up in our oceans each year.

It’s time for the disposable, ‘take-make-waste’ economy that humanity created to change. To slow down the wanton consumption of earth’s natural resources, stop plastic pollution and raw-materials waste, we need a circular economy that works for all of us. The good news is, steps are being taken toward just such a model.

Slowing Down the Natural Resource Consumption Rate

Manufacturers need to reduce the consumption of natural resources by recycling raw materials from end-of-use products and reconditioning or repurposing their components for use in new products.

By using digital and IoT technology, for example, manufacturers can empower consumers and employees to monitor the usage, performance, and overall integrity of factory or household equipment. Sensor technology can help predict problems and equipment failures, facilitate proactive maintenance, and ensure equipment remains viable at critical junctures.

Products will need to be designed with both end-of-use and remanufacture in mind. This requires designing-in processes for disassembly to reclaim raw materials and components that can be reconditioned, reused, or remanufactured.

When products are no longer viable, AI and robotics technology can salvage useful remnants from those products. For example, Apple uses a robot [Daisy] to disassemble iPhones to reclaim and conserve high-quality and precious materials in an energy-efficient way. Daisy dismantles 200 iPhones per hour and methodically places collected materials in appropriate containers. By using digital technology, manufacturers can assess returned products and materials for refurbishment, re-manufacture, or resale at a relatively low cost, and by keeping the same materials in circulation longer, they’ll constrain the rate of natural resource consumption.

Recovering End-of-Use Products for Remanufacture

Manufacturers need to increase the probability of recovering end-of-use products in order to reuse components or reclaim raw materials for new products.

To that end, they can offer direct-to-consumer, subscription-based ‘Product-as-a-Service’ mechanisms that use sensor technology to monitor product consumption and usage up until end-of-use. The manufacturer can then provide the consumer with an automated direct replacement of the product while collecting any vessels, cartridges, or containers for reincorporation in the manufacturing process.

In this scenario, the manufacturer’s reduced consumption dovetails with them gaining better insight into the consumer’s product experience by understanding the frequency of use in demand/replacement cycles.

Removing intermediaries in the supply chain can also provide greater value to the customer. Getting rid of middlemen costs less and ensures new products arrive directly at your door when you need them.

Industrial Symbiosis

Industrial symbiosis is the process by which waste or by‐products from one company or industry become the raw materials for another. The waste or by-product can either be donated or sold to another company allowing the resources to then be monetized and reused. Moving materials and resources between different companies and industries is key not just to creating a circular economy, but also to ensure the best possible use of natural resources.

Leveraging Technology and Making Circular Economies Happen

All of the above scenarios can reduce natural resource consumption, increase raw material productivity and lifecycles, and reduce manufacturing costs. Whether it’s via extending the life of mechanical and electronic appliances through remote performance monitoring, providing products direct-to-consumers with a system for reclaiming unwanted containers and cartridges, or improving the speed of disassembly and raw material reclamation for reuse, digital technology plays a pivotal role in making that reality.

The provenance and flow of components, products, and materials through supply chains to their end-of-use needs to be transparent. Unique identifier technologies such as cryptographic anchors, molecular DNA tags, or RFID tags can be applied to the surface of a component or product, or embedded into raw materials, to gather data on how wasteful a given supply chain is. Using these unique identifiers in conjunction with blockchain not only authenticates the provenance and origin of components and materials, it also provides location-based information for tracking and tracing product conditions.

Leading organizations are now focusing their efforts on using technologies to enable the transition to a circular economic model. Technologies such as IoT, predictive and prescriptive analytics, 3D printing, AI and machine learning, blockchain and digital twins, all have an essential role to play in this transition.

Products-as-a-Service

To further encourage the paradigm shift toward a circular economy necessitates a change in how we think about product acquisition. The motor industry offers drivers the opportunity to lease their cars with the option to buy after some certain period of time has passed. This ‘Product-as-a-Service’ leasing model is now being adopted by other manufacturers. Instead of purchasing a washing machine you can lease one. A consumer can enter into a contract with the manufacturer based on an agreed number of individual washing cycles or time, and be billed monthly. At the end of the contract, the manufacturer collects the machine and replaces it with a new one and a new leasing contract, or just takes the machine away for the consumer to consider other competitive leasing options. Either way, the machine is back in the hands of the manufacturer, who can now refurbish the machine for reuse.

During the consumer’s use of the machine, the manufacturer can not only monitor its usage, but also its integrity. Using IoT sensors and predictive analytics, the manufacturer can keep an eye on the health of the machine and recommend that the user proactively replace a given component before it breaks.

There are many examples of where ‘Product-as-a-Service’ and leasing models are becoming more commonplace by using digital technology to enable the provision, service, and financial arrangements. This is just one area where the industry is evolving to meet the moment, but an important one, and it illustrates how radically manufacturers can rethink their business models if they are so motivated. Moving to a more sustainable, less wasteful business model doesn’t have to mean a net loss for companies. If anything, the available examples seem to suggest that such transitions will open up unforeseen opportunities for new revenue streams and technological innovation. Far from being a zero-sum proposition, the conservation of raw materials and resources, it seems, can be of benefit to both consumers and manufacturers.

__________________________________________________________________

 Tim Adams is an Executive Partner at Theorem

wind energy production
Archives, Global Trade Daily, News, Special Reports

U.S. States Producing the Most Wind Energy

Leave a comment

“Meteoric” is one way to describe wind energy’s rise to the top of America’s renewable energy industry.

Amid repeated calls from scientists and activists to undertake measures to curb global warming, lawmakers, politicians, and the energy industry have responded. Foremost in that effort is the call for carbon-free energy production via alternative energy sources like wind and solar. Many states have followed suit, with governors from coast to coast implementing wide-ranging initiatives meant to gradually reduce the carbon footprint of power generation in the coming years.

Wind generation is at the leading edge of the movement toward clean energy production. Fields of wind turbines across the country have slowly started to increase their proportion of total energy production. And just this year, President Joe Biden announced measures meant to accelerate the development of offshore wind energy.

While U.S. offshore wind production currently lags behind that of other developed nations, its onshore capacity is second only to China. Wind energy’s share of total utility-scale electricity generation in the U.S. grew from less than 1% in 1990 to about 8% last year.

In 2019, more than $13 billion was invested in wind power, and the amount of new generation capacity added to the nation’s electrical grids through wind projects was greater than all other sources except natural gas. Driving the investment may be the simple fact that it’s far cheaper to install wind farms than it is to build hydroelectric plants and solar farms. Alongside the value, the federal government subsidized wind construction with tax credits. The result? Wind generation exceeded hydroelectric power for the first time in 2019.

