Understanding the Environmental Impact of Our Medstow Micro

Guided by one of our three core values, to “continually evolve,” our commitment to sustainability and innovation drives us to diligently improve our products and operations. At the company level, this means measuring our environmental impact over time. To that end, we recently conducted a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) on our novel microsample shipper, the Medstow Micro.

Through our LCA, we aimed to thoroughly measure the environmental impacts—from upstream manufacturing through end-of-life disposal—of the Medstow Micro to identify opportunities for improvement. Also, it’s important to note that while LCAs are powerful tools, they still certainly have limitations. By this, we mean that LCAs focus on individual products rather than entire companies, they rely on average data, and do not account for social implications. At Artyc, we view LCAs as one element of our climate story, and a meaningful way to help refine processes and assumptions.

Goals of the Medstow Micro LCA

Our LCA had three primary objectives:

1. Identify Environmental Hotspots: We sought to pinpoint specific stages in the Medstow Micro's lifecycle that significantly contribute to its environmental footprint, called “hotspots.”  This includes understanding the impacts of various manufacturing processes, transportation methods, warehouse locations and more to identify the largest levers for reducing our CO2e.
2. Assess Variable Sensitivities: We wanted to explore how changes in certain variables, such as shifting from air freight to ground freight or comparing different business models like Cooling as a Service (CaaS) versus leasing, would affect the overall environmental impact.
3. Establish a Benchmark: By creating a comprehensive environmental impact profile of the Medstow Micro, we aimed to provide a clear benchmark for future improvements. This benchmark is essential for informing our stakeholders, including team members, customers, and investors, about our progress and areas for enhancement.

Methodology and System Boundaries

Our LCA employed a cradle to grave approach, encompassing the entire lifecycle from mineral extraction to end-of-life disposal. This comprehensive scope required us to simplify and break down the lifecycle into distinct stages: (1) Components Production (2) Transport to Assembly Location (3) Product Assembly, Shipping to Artyc (4) Packaging (5) Usage Phase and (6) Refurbishment.

Business Models

For our LCA, we analyzed two business models: leasing and CaaS. In the leasing model, the Medstow Micro moves between a client warehouse/lab and a patient’s house, while in the CaaS model, it travels between an Artyc warehouse, a patient’s house, and a lab.

Functional Unit and Geographic Assumptions

The functional unit for our study was defined as one vial cooled at a stable temperature of 5°C for one roundtrip shipment. We based our geographic assumptions on typical customer locations, with warehouses in Salt Lake City and Dallas, and a patient in Chicago.

Transit Models

We modeled two transit scenarios to understand the impact of different transportation methods. Case 1 assumed 90 percent air freight and 10 percent light-commercial freight vehicles. Case 2 varied between leasing and CaaS, with trucks used for certain routes and air freight for others.

Data Collection and Analysis

We meticulously collected data on every component of the Medstow Micro, including material types and masses. When data was unavailable, we made informed assumptions, clearly labeled and explained. Our analysis relied on the openLCA software and the ecoinvent database, which provided standardized impact factors for various materials and processes.

Key Findings

1. Production Impact: The largest contributor to the Medstow Micro’s environmental footprint was the production phase, generating approximately 34.63 kg CO2e.
2. Transit Impact: Transit emissions ranged from 5 to 8 kg CO2e, with the higher figure associated with the CaaS model due to one additional shipping leg.
3. Refurbishment Impact: Refurbishment could significantly reduce environmental impact, with CO2e emissions for refurbished units estimated at 17.4 kg, which is about 50 percent of the emissions impact from initial production.
4. Comparative Analysis: Compared to traditional passive coolers, the Medstow Micro showed lower emissions per shipment, especially when considering multiple shipments over time. For instance, passive coolers produced 39 kg CO2e with gel packs and 58 kg CO2e with dry ice, while the Medstow Micro resulted in <5kg CO2e depending on the business model.
5. Carbon Break Even: The Medstow Micro achieves a carbon break-even point after 2-3 shipments, emphasizing its efficiency in long-term use.

Conclusion

Our LCA highlighted clear climate hotspots, which are areas that we can improve upon for future product iterations. Also, although production had the largest environmental impact, our approach to refurbishment combined with our circular business model means that we can quickly provide emission reductions to our customers.

Meanwhile, our team is already considering options to reduce the overall carbon footprint, and will continue to focus on developing solutions that lead to a more efficient, robust and sustainable cold chain.

Stay tuned for more updates and detailed analyses as we strive to modernize the cold chain and support a more sustainable future.