B5723

Date: August 1, 2012

O M AR R O M E R O -H E R N A N D E Z
TONY KIN GSBU RY
SER GIO ROM ERO
C E L E S T E L I N D S AY

Han Solar and the Green Supply Chain

Garrett Green, director of operations of San Francisco-based Han Solar read the morning news of
October 2011 on his iPad as he drank his cup of coffee: “We have reached seven billion people on this
planet! Many of these people have homes that need power and cars that need electricity, essentially
entire lives that are dependent on the existence of constant power. The demand for energy and
electricity will continue to increase exponentially and the world’s resources will be more rapidly
depleted than ever.” This, combined with the fact that governments around the world continued to
implement new regulatory policies to support consumption of solar energy and the production of solar
energy systems, made Han Solar, with its thriving photovoltaic panel (PV) business, seem timely.

However, as reflected in its thriving solar panel business recently, the company’s profits had started to
drop. At first, the company’s managers thought that the economy was to blame. But, after seeing that
their competitors were still growing, they began to question their theory. Eventually, after analysis,
the Han Solar team determined that the decrease in profits might be due to the company’s lack of
focus on the environment. Other competitors had claimed that their panels were manufactured and
distributed through conscious green processes. But Han Solar had no immediate answer to these
claims.

Previously, the company had positioned itself as one of the least expensive solar panels. But, as
competition increased, this “claim to fame” became less compelling to consumers. Thus, company
management realized that they had to come up with a new strategy for the company. After a
brainstorming session, they decided to increase the focus on the environment so that they could
position their company more positively to consumers, as well as to set the basis for exploring potential
carbon offsets1 that could make their business more attractive. And since the team noticed an increase
in green awareness by consumers, the Han Solar team decided to capitalize on it.

1
A reduction in emissions of carbon or greenhouse gases made in order to offset an emission made elsewhere.
Professors Omar Romero-Hernandez, Tony Kingsbury, and Sergio Romero prepared this case study with research assistance from Celeste
Lindsay as the basis for class discussion rather than to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of an administrative situation. This
company and all characters in this case study are fictitious. Any resemblance to real-life companies or people are merely a coincidence.
Authors want to express their gratitude to Jo Mackness and Kellie McElhaney for their support through the Center for Responsible Business /
Sustainable Products and Solutions Program.

Copyright © 2012 by The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored,
or transmitted in any form or by any means without the express written permission of the Berkeley-Haas Case Series.
This document is authorized for use only in HBSP's Ignisense at ${institution} from Jan 2020 to Jul 2020.
 HAN SOLAR AND THE GREEN S UPPLY CHAIN 2

Han Solar put a group of executives in charge of exploring the sustainability implications of the
company’s supply chain. Green and his team were asked to provide an estimate of the carbon
footprint of panels and consequently, identify green opportunities in the manufacturing process and
the distribution network, as well as to recommend the best distribution network to supply PV panels to
California. Some team members believed that the business should do whatever it takes to reduce
costs, while others felt that consumer expectations needed to be fulfilled beyond a simple price tag.
No one in the group was certain what the carbon footprint of the company was or the opportunities
and risks of Han Solar’s supply chain.

Background
According to the European Photovoltaic Industry Association, photovoltaic panels could provide
almost a quarter of the world’s required electricity by the year 2050. Although this seemed like a
distant reality, by 2012, panel manufacturing technology was already progressing at a rapid pace. As
manufacturing processes became more sophisticated and competition increased, panels continued to
be made in greater quantities and lower prices. Companies such as Han Solar benefitted from this
growth and from the support of government programs.

However, although solar panels emitted less environmental pollutants than oil or coal, the associated
manufacturing process still had many problems and opportunities. Specifically, Han Solar was aware
that the environmental benefits of photovoltaic systems lie within a range of values that could make
them better or worse than other sources (Exhibit 1). It was time to benchmark their operations against
other reported values.

Exhibit 1 Estimates of Lifecycle Green House Gas (GHG) Emissions (g CO2eq/kWh) for Broad
Categories of Electricity Generation Technologies.2

Supply Chain Sustainability

2
Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2012.

