IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2021i1p69-d708309.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing GHG Emissions and Improving Cost Effectiveness via Energy Efficiency Enhancements: A Case Study in a Biscuit Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Valentina Stojceska

    (Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, College of Engineering, Design and Physical Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge UB8 3PH, Middlesex, UK
    Centre for Sustainable Energy in Food Chains, Institute of Energy Futures, Brunel University London, Uxbridge UB8 3PH, Middlesex, UK)

  • Nicholas Parker

    (Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, College of Engineering, Design and Physical Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge UB8 3PH, Middlesex, UK)

  • Savvas A. Tassou

    (Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, College of Engineering, Design and Physical Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge UB8 3PH, Middlesex, UK
    Centre for Sustainable Energy in Food Chains, Institute of Energy Futures, Brunel University London, Uxbridge UB8 3PH, Middlesex, UK)

Abstract

As the new climate change driven regulations are brought into the force and energy prices and sustainability awareness increased, many companies are looking for the most efficient way to reduce their energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In this context, the food industry as one of the main energy consumers within the industry sector plays a significant role. This paper analyses the current energy consumption in a biscuit manufacturing company and considers a number of possible solutions for the energy efficiency improvements. The company uses modern and automated production processes and has signed a Climate Change Agreement. The experimental part involves identification of the energy users, as well as analysis of the energy bills, operation times, production schedule and on-site measurements of energy consumption. The opportunities for energy efficiency improvements, GHG emissions and costs reduction are investigated and additional information about the investments and payback period of the proposed improvements discussed. A number of opportunities for improvement are identified within the production area with a potential savings of 23%, which corresponds to EUR 40,534.00 and 190 tCO 2 , annually. It was found that the significant savings could be achieved by better managing the production lines and reducing operational hours from equipment, with no impact on productivity and no capital investment required. Further savings can be achieved through technical improvements requiring capital investments. All those improvements and savings make a significant contribution in accomplishing environmental targets set out by the FDF1 agreement.

Suggested Citation

  • Valentina Stojceska & Nicholas Parker & Savvas A. Tassou, 2021. "Reducing GHG Emissions and Improving Cost Effectiveness via Energy Efficiency Enhancements: A Case Study in a Biscuit Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2021:i:1:p:69-:d:708309
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/1/69/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/1/69/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dorward, Leejiah J., 2012. "Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)? A comment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 463-466.
    2. Garnett, Tara, 2011. "Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(S1), pages 23-32.
    3. Garnett, Tara, 2011. "Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(Supplemen), pages 23-32, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Burek, Jasmina & Nutter, Darin W., 2020. "Environmental implications of perishables storage and retailing☆," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    2. Min, Shi & Wang, Xiaobing & Yu, Xiaohua, 2021. "Does dietary knowledge affect household food waste in the developing economy of China?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    3. Michael Martin & Lina Danielsson, 2016. "Environmental Implications of Dynamic Policies on Food Consumption and Waste Handling in the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-15, March.
    4. Dorward, Leejiah J., 2012. "Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)? A comment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 463-466.
    5. Yue, Shen & Munir, Irfan Ullah & Hyder, Shabir & Nassani, Abdelmohsen A. & Qazi Abro, Muhammad Moinuddin & Zaman, Khalid, 2020. "Sustainable food production, forest biodiversity and mineral pricing: Interconnected global issues," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    6. Maiyar, Lohithaksha M & Thakkar, Jitesh J, 2019. "Environmentally conscious logistics planning for food grain industry considering wastages employing multi objective hybrid particle swarm optimization," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 220-248.
    7. Danilo Bertoni & Daniele Cavicchioli & Franco Donzelli & Giovanni Ferrazzi & Dario G. Frisio & Roberto Pretolani & Elena Claire Ricci & Vera Ventura, 2018. "Recent Contributions of Agricultural Economics Research in the Field of Sustainable Development," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-20, December.
    8. Ujué Fresán & Maximino Alfredo Mejia & Winston J Craig & Karen Jaceldo-Siegl & Joan Sabaté, 2019. "Meat Analogs from Different Protein Sources: A Comparison of Their Sustainability and Nutritional Content," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-10, June.
    9. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Angela Zinnai & Alberto Pardossi, 2018. "A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    10. Morena Bruno & Marianne Thomsen & Federico Maria Pulselli & Nicoletta Patrizi & Michele Marini & Dario Caro, 2019. "The carbon footprint of Danish diets," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 489-507, October.
    11. Ancuta Isbasoiu & Pierre-Alain Jayet & Stéphane De Cara, 2021. "Increasing food production and mitigating agricultural greenhouse gas emissions in the European Union: impacts of carbon pricing and calorie production targeting," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 23(2), pages 409-440, April.
    12. Susana G. Azevedo & Minelle E. Silva & João C. O. Matias & Gustavo P. Dias, 2018. "The Influence of Collaboration Initiatives on the Sustainability of the Cashew Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-29, June.
    13. Tjärnemo, Heléne & Södahl, Liv, 2015. "Swedish food retailers promoting climate smarter food choices—Trapped between visions and reality?," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 130-139.
    14. Peter Scarborough & Paul Appleby & Anja Mizdrak & Adam Briggs & Ruth Travis & Kathryn Bradbury & Timothy Key, 2014. "Dietary greenhouse gas emissions of meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans in the UK," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 179-192, July.
    15. Bonnet, Céline & Bouamra-Mechemache, Zohra & Réquillart, Vincent & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "Viewpoint: Regulating meat consumption to improve health, the environment and animal welfare," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    16. Nina Repar & Pierrick Jan & Thomas Nemecek & Dunja Dux & Martina Alig Ceesay & Reiner Doluschitz, 2016. "Local versus Global Environmental Performance of Dairying and Their Link to Economic Performance: A Case Study of Swiss Mountain Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-19, December.
    17. Panzone, Luca A. & Ulph, Alistair & Zizzo, Daniel John & Hilton, Denis & Clear, Adrian, 2021. "The impact of environmental recall and carbon taxation on the carbon footprint of supermarket shopping," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    18. Rohmer, S.U.K. & Gerdessen, J.C. & Claassen, G.D.H., 2019. "Sustainable supply chain design in the food system with dietary considerations: A multi-objective analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1149-1164.
    19. Vázquez-Rowe, Ian & Villanueva-Rey, Pedro & Moreira, Mª Teresa & Feijoo, Gumersindo, 2013. "The role of consumer purchase and post-purchase decision-making in sustainable seafood consumption. A Spanish case study using carbon footprinting," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 94-102.
    20. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Alberto Pardossi, 2020. "Improving Policy Evidence Base for Agricultural Sustainability and Food Security: A Content Analysis of Life Cycle Assessment Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-29, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    energy; food industry; baking; biscuits; GHG emissions; FDF1 agreement;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2021:i:1:p:69-:d:708309. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.