Increasing greenhouse gaseous concentration in the atmosphere is perturbing the environment to cause grievous global warming and associated consequences. Following the rule that only measurable is manageable, mensuration of greenhouse gas intensiveness of different products, bodies, and processes is going on worldwide, expressed as their carbon footprints. The methodologies for carbon footprint calculations are still evolving and it is emerging as an important tool for greenhouse gas management. The concept of carbon footprinting has permeated and is being commercialized in all the areas of life and economy, but there is little coherence in definitions and calculations of carbon footprints among the studies. There are disagreements in the selection of gases, and the order of emissions to be covered in footprint calculations. Standards of greenhouse gas accounting are the common resources used in footprint calculations, although there is no mandatory provision of footprint verification. Carbon footprinting is intended to be a tool to guide the relevant emission cuts and verifications, its standardization at international level are therefore necessary. Present review describes the prevailing carbon footprinting methods and raises the related issues.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Performance of a manufacturing system depends on its ability to simultaneously meet several requirements such as: quick response to market demand, high product quality, low manufacturing costs and timely deliveries; which in turn strongly depend on performance at the shop floor level. In the past, the shop floor level operational policies in the context of scheduling, maintenance and quality have been examined in isolation. However, it is hypothesised that these three aspects of operations planning may also have some interaction effect and hence joint consideration of various policy options pertaining to quality, maintenance and scheduling on the performance of the manufacturing system is an important area for investigation. In this paper, a review of literature addressing the joint consideration of these three aspects is presented and research gaps are highlighted. As a preliminary work, some numerical investigations are also presented to highlight the importance of joint consideration of these three aspects. Finally, a conceptual methodology is presented that can lead to further developments in this field. Some potential research areas in this context are identified. ) of the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee (India) and the Director-in-Charge of IIT Delhi (July-December 2000). He has vast experience in teaching, research and consultancy spanning for more than 41 years. He is on the editorial board of several international journals. He has many awards and prizes to his credit. His areas of interest include productivity management, supply chain management, industrial engineering, operations research and operations management. 1 job-attributed criteria (e.g., job flow time) 2 shop-attributed criteria (e.g., machine utilisation) 3 completion-based criteria (e.g., makespan) 4 due-date-based criteria (e.g., tardiness) 5 financial criteria (e.g., job handling cost) 6 miscellaneous criteria (e.g., labour utilisation).In general, production scheduling models are often mathematical programming models designed to maximise or minimise one or more of the above measures. Solution methodologies for such models range from traditional integer programming

No abstract

The term ''carbon footprint'' has evolved as an important expression of greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity for diverse activities and products. Widespread public acceptance and the ease of conveying information about GHG intensity with this term has also attracted scientists and policy makers to review and refine its calculations. Standard methods for carbon footprinting have been prepared, and sector-specific standards are under development. These standards direct the procedures to carry out carbon footprinting through life cycle assessment in conjunction with GHG accounting, classifes activities into three tiers based on the order of emissions. Agriculture is the largest contributor to anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases, so the quantification of different agricultural practices is essential for identification of more sustainable practices. Carbon footprinting has potential as a tool for assessing and comparing GHG performances of different agricultural products along with identification of points to improve environmental efficiencies. Case studies on the application of carbon footprinting to cultivation practices are increasing in the scientific literature, but the majority of studies do not comply with the standard three-tier methodology. This leads to nonuniformity among different studies and their comparisons. Hence, a standard guideline addressing carbon footprinting specifically for agriculture is essential for the effective application of this tool in the quantification of GHG intensity, mitigation of global warming, and adaptation against future climate change scenarios.