This document is authorized for use only in HBSP's Ignisense at ${institution} from Jan 2020 to Jul 2020.
 HAN SOLAR AND THE GREEN S UPPLY CHAIN 3

On the day of the kick-off meeting, the Han Solar group members decided that, in order to reduce
their CO2 emissions, they needed to first identify the location of the problem. They decided to
perform an extensive study of the manufacturing process and then make suggestions for ways to
“green” it. However, Han Solar’s director of sustainability said: “As we are trying to come up with
the footprint of the manufacturing process, we should keep in mind that this is only one part of a
bigger picture called supply chain sustainability.”

Supply chain sustainability is the management of environmental, social, and economic impacts, and
the encouragement of good governance practices throughout the life-cycles of goods and services. 3
This sustainability begins with “life-cycle thinking”, or considering the impacts of actions before they
are taken. In regards to manufacturing, life-cycle thinking could include changing the manufacturing
process to reduce energy and water use. Or, it could include simplifying the packaging to use fewer
raw materials, in addition to cutting out waste from production processes wherever possible.
Although these solutions may not be easy, it is important to consider and implement them in order to
remain a competitive and environmentally conscious business.

Furthermore, environmental, social, and economic impacts exist throughout every stage of the supply
chains, so it is possible that one manufacturing process change can affect every part of the chain. If
the efficiency of production of an item is improved, then the supplier will get the item more quickly
and customers will be happier with the quality of what they ordered. In this way, good environmental
practices can positively affect the entire chain. Changes upstream can be felt all the way downstream.

But, these changes can be slow since pressure for supply chain sustainability can come from a variety
of sources, including legal demands or regulations, customer demands, response to stakeholders,
competitive advantages, environmental and social pressure groups, and a loss of reputation for not
meeting certain environmental standards. Luckily, recent literature shows that it is not uncommon to
see that the advantages of being more environmentally conscious for a company outweigh the costs.

Garrett Green worked with his team to conduct a life-cycle analysis on the solar panels—“a technique
used to assess environmental impacts associated with all of the stages of a product’s life from cradle-
to-grave.”4 In this definition, “cradle-to-grave” refers to all of the processes used to create and recycle
a product, which include raw material extraction through materials processing, manufacturing,
distribution, use, repair and maintenance, and disposal or recycling. 5 These analyses include
compiling an inventory of relevant energy and material inputs and environmental releases in order to
evaluate the impact on the environment of these toxic chemicals and byproducts that are released to
the environment.

After this analysis is performed, interpreting the results can help a company make a more informed
decision on how to make its production line more eco-efficient. According to the ISO 14040 and
14044 standards, a proper life-cycle analysis includes the following four steps: goal and scope
definition, inventory analysis, impact assessment, and interpretation. The photovoltaic industry is not
unfamiliar with life-cycle analysis and several studies have taken place in recent years to address
GHG emissions of electricity generation technologies.

It is known that generating 1kWh or electricity from fossil fuel reserves, such as oil, emits about 1,000
grams of CO2-equivalents, while solar panels, according to this research, emit far less (Exhibit 1).
Despite the benefits of solar panels, they could still be more expensive and less efficient than other
energy counterparts. Green and his team reconciled this contradiction by discovering that the
emissions of carbon dioxide occur mostly during the manufacturing process, not during the use phase.

3
http://globalcompact.oit.duke.edu/globalcompact/sites/default/files/BSR%20supply%20chain%20sustainability.PDF.
4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-cycle_assessment.
5
Ibid.

This document is authorized for use only in HBSP's Ignisense at ${institution} from Jan 2020 to Jul 2020.
 HAN SOLAR AND THE GREEN S UPPLY CHAIN 4

Armed with this information, Green and the rest of the Han Solar research group decided to
investigate the manufacturing process further in order to decide where improvements could be made.

The Manufacturing Process

After the initial meeting, Green made a visit to the manufacturing facilities and presented a flow
diagram, describing the production of photovoltaic panels involved in nine major operations (Exhibit
2), which cover from Extraction of ram material (silica) to final panel assembly.