While tax credits and reasonable construction costs have increased wind’s popularity, perhaps its greatest advantage is availability. Wind regularly barrels across the Midwest and the Texas-Oklahoma border at average speeds of 20 to 30 miles per hour, a key speed range, as turbines reach their rated generation capacity when winds hit 26 to 30 miles per hour.

This explains why the Midwest and the West South Central region are home to the top wind-generated electricity producers in the nation. Texas leads the nation in total wind energy production, generating more than twice as much wind electricity as the next state. And while the Lone Star State’s wind energy makes up a significant portion of its renewable energy generation (92%), Kansas’ renewable energy generation relies on wind more than any other state. Kansas’ wind turbines produce more than 99% of its renewable energy and 42% of total.

The data used in this analysis is from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. To determine the states producing the most wind energy, researchers at Commodity.com calculated each state’s annual wind energy production, measured in megawatt-hours. Researchers also calculated the absolute change in wind energy production since 2010, wind’s share of total energy production, and wind’s share of total renewable energy production.

Here are the states producing the most wind energy.

State Rank Annual wind energy production (MWh) Change in wind energy production since 2010 (MWh) Wind share of total energy production Wind share of total renewable energy production

 
Texas     1     83,620,371 57,368,961 17.3% 92.0%
Oklahoma     2     29,008,131 25,200,048 34.0% 87.2%
Iowa     3     26,304,990 17,134,653 42.0% 96.2%
Kansas     4     21,123,539 17,718,474 41.5% 99.6%
Illinois     5     14,459,597 10,005,963 7.8% 96.0%
California     6     13,735,069 7,656,437 6.8% 14.1%
North Dakota     7     11,213,025 7,117,384 27.3% 77.9%
Minnesota     8     10,964,869     6,173,146 18.5% 75.8%
Colorado     9     10,852,376     7,400,525 19.3% 77.3%
Nebraska     10     7,211,092     6,789,447 19.3% 83.2%
New Mexico     11     6,892,087     5,059,905 19.6% 81.1%
Washington     12     6,677,261     1,932,582 6.3% 9.0%
Oregon     13     6,568,889     2,648,882 10.6% 17.0%
Indiana     14     6,216,030     3,281,987 6.1% 85.7%
Michigan     15     5,825,705     5,465,365 5.0% 58.7%
United States     –     295,882,483     201,230,237 7.2% 40.6%

 

For more information, a detailed methodology, and complete results, you can find the original report on Commodity.com’s website: https://commodity.com/blog/states-wind-energy/

supply chain
Archives, Global Logistics, Global Trade Daily, International Trade

Navigating the 12 Pitfalls of the Global Supply Chain

Leave a comment

With over 30+ years of international trade experience, I have witnessed numerous and repeated errors made by Sales, Purchasing, Logistics Managers, Supply Chain, and International Business Executives.

There are tremendous opportunities and benefits to be derived through global sourcing and foreign business development. Along with these opportunities are considerable challenges, obstacles, and pitfalls. In order to succeed in international business, management must mitigate these concerns through gaining knowledge and implementing processes and controls over import and export operations, including the development of robust training for all personnel.

The following section contains twelve steps companies can take to manage the solutions that will allow the navigation through these challenges and delivering success to the international operation.

These twelve steps create a pathway forward in a concise, straightforward methodology and time-tested process to ensure management accomplishes their desired corporate goals of profits, growth, and sustainability.

Avoid the following:

Step 1: “We have no personal liability”.

There is significant personal liability for individuals who operate in global supply chains.

U.S. Government enforcement agencies, such as but not limited to:

– Department of Justice

– Customs and Border Protection

– Departments of State, Commerce and Treasury

– Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms

– United States Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration

All above are a few of the agencies that will prosecute both organizations and individuals who are seriously out of trade compliance with their import and export regulatory responsibilities.

While criminal prosecution is a rare occurrence … it does happen every day in the supply chain, somewhere in the world of international trade.

Trade Compliance Management in companies with an international footprint is a necessary evil that needs to be managed and integrated into the fabric of the organization’s culture and business model.

Step 2: “The FOB Term is Always a Safe Incoterm to Utilize”.

The FOB Incoterm has three deadly areas of concern:

-It is used in domestic trade

-It is a gray area in the loading process

-There can be ambiguity when the point in time responsibility and liability shift from the seller to the buyer (exporter to importer).

It is used in domestic trade

For domestic trade in the United States, the UCCP (Uniform Commercial Code of Practice) currently (though in contention) utilizes the FOB term as a “term of sale or purchase”, where there are two primary options FOB Origin and FOB Destination.

Within the UCCP, FOB is defined as:

Uniform Commercial Code › U.C.C. – ARTICLE 2 – SALES (2002) › PART 3. GENERAL OBLIGATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT

2-319. F.O.B. and F.A.S. Terms.

Unless otherwise agreed the term F.O.B. (which means “free on board”) at a named place, even though used only in connection with the stated price, is a delivery term under which:

(a) when the term is F.O.B. the place of shipment, the seller must at that place ship the goods in the manner provided in this Article (Section 2-504) and bear the expense and risk of putting them into the possession of the carrier; or

(b) when the term is F.O.B. the place of destination, the seller must at his own expense and risk transport the goods to that place and their tender delivery of them in the manner provided in this Article (Section 2-503);

(c) when under either (a) or (b) the term is also F.O.B. vessel, car, or another vehicle, the seller must in addition at his own expense and risk load the goods on board. If the term is F.O.B. vessel the buyer must name the vessel and in an appropriate case, the seller must comply with the provisions of this Article on the form of a bill of lading (Section 2-323).

The UCCP Term allows any mode of transit or conveyance.

Some sources claim that FOB stands for “Freight on Board”. This is not the case. “Freight On Board” is not mentioned in any version of Incoterms, and is not defined by the Uniform Commercial Code in the USA.[10] Further to that, it has been found in court that “Freight On Board” is not a recognized industry term.[11] The use of “Freight on Board” in contracts is therefore very likely to cause confusion. The correct term is “free onboard”.

Keep in mind that a huge amount, if not a clear majority of domestic commercial transactions, are sold or purchased on a FOB basis and moved by truck, rail, or air. This would be ok if the FOB Term was the UCCP intent and not intended utilization under Incoterms 2020.

There is a very clear line of confusion between the domestic and international “FOB” terms in selling and purchasing. It is only when it causes a problem when it is seen as an issue.

Free on Board, or FOB is an Incoterm, which means the seller is responsible for loading the purchased cargo onto the ship, and all costs associated with same. At the point, the goods are safely onboard the vessel, the risk transfers to the buyer, who assumes the responsibility of the remainder of the transport.

