Studies, Analyses and Publications
Transparency builds trust. That is why we provide scientific studies, independent analyses and other publications related to the The MOECK WARMING SYSTEM®
here.
The publications document various aspects of our products, including life cycle assessments, Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies, as well as additional investigations and reports.
All content should be considered in the context of the respective study methods, assessment criteria and boundary conditions on which it is based.
Carbon footprint comparison of reusable and disposable warming systems
A study conducted by Amsterdam UMC and published in the British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA) examined the carbon footprint of three warming blanket systems used in the operating theatre. As part of a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), manufacturing, use, cleaning and disposal were taken into account. For the reusable MOECK WARMING SYSTEM® evaluated in the study, a calculated carbon footprint per surgical procedure was found to be up to 44% lower than that of the disposable systems evaluated.
Key findings
- For the reusable system evaluated, a value of 0.67 kg CO₂-equivalent per procedure was calculated.
- For the disposable systems evaluated, values of 1.05 kg and 1.30 kg CO₂-equivalent per procedure were calculated.
- The CO₂ break-even point of the reusable system compared with the disposable systems evaluated was reached after 5 to 9 uses.
The authors emphasise that, in a scenario evaluated in the study using renewable electricity for both the operating theatre and reprocessing, the calculated carbon footprint of the reusable system was up to 74% lower than that of the disposable systems evaluated.
Study in the British Journal of Anaesthesia
Product Carbon Footprint of the MOECK WARMING SYSTEM® lower-body warming blanket — assessment according to ISO 14067
The study conducted by Green Zero is based on ISO 14067 and examines greenhouse gas emissions as well as other environmental impacts of the reusable MOECK WARMING SYSTEM® lower-body warming blanket compared with a conventional disposable product evaluated in the study. The assessment follows a cradle-to-grave approach and includes the relevant life cycle stages of the products evaluated.
The assessment using the ReCiPe 2016 method (version 1.08) covers eight environmental impact categories, including global warming potential (GWP). Based on a functional unit of 200 uses, the reusable MOECK WARMING SYSTEM® lower-body warming blanket evaluated in the study showed a global warming potential (GWP) at least 3.9 times lower than that of the conventional disposable product evaluated. In the application scenario assessed, the functional unit corresponds to 53 disposable blankets.
The report underwent a critical review by an independent external expert. The review covered both the methodology applied and the results of the assessment.
Product Carbon Footprint UKD Summary