Exhibit 2 Han Solar’s Manufacturing Process

Operation # 2
Operation # 1 Operation # 3 Operation # 4 Operation # 7
Silica to Silicon Operation # 5 Operation # 6 Operation # 8 Operation # 9
Silica Extraction and mg-Si into sog-Si Casting and Wafer Application of
transformation Chemical attack n-film formation Passivation and ARC Panel assembly
Refining transformation production electric contacts

Exhibit 2 shows a nine step manufacturing process: Silicon Extraction and Refining, Transformation
of Silica into Silicon, Purification of mg-Si into sog-Si, Chemical Attack and Texturing, Casting and
Wafer Production, n-Film Formation, Application of the Electric Contacts, Passivation and ARC, and
Panel Assembly. Each of these processes is explained in detail in Appendix 1.

Green asked team members to gather readings and/or perform estimations of energy requirements for
each major process. The task involved a mix of specific activities including reading electricity bills,
adjusting data from specification sheets of various equipments, and performing direct measurements
when possible. Since he had limited time and resources, he wanted to focus on areas that represented
the largest “bang-for-the-buck”. His team had gathered most of the information needed and identified
major energy consumers.

Exhibit 3 Energy Required by Entire Han Solar’s Manufacturing Process

Process Energy Requirement

[Megajoules/panel]
1. Silica Extraction and Refining 0.71
2. Silica into Silicon 93.78
3. Transformation mg-Si to sog-Si 280.54
4. Casting and Wafer Production 83.62
5. Chemical Attack 12.22
6. n-film Formation 48.41
7. Application of electric contacts 48.41
8. Passivation and ARC 12.23
9. Panel Assembly 62.66
Total Energy 642.58 / panel

Exhibit 3 shows the energy necessary for each stage of the panel production process [MJ/panel]. This
includes the fuel needed for transport in each individual process, although this will vary according to
manufacturing plant locations. For this diagram, it is assumed that the panel parts are all made in the
same location and that transportation only occurs in the final assembly stage.

The Transportation Network

This document is authorized for use only in HBSP's Ignisense at ${institution} from Jan 2020 to Jul 2020.
 HAN SOLAR AND THE GREEN S UPPLY CHAIN 5

After Green and his team reviewed the manufacturing process, they came to the conclusion that some
of their energy intensive operations could be performed in low carbon economies such as Germany or
Norway. The Han Solar team also questioned whether they were using the most effective modes of
transport for their panels from the manufacturing location to the suppliers.

As a result, Green was charged with the task of computing the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
associated with the transportation network. In order to eventually calculate the amount of greenhouse
gases emitted into the environment in the process of transporting solar panels, Green and his team
needed to determine the distances traveled. Based on individual process locations, the company
decided to consider four routes:

 Mexico (MX, Northwest border) to California (CA)

 China (CH) to California
 China to Mexico and Mexico to California
 Germany (GE) to New Jersey (NJ) and New Jersey to California

These four routes were chosen because each location was where a certain process in manufacturing or
assembly occurred. Furthermore, four modes of transport were considered for this study: air, ship,
rail, and truck. For the distance calculations in Exhibit 4, ports, airports, and truck stops in the largest
cities in the correct area were used.

Exhibit 4 The Distances of Routes [km]

Route Air Ship Rail Truck

MX to CA - - - 200
CH to CA 12,000 - - -
CH to CA - 12,220 - -
CH to MX 12,150 - - -
CH to MX - 12,500 - -
GE to CA 8,500 - - -
GE to NJ - 6,300 - -
NJ to CA - - 3,860 -
NJ to CA - - - 3,750

The cost of these varying methods of transportation is based on the necessary distances traveled, and
weight. Load cargo is 1,000 panels, which would fit into a 40' container. Each panel weighs 12.5
kg. Assumptions made in calculating air costs are based on quotes from parcel companies. The rest
of the cost quotes (not air freight) were calculated using the following equations:

 A long-distance truck costs $170 + $1.85 per mile traveled.