FOB is the most common agreement between an international buyer and seller when shipping cargo via sea. This Incoterm only applies to sea and inland waterway shipments.

The 2020 edition of Incoterms opened the door for domestic utilization of the FOB term. The FOB UCCP term varies greatly from the FOB Incoterm.

Under Incoterms 2020, the preferred term for domestic utilization, since that door was opened, is FCA (Free Carrier At).

It is a gray area in the loading process

Under Incoterms 2000 and prior, the FOB term transferred risk and cost from the seller to the buyer once the goods passed the ship’s rail.

This factor was changed in the 2010 edition of Incoterms and continues in the 2020 edition. The term now read “…passes when the goods are on board the vessel”.

However, “on board” is not clearly defined. Is that when the goods are placed on the deck, in the hold, not yet secured, secured, etc.?

We had a case in our office, where a U.S. exporter, sold a huge piece of equipment, (25 Tons, $11m in value) to a customer in Europe. It was going to be shipped via ocean, secured in a cargo hold under deck.

During the loading process, the goods were being lifted onto the vessel by a crane and longshoreman crew. In the handling, the equipment was laid down on the deck of the hold several times, while the longshoreman positioned the cargo.

In that repositioning process, the freight was damaged. The issue now became who is responsible, based upon the Incoterm of FOB Port Elizabeth – the seller or the buyer?

Were the goods actually “on board” when they were damaged? The maritime judicial system will eventually resolve that issue and court precedence will be established.

But today there is an ambiguity in defining “on board” in the FOB Incoterm. There are references to being “secured in place”, but it appears ambiguous.

Sellers and buyers need to address these specific concerns in the contract of sale and attempt to minimize the gray areas of liability, that may present themselves when using the FOB term.

There can be ambiguity when the point in time responsibility and liability shift from the seller to the buyer (exporter to importer).

This is the explanation of the FOB term from the Incoterms 2020 edition.

A2 (Delivery)

The seller delivers by placing the goods on board the vessel nominated or provided by the buyer on the agreed date, or within the agreed period as notified by the buyer, or if there is no such time notified then at the end of that period.

There is still a belief that the ship’s rail is the defining point, i.e.: before the notional vertical line above the rail is the seller’s cost and risk, and after is the buyer’s cost and risk. A court ruled that the delivery point was when the goods were on the deck but that then caused the question was the notional vertical line replaced with a notional horizontal one in line with the deck itself and what if the goods were being placed below deck? This ship’s rail concept was removed in the Incoterms® 2010 version. Typically, then, “on board” is taken to mean when the goods are safely on the deck or in the hold. If the cargo needs to be then further secured for transportation such as being lashed or separated with some material or spread evenly throughout the hold for bulk goods like grain the seller and buyer should agree in their contract what is needed and at whose cost and risk this is done.

B2 (Delivery)

The buyer’s obligation is to take delivery when the goods have been delivered as described in A2.

FOB A3 / B3: Transfer of Risk

A3 (Transfer of risk)

In all the rules the seller bears all risks of loss or damage to the goods until they have been delivered in accordance with A2 described above. The exception is loss or damage in circumstances described in B3 below, which varies depending on the buyer’s role in B2

B3 (Transfer of risk)

The buyer bears all risks of loss or damage to the goods once the seller has delivered them as described in A2.

If the buyer fails to inform the seller of where and when the vessel will be presented or if the vessel fails to arrive on time, or it fails to take the goods so that the seller cannot deliver, then the buyer bears the risk of loss or damage to the goods from the agreed date or at the end of the agreed period.

On an operational level, the seller delivered the goods to the terminal, carrier, or other agreed named place, and the goods were not loaded on board as anticipated for an array of reasons, such as but not limited to the carriers having vessel timing or loading issues and the seller appropriately notified the buyer than delivery has been made and risk of loss and damage has passed from the seller to the buyer.

The important aspect to note here is that the buyer expected to take delivery “on board” and now that did not occur as the buyer will take delivery and assume all risks at a point short of “on board”.

In general, Incoterms need to be understood in their entirety including the consequences associated with using the incorrect Incoterm or not understanding the specific responsibilities as the buyer or seller. Incoterms training is a must for all personnel engaged in global trade and more particularly those operating in Procurement, Sales, Operations, Finance, and Customer Service.

Companies involved in international trade using best practices will switch Incoterms 2020 rules in quotations, purchase orders, contracts, commercial invoices, and other commercial documentation when determining the level of responsibilities and costs they want to take on; dividing the responsibilities for risk transfer, costs, and responsibility for carrier selection between the buyer and the seller.

Step 3: Contracts Override Relationships

In international trade, relationships trump contracts. Relationships will drive a successful deal and a long tenure. I have always extolled “you can contract out risk”, but you can seriously minimize and mitigate risk by establishing favored relationships that allow the best opportunity for problem resolution and working out issues that will likely occur over time and trade.

Contracts are important to make the deal have legal standing, but it is foolish to believe that the contract eliminates any risk in the transaction. In fact, sometimes contracts can cause risk when a false sense of security is at hand.

Obtaining legal support is prudent but spending money and time at building relationships with suppliers, vendors, agents, and customers will go a long way in mitigating many of the risks in global trade.

Step 4: Service Providers are Experts in all Aspects of the Global Supply Chain

Just not so! While a small percentage of service providers are clearly experts, professionals, and aligned with teams of knowledgeable staff the majority have serious limitations.

While many have the expertise to arrange affreightment, pick up and delivery many lacks:

-the necessary local connections in all foreign markets

-trade compliance knowledge

-an understanding of how best to eliminate risk and cost from the supply chain

A high degree of scrutiny, vetting, and discerning should take place when choosing service providers, 3PL’s, freight forwarders, and customhouse brokers.

Areas of evaluation:

Service providers can be very valued partners in your global supply chain. Just because they hang out a shingle does not mean they can provide real benefit. Scrutinize robustly and vet diligently. It will pay off in the long run. Having a quality partner will make your job easier and with a greater ability to meet all the challenges successfully.

Step 5: Manage the Supply Chain with Robust Technology

Supply chains that have expansive technology in every aspect of the operation will gain great leverage in performance metrics.

Areas of technology in the supply chain are:

Technology creates efficiency, ease of operations, robust information flow, security, and other benefits. It allows for the highest levels of performance in any organization, but more particularly in the global supply chain. Technology advances forward and expands every day. Keeping contemporary is a challenge that all supply chain executives face.

Cyber Security has grown to be a significant threat. It must be contemplated and managed in every moment and keystroke of the day. There are cybersecurity solutions that must be integrated into all aspects of operation, where there is a technology interface.

