The Experts below are selected from a list of 231 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Pawel Rokita - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
facilitating household Financial Plan optimization by adjusting time range of analysis to life length risk aversion
ECDA, 2016Co-Authors: Radoslaw Pietrzyk, Pawel RokitaAbstract:The article presents a concept of two-person household model with an original approach to expressing life-length risk aversion, allowing, at the same time, to simplify Financial Plan optimization. The technique uses (with improvements and corrections) concepts introduced in some earlier works by the authors, but it has not been presented so far as the main subject nor discussed in details. Moreover, Financial Plans for two persons treated as a household are compared here with a sum of two single individuals. This enriches the presentation of the model by an analysis of advantages of the joint (household) approach.
-
facilitating household Financial Plan optimization by adjusting time range of analysis to life length risk aversion
2014Co-Authors: Radoslaw Pietrzyk, Pawel RokitaAbstract:The article presents a concept of two-person household model with an original approach to expressing life-length risk aversion, allowing, at the same time, to simplify Financial Plan optimization. The technique uses (with improvements and corrections) concepts introduced in some earlier works by the Authors of this article, but it has not been presented so far as the main subject nor discussed in details. Moreover, Financial Plans for two persons treated as a household are compared here with a sum of two single individuals. This enriches the presentation of the model by an analysis of advantages of the joint (household) approach.
John W. Rich - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Early Entrance Co-Production Plant - Decentralized Gasification Cogeneration Transportation Fuels and Steam From Available Feedstocks, Quarterly Report: July - September 2003
2003Co-Authors: John W. RichAbstract:Waste Processors Management, Inc. (WMPI), along with its subcontractors Texaco Power & Gasification (now ChevronTexaco), SASOL Technology Ltd., and Nexant Inc. entered into a Cooperative Agreement DE-FC26-00NT40693 with the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) to assess the techno-economic viability of building an Early Entrance Co-Production Plant (EECP) in the United States to produce ultra clean Fischer-Tropsch (FT) transportation fuels with either power or steam as the major co-product. The EECP design includes recovery and gasification of low-cost coal waste (culm) from physical coal cleaning operations and will assess blends of the culm with coal or petroleum coke. The project has three phases. Phase I is the concept definition and engineering feasibility study to identify areas of technical, environmental and Financial risk. Phase II is an experimental testing program designed to validate the coal waste mixture gasification performance. Phase III updates the original EECP design based on results from Phase II, to prepare a preliminary engineering design package and Financial Plan for obtaining private funding to build a 5,000 barrel per day (BPD) coal gasification/liquefaction Plant next to an existing co-generation Plant in Gilberton, Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania. The current report covers the period performance from July 1, 2003 through September 30, 2003. The DOE/WMPI Cooperative Agreement was modified on May 2003 to expand the project team to include Shell Global Solutions, U.S. and Uhde GmbH as the engineering contractor. The addition of Shell and Uhde strengthen both the technical capability and financing ability of the project. Uhde, as the prime EPC contractor, has the responsibility to develop a LSTK (lump sum turnkey) engineering design package for the EECP leading to the eventual detailed engineering, construction and operation of the proposed concept. Major technical activities during the reporting period include: (1) finalizing contractual agreements between DOE, Uhde and other technology providers, focusing on intellectual-property-right issues, (2) Uhde's preparation of a LSTK project execution Plan and other project engineering procedural documents, and (3) Uhde's preliminary project technical concept assessment and trade-off evaluations.
-
EARLY ENTRANCE CO-PRODUCTION PlanT--DECENTRALIZED GASIFICATION COGENERATION TRANSPORTATION FUELS AND STEAM FROM AVAILABLE FEEDSTOCKS
2003Co-Authors: John W. RichAbstract:Waste Processors Management, Inc. (WMPI), along with its subcontractors Texaco Power & Gasification (now ChevronTexaco), SASOL Technology Ltd., and Nexant Inc. entered into a Cooperative Agreement DE-FC26-00NT40693 with the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) to assess the technoeconomic viability of building an Early Entrance Co-Production Plant (EECP) in the United States to produce ultra clean Fischer-Tropsch (FT) transportation fuels with either power or steam as the major co-product. The EECP design includes recovery and gasification of low-cost coal waste (culm) from physical coal cleaning operations and will assess blends of the culm with coal or petroleum coke. The project has three phases. Phase I is the concept definition and engineering feasibility study to identify areas of technical, environmental and Financial risk. Phase II is an experimental testing program designed to validate the coal waste mixture gasification performance. Phase III updates the original EECP design based on results from Phase II, to prepare a preliminary engineering design package and Financial Plan for obtaining private funding to build a 5,000 barrel per day (BPD) coal gasification/liquefaction Plant next to an existing co-generation Plant in Gilberton, Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania. The current report covers the period performance frommore » January 1, 2003 through March 31, 2003. Phase I Task 6 activities of Preliminary Site Analysis were documented and reported as a separate Topical Report on February 2003. Most of the other technical activities were on hold pending on DOE's announcement of the Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI) awards. WMPI was awarded one of the CCPI projects in late January 2003 to engineer, construct and operate a first-of-kind gasification/liquefaction facility in the U.S. as a continued effort for the current WMPI EECP engineering feasibility study. Since then, project technical activities were focused on: (1) Planning/revising the existing EECP work scope for transition into CCPI, and (2) ''jump starting'' all environmentally related work in pursue of NEPA and PA DEP permitting approval.« less
Radoslaw Pietrzyk - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
facilitating household Financial Plan optimization by adjusting time range of analysis to life length risk aversion
ECDA, 2016Co-Authors: Radoslaw Pietrzyk, Pawel RokitaAbstract:The article presents a concept of two-person household model with an original approach to expressing life-length risk aversion, allowing, at the same time, to simplify Financial Plan optimization. The technique uses (with improvements and corrections) concepts introduced in some earlier works by the authors, but it has not been presented so far as the main subject nor discussed in details. Moreover, Financial Plans for two persons treated as a household are compared here with a sum of two single individuals. This enriches the presentation of the model by an analysis of advantages of the joint (household) approach.