 Intermodal rail costs $250 + $0.45 per mile traveled.
 Ocean freight costs $600 + $0.04 per mile traveled.

Using these assumptions, the costs were calculated and amounted to:

This document is authorized for use only in HBSP's Ignisense at ${institution} from Jan 2020 to Jul 2020.
 HAN SOLAR AND THE GREEN S UPPLY CHAIN 6

Exhibit 5 The Costs of Routes [USD]

Route Air Ship Rail Truck

MX to CA - - - 500
CH to CA 11,000 - - -
CH to CA - 900 - -
CH to MX 12,650 - - -
CH to MX - 1,100 - -
GE to CA 11,150 - - -
GE to NJ - 750 - -
NJ to CA - - 1,330 -
NJ to CA - - - 3,500

Finally, the team gathered information and reported on another factor, commonly used to measure
customer fulfillment rate: the lead time (Exhibit 6):

Exhibit 6 The Lead Time of Routes [Days]

Route Air Ship Rail Truck

MX to CA - - - 4
CH to CA 6 - - -
CH to CA - 21 - -
CH to MX 6 - - -
CH to MX - 22 - -
GE to CA 11 - - -
GE to NJ - 20 - -
NJ to CA - - 8 -
NJ to CA - - - 6

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Calculation

After Green and his team gathered the various costs, distances, and lead times for the different routes
under consideration, they used the data to determine the amount of greenhouse gases emitted to the
environment associated with each transportation network.

Emission factors for several transport modes were gathered from scientific databases, as a function of
distance travelled and cargo (Exhibit 7). This helps team members to understand the relative role of
truck, train, ship, and airfreight.

This document is authorized for use only in HBSP's Ignisense at ${institution} from Jan 2020 to Jul 2020.
 HAN SOLAR AND THE GREEN S UPPLY CHAIN 7

6
Exhibit 7 Transport GHG factors [mg-CO2eq/km.kg]

Ship transoceanic Air cargo Truck, Train,

freight intercontinental lorry 3.5 to 16 ton Diesel, US
11 1,068 334 50

With this information, the team uses a standard cargo reference for their panels (shipping a 1,000 kg
package of solar panels) over the different route distances.

An Analysis of Different Electricity Mixes

Another factor came into play—GHG emissions vary by energy mix while countries have different
energy mixes. The analyses thus far only cover the use of energy mixes from the United States, which
is not fully accurate since different parts of the panels are manufactured in different locations,
including China, Mexico, and Europe. Therefore, international data describing the GHGs emissions
associated to the production of electricity (per kWh produced in a specific country or region) has been
gathered by Han Solar.

Green and his team used this information to understand the relative GHGs contribution related to the
energy requirements (Exhibit 2) of Han Solar’s manufacturing processes. GHGs of the
manufacturing process can also be contrasted to GHG emissions related to transport and distribution.
Exhibit 8 presents GHGs data of energy generation in China, Mexico, the United States, Germany,
and Norway, respectively. Specific data on Mexico’s North Western region, with a large share of
their electricity from geothermal sources, is also included (Exhibit 8). Relative emissions were
significantly lower than the nations’ average. This raised attention amongst team members who
realized that one of their manufacturing facilities was located there and thus they wanted to find ways
to come up with lower carbon footprints.
7
Exhibit 8 Electricity GHG factors [g-CO2eq/kWh]

China Germany Mexico – Mexico – Norway USA -

average NW grid8 average
788 349 515 298 6 573

*1,000 MJ is equivalent to 277.78 kWh

Moreover, the exhibit also shows that China emits the largest amount of GHG per unit of energy. Its
energy mix includes large shares of coal and other fuel sources. Germany, on the other hand, obtains
most of its energy from wind and water sources, resulting in a relatively clean energy mix, while
Norway has the lowest GHG emissions per unit of electricity generated. Mexico and the United States
fall in between the two energy opposites of China and Norway. These large set of locations
represented a puzzle for the team members—how could they deal with different locations, emissions,
costs, and delivery times to come up with recommendations for the board of directors?