Step 6: We have been doing it this way … for over 5 years with no problems.

We hear this often and clearly because a company has not encountered a specific problem, does not necessarily mean things are being done correctly.

A volcano is not a problem until it erupts. The underlying problem is waiting for emergence. Dealing with potential issues proactively and anticipating “what ifs” are a much better option.

Potential problems along with potential betterments must be proactively pursued to assure you do not have serious issues and are doing all possible to reduce risk and cost and/or business process improvements.

Continually updating a logistic SWOT Analysis, risk management assessments and process evaluations are all necessary steps in mitigating any unanticipated problems in the future.

Because no one is complaining does not mean everything is ok. You must be proactive in making sure everything is ok, without assumptions. Err to the side of conservativism as it will prevent future headaches.

The pandemic was a complete disaster and disruption to all global supply chains. Having said that, some good came out of it as companies had time for internal introspection at risk and threats leading to proactive steps in mitigation.

Step 7: We Handed it to the Carrier, so it must be “on board”

Tracking and tracing need to be accomplished at a very detailed and exhaustive level.

Just because you have confirmation that a carrier has received freight, does not assure it made it on board the vessel, aircraft, railcar or truck.

You need affirmation that in fact the goods have actually made it on board the conveyance with an updated ETA, followed up with daily frequency, in case of any unanticipated delays, which occur all the time.

Step 8: We Always Check the Denied Parties List

Many international executives believe their companies are consistently checking and reviewed the various lists making up the “Denied Party Screening” regulations for importers and exporters.

In many years of auditing companies engaged in global trade, only a small percentage is fully compliant with the review, checking and compliance responsibilities associated with Denied Party Screening.

There are available direct connections into the government agencies and numerous third-party technology companies with DPL Screening Capabilities.

Step 9: I am the Ultimate Consignee on these Goods, but not the Importer of Record.

Many companies who are the recipients of imported merchandise who are not participative in the import process believe they have no import responsibilities.

That is potentially and totally incorrect! Customs (CBP) has the right to evaluate any import situation and determine that the ultimate consignee could be considered the “importer of record” and therefore has all the responsibilities as the “importer of record”. This would then require adherence to all import regulations HTSUS, valuation, recordkeeping, etc.

Step 10: Domestic Packing will work for my International Shipments

Claims for loss and damage on international shipments occur every day and a major cause is inadequate packing, marking and labeling.

Just check with any marine insurance companies they will advise of the frequency and the severity of claims occurring on import and export shipments directly attributed to inadequate packing marking and labeling which could jeopardize marine cargo insurance coverage as an implicit or explicit warranty.

Step 11: Do we really need to ensure the shipment?

Loss and damage to international freight is a daily occurrence worldwide. In the overall cost of the global supply chain, marine insurance is an inexpensive purchase offering a high value of the return.

Just looked at what happened this year in the Suez Canal, with the grounding of the Ever Given (Evergreen Lines) which potentially caused losses in excess of $ 1billion.

Direct claims in delays and damage and indirectly caused by a General Average Claim. The fines, penalties, delays and lost cargo is still mounting, as only in early July, has the vessel finally exited the Suez Canal.

Marine cargo insurance is a solid, responsible, value-driven, and best practice purchase for any company shipping goods internationally.

“All Risk”, “Warehouse to Warehouse” with contemporary customized underwriting terms under standard policies are available.

Step 12: Do I need to train my global supply chain team?

The challenges of the global supply chain are numerous and daunting. These challenges can only be met by experienced well-trained managers and staff. The training needs to be consistent, contemporary and robust. Key areas to include are:

-Compliance

-Documentation

-Negotiating Freight

-Sourcing Management

-Logistics Management

-Technology Management

-Warehousing & Distribution

-International Contracts

-Risk and Spend Directives

-Foreign Trade Zones

These outlined above show a handful of the necessary skill sets required for import and export personnel to master. And “training” is the pathway to successful global supply chain management.

Summary:

The twelve examples outlined above provide a synopsis and evidence that mistakes based upon a lack of knowledge and skillsets can cause great disruption in import and export activity in the global supply chain.

Developing resources, providing training, and implementing procedures will assist in mitigating the problems and challenges identified in the above article.

Resources in international business and supply chain management will provide informed intelligence that will allow for making better decisions.

Training and skill set development will better prepare supply chain, import & export executives, managers, and staff to better deal successfully with all the challenges of global trade.

Procedures, protocols, and disciplines in management are always critical to a company’s success in business. In the global supply chain, SOPs are an integral component of freight, logistics, trade compliance, foreign sales, and overseas procurement that assure a company’s success in its international footprint.

The author can be reached at: tomcook@bluetigerintl.com for questions and comments.

germany
Archives, EU Trade, Global Trade Daily

Economic Recovery in Germany Marked with Fierce Rise in Inflation and a Stronger Green Transition

Leave a comment

When examining a recovery for the German economy as the world rebounds from the events of 2020, it’s important to realize that many sectors will continue to struggle throughout this year. Although the response from the government was fast and strong at the start of the pandemic, three main challenges remain top of mind for Germany this year throughout the recovery process as businesses adapt to a withdrawal of government support and the economy reopens. Many of them took up debt last year and are more vulnerable than before the start of the pandemic. In addition, supply bottlenecks across several sectors will affect exports, and lastly, they will face rising inflation, which is forecast to rise to 4% later this year.

At the onset of the pandemic, the German government provided an immediate response to support businesses, which led to a sense of stability for most of 2020 and the beginning of 2021. Now, as vaccinations progress and cases go down, the government will evaluate its existing stimulus measures and begin to pull back on fiscal support. The German government’s generous support has already provided for approximately $400 billion in direct support (11% of GDP), higher than most countries in Western Europe. Much of what happens next will be decided during the September parliamentary elections but in the meantime, businesses are preparing to say goodbye to the generous financial aid provided.

One government support staying in place is the suspension of the Debt Brake Rule. This rule – which limits the federal deficit to 0.35% of economic output per year, by adding an investment rule to secure enough public money for climate protection, infrastructure, health care and education– has recently been officially suspended for 2022. Not only does this temporary suspension this rule ease the burden on German businesses and the wider economy, but helps transatlantic relations with the U.S., which has been running a trade deficit with Germany. The suspension of the rule has and will continue to help with the U. S’s high current account deficit with Germany, however, it is only predicted to be suspended through 2022.