-
facilitating household Financial Plan optimization by adjusting time range of analysis to life length risk aversion
2014Co-Authors: Radoslaw Pietrzyk, Pawel RokitaAbstract:The article presents a concept of two-person household model with an original approach to expressing life-length risk aversion, allowing, at the same time, to simplify Financial Plan optimization. The technique uses (with improvements and corrections) concepts introduced in some earlier works by the Authors of this article, but it has not been presented so far as the main subject nor discussed in details. Moreover, Financial Plans for two persons treated as a household are compared here with a sum of two single individuals. This enriches the presentation of the model by an analysis of advantages of the joint (household) approach.
Nicola Dellepiane - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Integrating the operational and Financial components of the short‐term company Plan
Managerial Finance, 2004Co-Authors: Nicola DellepianeAbstract:The operational component of a company’s short‐term Plan (amounts of products to be delivered and sold to various markets at prices that vary according to markets, sales channels, types of customers and quantities sold, levels of utilization of production capacity, assignment of resources to the manufacturing of different products, amounts of raw materials purchased from different sources, stocks of raw materials and finished products) gives rise to a series of cash inflows and outflows which are not synchronized. The Financial component of a company’s short‐term Plan has to indicate how to compensate the imbalances, in time, generated by the operational Plan, between availabilities and requirements of cash, and indicate the sources of financing to be used and how to temporarily invest cash surpluses. The approach, too often followed in companies, that defines the Financial component of a company’s short‐term Plan as a consequence of the operational component of the Plan, ignores the potential interactions between them and the possibility of defining simultaneously a more economic interfunctionally integrated Plan. A model is presented for the decisions in the operational component and a model for the decisions in the Financial component. If these models are used separately, they can be integrated resorting to an iterative approach that mutually adapts their separate solutions in order to define the company Plan. However, the best approach is to build a model that integrates the two separate models into one structured in a way that can define the optimal integrated short‐term operational and Financial Plan. The lack of integration between the operational and the Financial components of the short‐term company Plan is a common weak point in the existing literature and practice.
-
integrating the operational and Financial components of the short term company Plan
Managerial Finance, 2004Co-Authors: Nicola DellepianeAbstract:The operational component of a company’s short‐term Plan (amounts of products to be delivered and sold to various markets at prices that vary according to markets, sales channels, types of customers and quantities sold, levels of utilization of production capacity, assignment of resources to the manufacturing of different products, amounts of raw materials purchased from different sources, stocks of raw materials and finished products) gives rise to a series of cash inflows and outflows which are not synchronized. The Financial component of a company’s short‐term Plan has to indicate how to compensate the imbalances, in time, generated by the operational Plan, between availabilities and requirements of cash, and indicate the sources of financing to be used and how to temporarily invest cash surpluses. The approach, too often followed in companies, that defines the Financial component of a company’s short‐term Plan as a consequence of the operational component of the Plan, ignores the potential interactions between them and the possibility of defining simultaneously a more economic interfunctionally integrated Plan. A model is presented for the decisions in the operational component and a model for the decisions in the Financial component. If these models are used separately, they can be integrated resorting to an iterative approach that mutually adapts their separate solutions in order to define the company Plan. However, the best approach is to build a model that integrates the two separate models into one structured in a way that can define the optimal integrated short‐term operational and Financial Plan. The lack of integration between the operational and the Financial components of the short‐term company Plan is a common weak point in the existing literature and practice.
John Mountzuris - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Communicating pharmaceutical outcomes to hospital administration.
American Journal of Health-system Pharmacy, 1995Co-Authors: John MountzurisAbstract:The contributions of a pharmaceutical outcomes approach to therapeutic decision-making and the budgetary process are explored. In the new health care climate, pharmacists can no longer look at a pharmaceutical product or service strictly on the basis of clinical outcomes but must consider the economic and humanistic outcomes as well. Today, pharmacists as effective outcomes managers must ask, Will the drug therapy work? What will be the overall cost? What effect will the treatment have on the patient's quality of life? Some newly developed agents, while they may have a high acquisition cost, can reduce suffering and bottom-line costs by avoiding unnecessary hospitalizations. There needs to be a movement from individual departmental budgets to shared budgets. Another approach to the budgetary system is cost shifting among the various patient care settings. Reimbursement strategies should be in place to ensure recovery of costs. Hospital decision-makers should have a comprehensive knowledge of institutional payer mix, pharmaceutical, formulary decisions, Financial Planning, and the availability of indigent care programs. Pharmaceutical outcomes must become an important factor in therapeutic decisions. Pharmacy directors must present a strategic Financial Plan to hospital administration that positions the pharmacy as a solution to cost issues.