6
“Ecoinvent,” Ecoinvent v2.01, Product Ecology Consultants, Swiss Center for LCA Inventories, 2007.
7
World Resources Institute, “The greenhouse gas protocol initiative: Corporate accounting
and reporting standards,” World Resources Institute and World Business Council for Sustainable Development, www.ghgprotocol.org, 2004.
8
Authors research, as presented in LCA Conference 2012, “Improving Sustainable Supply Chains though Life Cycle Assessment, Risk
Management and a Multi-Objective Decision Process”.

This document is authorized for use only in HBSP's Ignisense at ${institution} from Jan 2020 to Jul 2020.
 HAN SOLAR AND THE GREEN S UPPLY CHAIN 8

What Next?
Garrett Green needs to provide recommendations to the Board and explain his vision of Han Solar
Sustainable Operations. The board wants to know the possible improvements that his will make to the
operations.

Shareholders want Green and his team to come with a good understanding of the situation as well as
strategic and operational ideas to increase their return value through sustainability.

This document is authorized for use only in HBSP's Ignisense at ${institution} from Jan 2020 to Jul 2020.
 HAN SOLAR AND THE GREEN S UPPLY CHAIN 9

Case Discussion Questions:

1. Do you think Han Solar’s green strategy will increase shareholder returns? List some other
possible impacts of sustainability efforts.

2. What is the corporate carbon footprint of their manufacturing and distribution processes?
Assuming one shipment of 1,000 PV panels produced in China and delivered to California
(manufacturing and distribution). Explain how you identified the different elements that
make up the total footprint.

3. Considering your results from the previous question, why do international companies favor
air freight over shipping, when delivering final goods from China?

4. Decide which transportation network should be implemented in order to supply panels to

California. The following questions may be considered:

a. Between cost, distance, and lead time, which is the most important criteria in deciding
which transportation network to take and why?

b. Design the locations of the various plants for the entire manufacturing process. You
might want to create a map of the processes and place each one in a different location.
Then describe why you chose the locations in a few sentences or less.

5. Overall, what should Han Solar do in order to become a leading company in the PV space
again?

6. Which process can be improved and how? Based on your own further research, what changes
can be made in some of these processes so that there are fewer emissions to the environment?
How can emissions and production cost both be reduced in tandem?

This document is authorized for use only in HBSP's Ignisense at ${institution} from Jan 2020 to Jul 2020.
 HAN SOLAR AND THE GREEN S UPPLY CHAIN 10

Appendix 1 Detailed Manufacturing Stages

Step 1: Silicon Extraction and Refining

The process of extracting and refining the silicon begins with quartz and sand. Mined from the
ground, these two materials are in high abundance and so cannot be perceived as a limiting factor in
the manufacturing of solar panels. In other words, scarcity of quartz will never be a problem for the
manufacturing of solar panels. The silica sand is mined and then cleaned. This refining process
releases dust into the environment, which is made up of crystalline silica particles. The primary inputs
for the Extraction and Refining Process are thermal energy and silica flour. This energy is typically in
the form of coal or diesel driven fuel and the silica flour is a fine powder that is not solar grade. This
would be the form that silicon would take in its natural habitat: the ground. The outputs of this process
are small particles to the air, silicon dust, and the ultimately produced Silicon Dioxide.
Step 2: Silica into Silicon Transformation

The transformation of Silica into Silicon begins with the previously refined silica sand. Carbon, in the
form of charcoal and hard wood, is combined with silicon dioxide to form elemental Silicon (Si) and
CO. This Si is known as metallurgical grade Silicon (mg-Si) and is mostly pure. Oxygen gas is piped
through the mg-Si to decrease Al and Ca impurities. The primary inputs to this process are charcoal,
coke, hard wood, silicon dioxide, and power in the form of thermal energy. The silicon dioxide then
becomes pure silicon. As a result of this process, carbon and sulfur dioxide is emitted into the
atmosphere.
Step 3: Transformation mg-Si into sog-Si