Businesses globally are struggling with some of the worst supply chain issues to date. This is hitting German sectors particularly hard, as there is a national shortage of shipping containers and semiconductor chips. Supply chain issues are expected to be mainly short-term for the manufacturing industry, especially the automotive industry, and opportunity lies ahead in the medium-to-long term as demand grows for German exports in China and the U.S. The need to spend more on sustainability is the broad consensus among the German population and the main political parties and it is predicted the green party will be a strong contender in the September election. Demand for electric cars is growing, and the Germany car industry was able to play into this trend pretty well, helped by their strong financial position.

There are business opportunities in Germany for companies providing products or services for digitalization and sustainability, as Germany is striving to catch up in the digitalization process.

In general, the German economy is in good shape. While many businesses adapt as the stimulus pulls back, a few sectors will be struggling – such as textile and retail, where margins were already thin prior to the pandemic. The metal and steel industries are generally in good condition, with some upset from strong competition and small profit margins.

Keeping in mind that despite stimulus and support, businesses operating in Germany will have to protect their trade receivables in anticipation of the economic changes this year will bring.

________________________________________________________________

Theo Smid is a Senior Economist for Atradius based in the Netherlands.

global air cargo
Air Cargo, Archives, Global Logistics, Global Trade Daily

Why is Global Air Cargo Demand on the Rise?

Leave a comment

According to the International Air Transport Association (IATA), the official global body of the airline industry, the demand for global air cargo reached its highest level since IATA began collecting the data in 1990. In March 2020, the demand was 4.4 percent higher than in March 2019. This was the month before the Covid-19 outbreak. However, the statistics don’t necessarily explain why global air cargo demand is at such an all-time high. Let’s try to break down some events that have led to the current state.

The upside of the pandemic

The pandemic has taken many lives and caused numerous problems for nearly every nook and cranny of the financial world. However, this doesn’t mean that there’s no silver lining to be found. The demand for global air cargo has benefited from the consequences of the pandemic in volumes no one could’ve predicted. Following the COVID-19 epidemic, air cargo demand has been steadily increasing.

However, it’s not all rainbows and butterflies in this industry. It seems that the demand growth slowed down a bit in March. In March 2021, air cargo demand was only 0.4 percent greater than it was in February 2021. Furthermore, in February 2021, it was 9.2 percent greater than in February 2019. The lower performance of Asian-Pacific and Latin American operators could be to blame for the slowdown. This, of course, doesn’t mean that the rising chain has been broken. It’s merely settled on a slower pace. The fact that demand in March 2021 was at its highest point since 1990 supports this point.

The everlasting will to evolve

Of course, we cannot contribute the rise of global air cargo demand solely to the pandemic. People need to be willing to make lemonade out of lemons; the lemons alone aren’t enough. The cheesy metaphor aside, all it means is that airlines are taking all the necessary measures to find the needed capacity to continue working and evolve beyond their previous achievements. They are using the recent boost to improve upon significant issues such as the frequency of delayed or damaged goods.

This crisis has proven that air freight can overcome fundamental problems by quickly embracing innovations. This is how it has continually remained the most effective way of shipping. Even though a part of the passenger fleet remains grounded, it continues to meet the growing demand. By digitalizing and being open to new ways of doing business, global air cargo is a bright light in the aviation industry.

Underlying economic conditions are beneficial to global air cargo demand

The underlying economic climate remains favorable for air cargo. The manufacturing Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) component of new export orders, which stood at 53.4 in March, reflects this. Manufacturing growth during the previous month is demonstrated by a score of above 50. During January and February 2021, this was centered in developed countries. Deliveries for manufactured goods are also increasing dramatically, which usually means more demand for air freight in an effort to cut down on shipping time.

Global air cargo is convenient

Seeing how this way of transporting items is the fastest, there are many benefits to it. This naturally makes it far more convenient and is why people turn to global air cargo regularly. Aside from the fact that this transportation alternative is fast, it’s also very reliable. Another great pro that explains the rise of global air cargo demand is that there are no conditions location-wise. Wherever you live, delivering your goods won’t be an issue. This means that you’ll be able to cut down on additional costs such as renting storage, packaging, and insurance, especially if you’re relocating. Global air cargo allows you to plan your shipments to a tee.

Air cargo is setting new sustainability goals

One of the worst downsides of global air cargo is its environmental impact. However, the industry has been working on reducing its carbon footprint by digitalizing operations wherever possible. The fact that air cargo is trying to be sustainable is excellent news! These activities are critical for long-term success. By removing unnecessary steps and reducing the amount of time, effort, and resources needed, digitization will help advance sustainability. They’ll save paper by using e-air waybills, for example. The use of artificial intelligence will result in more efficient planning and lower fuel use. Apart from the ideas that have already been set in motion, the demand for global air cargo also motivates industry workers to keep trying to develop new ways of making air freight sustainable.

Not everything is black and white

Although we can safely speak of the rise of global air cargo demand, staying objective is imperative. It’s essential to be aware of the reality surrounding this matter. All this means is that you should by no means imagine a straight rising line of improvement. Even though the demand for global air cargo is growing, we cannot neglect the rollercoaster nature of it all.

Many factors affect global air cargo demand. For example, it varies significantly across the IATA’s regions. Africa has had the best results, while Latin America had the lowest. Strong Asia-Africa trade flows dramatically enhanced African air cargo demand by 24.6 percent in March this year compared to March 2019. Over the same period, Latin American demand on international routes decreased by 23.6 percent.

____________________________________________________________

Thomas Hendricks has been working as a consultant at primemoversnc.com with an ambition to help people get the most out of their moving experiences. When he is not working, you can find him reading about the innovations in the industry or polishing up his cooking skills.

food systems
Archives, Global Trade Daily, Special Reports

Striving for Sustainability in Global Food Systems

Leave a comment

As the global community gears up for the 2021 UN Food Systems Summit, it is significant that preparations are also underway by Global Reporting Initiative to deliver a new sector reporting standard for agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing. The Summit aims to leverage the power of food systems to deliver progress on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Yet, unlocking the contribution of companies in the food production sectors will be impossible without clarity on their sustainable development impacts.

As part of GRI’s Sector Program, which aims to deliver 40 Sector Standards over the coming years, the exposure draft version of the Sector Standard for Agriculture, Aquaculture, and Fishing is currently out for public comment. The Sector Program has a remit to provide the global best practice for transparency within sectors, helping organizations meet stakeholder expectations for comprehensive and comparable sustainability reporting.

We are prioritizing agriculture, aquaculture and fishing because these sectors provide for basic and essential societal needs: food, most obviously, but also raw materials, such as fibers and fuels. They also have shared and overlapping materiality, which steered our rationale for bringing them under one umbrella.

The Standard will add to the reporting landscape for the sectors, bridging the gap on sector topics where stakeholder expectations are evolving and scrutiny is increasing. It will deliver disclosures that consider biodiversity and natural resources, measures to mitigate climate change, as well as how to adapt farming and fishing practices in ways that minimize their negative impacts.

This focus closely dovetails with the objectives of the Food Systems Summit, for which the pre-summit activity starts in July. The UN articulates the aims as ensuring access to safe and nutritious food for all; shifting to sustainable consumption patterns; boosting nature-positive production; advancing equitable livelihoods; and building resilience to vulnerabilities, shocks, and stress.

Research and rationale

The draft Standard’s content is the culmination of more than 12 months of rigorous research by our Sector Team, drawing on authoritative sources and a multi-stakeholder process. A 19-member expert working group was instrumental in developing the exposure draft. Reflecting diverse backgrounds, it includes representatives from five continents and constituencies, with a unique combination of sectoral skills and organizational experience, including crop and animal production, aquaculture, and fishing.

The proposed Sector Standard will help companies increase recognition and understanding on their shared sustainability challenges. It includes relevant reporting topics that are covered by GRI’s (sector-agnostic) topic-Specific Standards – for example, climate adaptation, biodiversity, waste, food safety, and occupational health – as well as introducing seven new topics.

By including topics not covered by existing GRI Standards, we have expanded the breadth of reporting guidance for agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing organizations to identify their most significant impacts – thereby supporting decision-useful data that can be a catalyst for the adoption of more sustainable practices.

The seven new topics

The newly introduced topics in the draft Standard are:

1. Food security recognizes the sectors’ central role in food production, guiding organizations to describe commitments to ensure their operations contribute to the stability of food supply and access to food, including how they work with other organizations.

2. Land and resource rights calls on companies to report how they respect individuals’ and communities’ land rights (including those of indigenous people). It also asks about their operations and suppliers whose access or rights to natural resources cannot be assured.

3. Living income addresses whether companies provide enough for workers and producers supplying to them to afford a decent standard of living. The topic also deals with reporting on the proportion of employees paid above living wage.

4. Natural ecosystem conversion covers policies, commitments and monitoring tools to reduce or eliminate activities that change natural ecosystems to another use or profoundly change an ecosystem’s structure or function.

5. Soil health guides reporting on soil management plans and fertilizer application.

6. Pesticides use focuses on how organizations manage and use chemical or biological substances for controlling pests or regulating plant growth.

7. Animal health and welfare addresses the approach to animal health planning and use of welfare certification schemes or audits, as well as disclosing the use of any medicinal or hormone treatments.

Grounded in the SDGs

With positive and negative impacts that link to the SDGs, all of the topics covered in this Sector Standard, and the way it is structured, will make it easier for businesses to understand their contribution to the achievement of the SDGs – and how they can contribute towards solutions.

Perhaps more than any other sector, agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing organizations have wide-ranging impacts that touch on all of the 17 SDGs. In particular, this new Standard makes multiple linkages between topics and goals on ending poverty (Goal 1); ending hunger (Goal 2); ensuring the availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation (Goal 6); promoting decent work for all (Goal 8); reducing inequalities (Goal 10); ensuring sustainable consumption and production (Goal 12); taking climate action (Goal 13); protecting life below water (Goal 14) and life on land (Goal 15); ensuring peace and justice (Goal 16); and building partnerships (Goal 17).

We need your input

The global public comment period to gather feedback on the exposure draft for Agriculture, Aquaculture, and Fishing Sector Standard closes on 30 July. We encourage you to channel your considerations on this draft’s feasibility, completeness, and relevancy by completing an online questionnaire. The more input from all interested groups and stakeholders, the more we can do to ensure the delivery of a Standard that is fit-for-purpose.

Our hope for the final Standard, which we intend to launch in 2022, is to empower organizations to achieve meaningful and consistent sustainability reporting that supports sustainable food systems and encourages responsible fishing and farming practices. We all know that companies within these sectors are essential for providing the food and resources that human wellbeing depends on. Let’s ensure that they can do so in a way that contributes to lasting and sustainable solutions.

___________________________________________________________

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Margarita Lysenkova joined GRI Standards Division in 2019 and has been instrumental in the development of the new Sector Program, contributing to the GRI Oil and Gas Sector Standard and leading the pilot project for the Sector Standard for Agriculture, Aquaculture, and Fishing.

With a professional background in corporate, UN and non-for-profit sectors across four countries, Margarita’s expertise spans international labour standards and sustainability. Previous roles include working for the International Labour Organization in Geneva, and in financial reporting with a Belgian multinational. Margarita holds degrees in economics (Saint Petersburg University of Economics & Finance) and business management (ESC Rennes School of Business).

ABOUT GRI

Global Reporting Initiative is the independent, international organization that helps businesses and other organizations take responsibility for their impacts, by providing the global common language to report those impacts – the GRI Standards.

development
Archives, Global Trade Daily, News

Goodman Group Doubles Down on Sustainability with New Multi-Story Industrial Development on Seine Axis

Leave a comment

Today HAROPA PORT announces the creation of a major river and seaport complex. It is the outcome of a call for logistics projects initiated by the Port of Gennevilliers (French département 92). Goodman has been selected for the development of a 90,000 sqm multimodal logistics platform – unique in Europe. The platform will be constructured over four levels, linked directly to the Seine and targeting the development of river transport and urban distribution for the Greater Paris region. The project is a perfect illustration of the new river and seaport’s positioning and ambitions for the development of decarbonised logistics.

Key features include;

+90,000 sqm of logistics space including 10,000 sqm of offices

+16 units of 5,000 sqm

+Four levels accessible to all vehicle types

+11,000 sqm solar PV

+17,000 sqm rooftop urban farm, of which 7,000 sqm is  greenhouse space

+BREEAM Outstanding certification, BiodiverCity and Low-Carbon labels

+One river transhipment dock

Named GREEN DOCK, this cutting-edge logistics project will be ideally located in the port of Gennevilliers, the leading port facility for the Greater Paris area by size and activity and only five kilometres from Paris and 20 minutes from Roissy – Charles de Gaulle airport. 250 companies from a diverse range of sectors have already chosen the area due to the ports location and multi-modal offerings, which include a combination of river, sea/rail, oil pipeline and road transport modes. GREEN DOCK will allow urban distribution businesses to provide “final-kilometre” delivery and to develop river-based transport deep into the French capital.

The vision for river transport is becoming increasingly important for many operators. STEF, DB SCHENKER and CEVA Logistics have already expressed interest in GREEN DOCK, providing input for its design. GREEN DOCK will be developed, held and managed directly by Goodman.