In this process, metallurgic-grade Silicon and hydrochloric acid are combined to create trichlorosilane.
Then, in order to produce solar-grade Silicon, the trichlorosilane is oxygenated. This additional
purification is necessary to maintain the integrity of the solar panel itself. Industry standard requires
that the Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) process to produce sog-Si be used. In this method,
hydrogen is added to mg-Si in a reactor core at high temperature and pressure. These two compounds
react to form trichlorosilane. In this process, the trichlorosilane itself is recycled and reused, thus
decreasing the amount of harmful environmental emissions. The inputs for this process are
trichlorosilane, silicon, and thermal energy. Silicon dust is emitted to the air and CO2 pollutes the
water.
Step 4: Casting and Wafer Production

As a result of further silicon refinement, the wafers begin to take shape. In this process, highly pure
Silicon feedstock is formed into large multi-crystalline blocks. This is accomplished by melting the Si
under Ar gas and then allowing it to solidify at much lower temperatures inside of a crucible. This
solidification process has the potential to decrease the efficiency of the cells since it introduces
impurities at the grain boundaries of the Silicon blocks. These inefficiencies are subsequently
addressed by contouring the outer surfaces of the blocks. In order to create the wafers, these large
silicon blocks are sliced very thinly using a multi-wire saw and cooling liquid. Unfortunately, this step
does involve waste Si, as the wafers need to be a very specific thickness in order to be usable in the
solar panel itself. The inputs for this process are formic acid, mineral oil, silicon carbide, argon, and
water.
Step 5: Chemical Attack and Texturing

The purpose of this process is to create texture on the surface of the wafer in order to "trap" more light
and, thus, increase the efficiency of the solar cell. A more textured surface will provide the necessary
roughness for the panel itself. A combination of NaOH and concentrated Sulfuric Acid is washed over
the cell to create the desired texture. The inputs for this process are KNO3, Power, KOH, Water, and
sog-Si. The chemical attack and texturing results in emissions of KOH to the local water supplies.

This document is authorized for use only in HBSP's Ignisense at ${institution} from Jan 2020 to Jul 2020.
 HAN SOLAR AND THE GREEN S UPPLY CHAIN 11

Step 6: N-Film Formation

After the chemical attack and texturing, it becomes necessary to create the film on top of the wafer to
allow more light to reflect off of the surface. To accomplish this, the wafer is placed in an oven at very
high temperatures and is coated in liquid Phosphoric Oxychlorate, creating a layer of phosphorus
silica glass on its surface. This new glass film is then etched with Flouric Acid. Special care is taken to
ensure that the edges are etched with plasma to remove any excess phosphorus. If this extra step is not
taken, the phosphorus on the edges of the wafer could create a short circuit. The inputs for this process
are CH4, KCLO3, HF, Power, and Water. The process results in NASO4 contaminating the otherwise
pure fresh water supplies.

Step 7: Application of the Electric Contacts

After the n-film has dried and hardened, electric contacts are applied to the surface of the cell to ease
further solidification. The inputs for this process are silver lead alkali, aluminum anode filler, power,
and water. The outputs are generic solvent and water.
Step 8: Passivation and ARC

After the electric contacts have been applied, the cell is now ready to undergo passivation and get its
anti-reflective coating (ARC). A thin layer of aluminum and silver paste is screen printed onto the
front surface of the cell to prevent holes from forming on its surface. This paste contains solvents,
resins, fillers, and glass in order to maintain the proper consistency. The paste includes glass to
facilitate cohesion and adhesion of the particles within the wafer itself. Thin lines are then etched onto
this layer. These lines decrease the losses caused by shadowing on the cell itself and allow for a small
surface series resistance. The wafers are then heated at high temperatures in order to seal these lines.
The anti-reflective coating is now finished and the cell will undergo bulk passivation.
Bulk passivation, also known as hydrogen passivation, is the process whereby hydrogen atoms wash
over the surface of the wafer to catalyze recombination amongst the particles at the surface. This
surface passivation layer is used to control the speed of the reaction, as this catalysis process has the
potential to happen too quickly and affect the integrity of the solar panel itself. This process is
necessarily slow since rapid work can cause defects in the grain boundaries and decrease the cell's
efficiency. The inputs for this process are silicon hydride, ammonia, nitrogen gases, power, and water.
The outputs are nitrogen gaseous emissions and a completed solar cell.
Step 9: Panel Assembly