Goodman’s approach utilized a multi-disciplinary team to conceptualise this prime multimodal site combining modularity and a contemporary eco-design. The modern architectural lines of its façade will be constructed in natural, recycled materials including wood and concrete to integrate the site into its Seine riverbank surroundings. The building’s structure has been conceived for total flexibility and will allow its working areas to evolve in line with the needs of the occupants. Lastly, its roofing will be home to the largest urban farm in Europe, run by Cultivate it will cover 17,000 sqm, including 7,000 sqm of greenhouse space.

GREEN DOCK also sets out to be a model of economic land use and sustainable development, aiming for BREEAM certification at Outstanding level plus the BiodiverCity and low-carbon labels. Covering 90,000 sqm over four levels, supplemented by an access zone and underground parking, the project will have a density four times higher than standard. Energy management on the site will also benefit from innovations unparalleled in terms of scale: a solar PV plant covering 11,000 sqm of roof area intended for the site’s own supply, a heat exchanger connected to the Seine for heating and cooling the building and a geothermal plant. The dock, a key component of the site’s multimodality, fully funded by Goodman, provides a direct link between the project and the river. It will offer users direct, functional access to river transport, both upstream and downstream.

“We are honoured to have been awarded the project initiated by HAROPA PORT for the Gennevilliers flagship site. Green Dock, our multimodal project design is the outcome of a year of studies and discussion and embodies the firm belief that river transport will be central to tomorrow’s urban distribution. Its vertical design is inspired by our completed projects in Asia, but its functional architectural quality and environmental performance make Green Dock unique. It exemplifies the level of excellence we aim for in each of our developments.” says Philippe Arfi, Director of Goodman France.

“It is with pleasure that we sign this commitment to working with Goodman on this highly auspicious day on which HAROPA PORT comes officially into being. This project for a multimodal platform is an innovation for Europe and confirms the role of the new HAROPA PORT in ambitious, decarbonised logistics. This agreement is a perfect illustration of our ability to offer end-to-end logistics solutions right from the maritime terminals of Le Havre and Rouen up to the final kilometre and to pursue alongside our partners projects on a scale and of a quality never before seen in our ports” confirms Stéphane Raison, CEO of HAROPA PORT.

__________________________________________________________________

About HAROPA PORT

Since 1 June 2021, the ports of Le Havre, Rouen and Paris, already united under single banner of HAROPA since 2012, form the “major Seine Axis river and sea port authority”. As the fifth largest north-European port complex, HAROPA PORT has connections to every continent based on an international maritime offering in the very first rank (calling at nearly 700 ports). It serves an extensive hinterland centred on the Seine Valley and the Paris region, together constituting France’s biggest consumer catchment area. From Le Havre to Rouen, the port complex can point to 2.5m sq. m. of logistics warehousing currently in service and over 1m sq. m. of available warehousing space. Today in France, HAROPA PORT provides a transport and logistics system capable of proposing holistic, end-to-end service offerings. It generates annual maritime and river traffic in excess of 130m tonnes and its activities represent approximately 160,000 jobs.

For more information, please contact:

Marie HERON T +33 2 32 74 72 87 – +33 6 79 69 36 09 marie.heron@haropaports.com

Nicolas BOUDET +33 1 40 58 29 81 – +33 6 74 35 22 17 nicolas.boudet@haropaports.com

About Goodman

With assets under management totalling A$52.9 billion and 366 properties under management, Goodman is the largest listed industrial property group in Australia and one of the largest managers of listed specialist funds worldwide. Its market vision and its specialised teams in each country, create solid investment opportunities and develop spaces and working environments that meet the individual needs of each customer.

With over 900 staff and 26 offices in 14 countries, Goodman has the global reach to meet the needs of its clients as their businesses expand or develop. In Europe, Goodman is present in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, France, Spain, Italy, and the United Kingdom.

For more information on Goodman in France, go to: www.goodman.com

waste
Archives, Global Trade Daily, Imports/Exports, News

China’s Recent Ban on Solid Waste Imports to Shift Global Recovered Paper Market

Leave a comment

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘World – Recovered Paper – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

Paper waste exporters worldwide now have to shift their supply chains: China, a global key processor of imported waste, banned solid waste imports in 2021. Countries with insufficient domestic paper processing capacity will now be forced to develop these facilities, against the current global trend towards the circular economy. 

Key Trends and Insights

Paper recycling worldwide is increasing robustly. According to the European Paper Recycling Council, paper recycling in the EU reached 72% in 2019. The U.S. attained a record recycling performance indicator of 68.2% in 2018; this figure then started to drop to 65.7% in 2020, following a decline in the volume of American waste paper being processed abroad. Despite the rise in paper recycling facilities in the U.S., the country has not yet overcome its shortage of reprocessing plants.

In 2020, global imports of waste and scrap of paper and paperboard declined by 15% against the previous year (IndexBox estimates). This decline was largely a result of China’s systematic curb of paper waste imports, an initiative aimed at improving the country’s environmental situation.

Since 1 January 2021, a full ban has been in force in China regarding solid waste imports, which were to be sent for recycling inside the country. This ban also includes all paper waste. Indonesia has also announced similar plans to curb waste imports. The EU and the U.S. now face the emerged issue of rearranging supply chains in paper recycling.

With approx. $1.7B of imported paper waste, China accounted for approx. 29% of the recycling of global waste and scrap paper and paperboard before 2021. Now, this market share is to be captured by other actors. India, Vietnam and Malaysia, among others, have started to increase the volume of imported paper waste, thereby partially sustaining the global recycling balance.

The recycling of paper and cardboard is set to increase worldwide, in line with the global shift to a circular economy. A decline in the global export and import of waste paper products is therefore equally forecast, against increasingly stringent environmental standards in particular countries. The key exporters of paper waste, such as the U.S., the UK, and Japan will now be forced to develop their own paper and cardboard recycling capacity.

Recovered Paper Imports by Country

In 2020, global recovered paper imports decreased by -10.5% to 38M tonnes, falling for the fourth year in a row. In value terms, they contracted by -15% to approx. $6B.

In value terms, China ($27.7B) led the market, alone. The second position in the ranking was occupied by the U.S. ($5.4B). It was followed by Japan.

In 2020, China (9M tonnes), distantly followed by Germany (4.3M tonnes), Indonesia (2.8M tonnes), the Netherlands (2.7M tonnes) and India (2M tonnes) were the main importers of recovered paper, together committing 54% of total imports. Mexico (1.6M tonnes), Taiwan (Chinese) (1.4M tonnes), Austria (1.3M tonnes), Thailand (1.2M tonnes), Turkey (1.2M tonnes), South Korea (1.2M tonnes), Canada (0.8M tonnes) and France (0.8M tonnes) occupied a minor share of total imports.

In 2020, the average recovered paper import price amounted to $156 per tonne, which is down by -5% against the previous year. Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was India ($201 per tonne), while the Netherlands ($106 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

Parabolic Trough
Archives, Global Trade Daily, Utilities

Parabolic Trough Technology to Gain Traction in Concentrated Solar Power Market

Leave a comment

The rapid adoption of clean energy across the decentralized grid network is projected to add impetus to the global concentrated solar power market expansion in the foreseeable future. Governments worldwide are focusing on improving the usage of sustainable energy by introducing various policies and reforms.

Likewise, high integration of the thermal energy storage technology, as well as the FDI’s and private investments in the Asia Pacific & the Middle East regions to deploy new concentrated solar power plants, will boost industry share.

The global market has been witnessing robust demand for sustainable electricity, along with mounting investments in solar integrated power grids. Furthermore, the advancements in technology to use the solar receivers with increased thermal performance, the large-scale integration of renewable energy, as well as the rapid sustainable electrical network construction will contribute to notable concentrated solar power market growth over the projected timeframe.

The energy demand across the globe has been constantly rising. Several businesses are making medium- and large-scale investments to develop solar generation farms, which in turn, can drift the regulatory policies & consumer tendencies towards solar technologies. Concentrated solar thermal systems will further gain high prominence over the coming years, due to the restructuring of various trade policies as well as investment flows across the developing economies.

Based on technology, the global concentrated solar power market from the parabolic trough segment is slated to witness remarkable traction in years to come, which is attributable to the rising number of investors, coupled with the utility inclination towards this technology. The segmental growth will also be bolstered by the shifting focus towards the advancements of thermal energy storage options and subsequent development of solar receivers to improve the collector field thermal performance. Additionally, growing R&D activities to adopt storage technology with high absorption rates and longer receiver life cycle will augment the integration of this technology.

In the parabolic trough CSP systems, the solar energy is concentrated by the parabolically curved and trough-shaped reflectors on a receiver pipe above a curved mirror surface. The heat energy is then deployed in the thermal power block to generate power in a conventional steam generator. These accelerating concentrated solar power advantages will amplify the concentrated solar power market outlook over the forecast spell.

In terms of segmentation by capacity, the ≤ 50 MW segment is set to gain significant momentum in the years ahead. The segmental expansion can be credited to the capability of the CSP units to complement the escalating energy demand across the commercial sector as well as their high applicability in small-scale industrial process heat systems to lower the level of fossil fuel consumption.

Furthermore, rising installations of solar thermal power plants across space-constrained areas, coupled with the stringent environmental regulations to ensure carbon reduction, will create ideal growing conditions for the overall concentrated solar power market over the projected timeframe. For example, in 2019, the Indian Government set 7.2% as the solar purchase obligation for the power distribution companies, which will be increased to 10.5% by 2021.

With regards to storage, the global concentrated solar power industry from the without storage segment will depict a considerable growth rate, driven by the low installation costs and complexity. Minimal capital expenditure has also led to a reduction in maintenance and operational costs. Additionally, a paradigm shift towards the installation of these without storage CSP plants due to high capacity utilization and power reliability will boost business growth.

The competitive landscape of the concentrated solar power market consists of companies namely Acciona Energy, Suntrace, Enel Green Power, Abengoa Solar, and ACWA Power, among others. These companies are targeting towards expanding their regional footprint and product portfolio by implementing strategies such as M&A and business expansions.

For instance, in March 2021, ENGIE reached an agreement to acquire a 100-MV concentrated solar power plant from Abengoa, which is equipped with a molten salt storage system and parabolic trough technology to enable 5.5 hours of power storage and deliver electricity during peak demand.

Source: https://www.gminsights.com/industry-analysis/concentrated-solar-power-market

sustainability
3pls, Archives, Global Logistics

An Efficient Supply Chain is by Nature a More Sustainable One

Leave a comment

It’s C.H. Robinson’s mission to improve the world’s supply chains. We’ve been doing it for decades now. But in a world ever more conscious of the imperative to reduce carbon emissions, helping customers move their freight more efficiently has taken on new urgency.

Our customers are tackling their carbon footprint from all angles, from their facilities to the source of their electricity. They’re turning to us for help with an even more challenging sustainability goal: reducing greenhouse gases across their supply chains. With nearly 200,000 customers and contract carriers worldwide, we stand to make a significant impact on sustainability across the industry.

New technology and data we’ve launched are proving to be an accelerator of change. Now that companies can get an instant calculation of all their transportation emissions, a huge barrier is removed and the possibilities for reduction are revealed. We helped one of the largest outdoor retailers reduce their carbon output through mode conversion and purchase order aggregation, which eliminated 1,270 metric tons of emissions from their supply chain in one year – the equivalent of 3,000 barrels of oil.

Load and mode optimization, consolidation, and eliminating empty miles are some of the ways we make supply chains more efficient. As Chief Human Resources and E.S.G. Officer for C.H. Robinson, I’m proud to say that those services are also some of our most effective sustainability solutions.

For example, because C.H. Robinson’s technology is built by and for supply chain experts, we can uncover that a customer’s weekly freight from Los Angeles to Chicago is consistently seven different less-than-truckload (LTL) shipments from seven different vendors. To help the customer save money, reduce waste and achieve their sustainability goals, we can consolidate that onto one truck. That’s six cross-country shipments and a lot of emissions eliminated. More efficient. More sustainable.

Our global suite of services also provides more options. For example, if that customer has bigger shipments that are less time-sensitive, one option would be switching from trucks to rail. On average, a ton of freight can move 470 miles by rail on a single gallon of gas. More efficient. More sustainable.

Just think about the carbon reduction that’s possible in a major national retailer’s supply chain. Let’s say the retailer has hundreds of shipments going from Amsterdam to Barcelona every week, with trucks driving back empty to pick up their next load. Those are wasted miles.

Because of our global scope and scale, our supply chain experts can optimize that, too. While even the largest of retailers only has visibility into their own freight, C.H. Robinson has visibility into 19 million shipments annually. It’s an enormous information advantage for our customers. Across our vast network of contract carriers, we can identify hundreds of trucks on similar schedules going from Barcelona to Amsterdam. Pairing up that freight can eliminate those empty miles and the associated carbon emissions. More efficient. More sustainable.

In my E.S.G. role at C.H. Robinson, I have the privilege of seeing how our expertise in solving the most complex supply chain problems is creating a more sustainable future for our customers, our industry and our planet. Let us help you achieve your sustainability goals.

___________________________________________________________________________

Angie Freeman is the Chief Human Resources & ESG Officer at C.H. Robinson