Finally, the cells are strenuously tested to ensure utmost compliance with industry regulations. The
panel is then formed by connecting 36 cells with tin-coated copper strips. These strips are then coated
in tin in order to ease electron transfer between cells. EVA roofing sheets are also used to cover the
assembled panel so that it remains safe from inclement weather. This process has many inputs,
including copper sheet, sealing compound, aluminum sheet, unsaturated polyester resin, EVA-roof
sheets, thermally insulated aluminum frame material, glass, power, and 36 solar cells. Panel assembly
results in the output of surplus silicon sealing compound and EVA-roof sheets. The assembly also
results in an assembled panel.

Source: Adapted from A. Stoppato, “Life Cycle Assessment of Photovoltaic Electricity Generation." Energy, Elsevier,
224-32, 2008.

This document is authorized for use only in HBSP's Ignisense at ${institution} from Jan 2020 to Jul 2020.
 HAN SOLAR AND THE GREEN S UPPLY CHAIN 12

Bibliography

A. Stoppato, “Life Cycle Assessment of Photovoltaic Electricity Generation." Energy, Elsevier,

224-32, 2008.

P.K. Humphreys, "Integrating Environmental Criteria into the Supplier Selection Process."
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Elsevier, 349-56, 2003.

Stefan Seuring, and Martin Muller, “From a Literature Review to a Conceptual Framework for
Sustainable Supply Chain Management." Journal of Cleaner Production, Elsevier, 1699-710, 2008.

Tobias Schoenherr, V. M. Raotummala, and Thomas Harrison, “Assessing Supply Chain Risks with
the Analytic Hierarchy Process: Providing Decision Support for the Offshoring Decision by a US
Manufacturing Company." Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, Elsevier,
100-11, 2008.

Helen Walker, Lucio Disisto, and Darian Mcbain, “Drivers and Barriers to Environmental Supply
Chain Management Practices: Lessons from the Public and Private Sectors." Journal of Purchasing
and Supply Management, Elsevier, 69-85, 2008.

Francesco Testa and Fabio Iraldo, ”Shadows and Lights of GSCM (Green Supply Chain
Management): Determinants and Effects of These Practices Based on a Multi-National Study."
Journal of Cleaner Production, Elsevier, 953-62, 2010.

EyeforTransport, "North American Sustainable Supply Chain Report: A Brief Analysis of

Eyefortransport's Recent Survey," 4th Sustainable Supply Chain Summit,
www.eft.com/sustainablesupplychain, 2011.

"Life Cycle Assessment of Crystalline Photovoltaics in the Swiss EcoInvent Database."

Broader Perspectices, John Wiley \& Sons, Ltd., 2005.

"Solar Panel Manufacturing." http://solarbuzz.com, 2011.

“The Energy Intensity of Photovoltaic Systems." Ecotopia,

http://www.ecotopia.com/apollo2/pvepbtoz.htm, 2011

FedEx {"FedEx Rates and Transit Times"}. http://www.fedex.com/ratefinder/home, 2011.

Romero-Hernandez, S., Romero-Hernandez, O., Wood, D. Renewable Energy Technologies and

Policies in Mexico (spanish), 2011

European Photovoltaic Industry Association, Solar Generation report, 2010.

Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation Special Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, 2012.

Romero-Hernandez, S., Romero-Hernandez, O., Dornfeld, D., Kingsbury, T. Supply Chain

Implications of Shipping Goods from Mexico. Proceeding of 19th CIRP Conference on Life Cycle
Engineering 2012 held at University of California Berkeley, 2012

This document is authorized for use only in HBSP's Ignisense at ${institution} from Jan 2020 to Jul 2020.