Environmental driven activity is increasingly common in manufacturing businesses to address the triple bottom line components of people, planet and profit: namely accounting for societal needs, the growing evidence of global warming and the need to reduce costs (see Figure 1). Indeed the emerging evidence is that current estimates for the year by which CO2 levels must brought under control by is extremely conservative. The drivers are typically from opportunity costs of reducing the consumption of resources as well as the requirements and punitive costs from increasing legislation. Long term predictions indicate that the necessity to reduce resource use will continue and accelerate. The pressures originate from rising energy costs as oil reaches peak output and demand outstrips supply as well as on the cost and availability of materials and their subsequent disposal. Two examples of this are the increase in steel prices and material disposal costs in UK landfill. Additionally there are concerns over the security of material supply. Aside from the societal pressures to be cleaner, manufacturers must reduce the consumption of materials and energy and subsequent waste to remain competitive. Waste here must be interpreted in its widest form, not simply easy to see material waste but to include energy, water and other resources.

Figure 1. Sustainability – the triple bottom line

Sustainable manufacture is based on the principle of meeting the needs of the current generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Operational methods for the minimisation of energy use in manufacturing have been studied. Pre-dating sustainability research are the waste reduction principles embedded in the Toyota Production System. Interestingly Toyota Motor Europe's focus on reducing VOCs, water and energy use since 1993 has resulted a 68% reduction in use per car so far as well as achieving zero waste to landfill. This is from a company known to be aggressive on waste and many would therefore not expect them to find such additional waste. There must be significant savings to be made in all companies therefore. But companies do not intend to be wasteful, so apart from switching off equipment how do they know what to do? To quote one facilities manager you have to "dig, dig, dig to find there are still savings to be made".

There has been a growth in information on sustainable manufacture but still little is known about how the components of low carbon, sustainable manufacture can be brought together in an integrated way. Importantly there is little in the way of pragmatic, low cost examples of how manufacturers have made significant savings.

Keeping the value

Few industries have considered their manufacturing system as an industrial metabolism using natural systems as a model. Here material and energy are used not only in an efficient but also an effective way in order to comply with the four system's conditions according to The Natural Step:

• Do not deplete natural resources extracted from ecosphere;
• Do not accumulate waste produced by technosphere into the ecosphere;
• Do not degrade the ecosphere by physical means;
• Meet human needs worldwide.

The systems approach draws a clear distinction between the ecosphere, associated with environmental science, and the technosphere, associated with environmental engineering (see Figure 2). Material and energy inputs are "consumed" in the technosphere with limited efficiency. By maximizing resource use productivity, the amount of waste output and related CO2 emissions can be minimised. By allowing the recirculation of what was previously "lost" or "emitted" to the ecosphere, efficiency is increased. Emissions of CO2 can be used as a performance indicator but it does not capture all the environmental impacts such as resource depletion. It is, however, the easiest measure to quantify the consequences of human activities on environment.

Figure 2: An industrial ecology view of manufacturing

This industrial ecology view can be transformed into a view of the lifecycle of materials against the thermodynamic state (Figure 3). As material is converted into components and those components are assembled into products the value or thermodynamic state increases. The R's strategies of reduce, reuse, recycle, etc. can be mapped onto this. Any change of state will change the value of the materials. Under typical current "recycling" this change of state involves significant jumps thereby losing most value and consuming most energy to return the material to a form usable in a product. There are increasing examples of companies reusing components rather than recycling, thereby keeping the value and reducing costs. The diagram also captures losses from the value stream. Examples of this down cycling are "recycling" glass for road construction and "recycling" plastic for picnic benches respectively!

Figure 3. Lifecycle of materials against thermodynamic state

Why change?

There are numerous pressures on manufacturers to change (see Figure 4). The pressures may arise externally from legislation change, consumer pressures and pressures from wider society. A common pressure is from customers demanding evidence of sustainable manufacturing activity. Other pressures are associated with the key resource flows into a business (materials and energy) and those out of a business (product and waste). Whilst manufacturers are putting considerable work into becoming leaner and removing waste, this waste removal has previously concentrated on visible waste. Increasingly companies are placing more attention to less visible wastes such as energy (power, heat), compressed air (heat, leakage, inappropriate use) and water.

Figure 4. Key motivations for manufacturers to become more sustainable

What are companies doing?

Many practices that manufacturers are adopting are practical and simple. But these practices should not be undervalued. They are often relatively easy to implement, require little investment and produce significant savings. To keep resources in the technosphere, the following is a starting set of ideas to adapt, copy and in turn pass on to others! All are taken from recent examples from manufacturers of all sizes and sectors and are categorised according to Figure 5:

Materials and packaging: Ordering materials in appropriate volumes in appropriate packaging can reduce costs through lower packaging content and less wasted product. One example is a small liquids processor who worked with their supplier on reusable packaging which also enabled full liquid extraction with resulting cost reductions for both supplier and customer. Another example is Farnell who now distribute electronics in biodegradable antistatic packaging.

Energy: Focus on reducing energy consumption (see below) before considering the origin of energy, however, one interesting example from Mars is their investment in piping methane from local landfill to significantly reduce energy costs.

Measurement: Invariably all companies measure the consumption of resources to prompt potential savings. Measurement can prompt for savings in absolute consumption terms as well as comparisons between production areas or shifts. Companies following the consumption have made impressive savings. One best-in-class company long known for its focus on waste recently reduced its absolute energy consumption by nearly 10% year on year for 5 years. It was also increasing its production volumes! Trelleborg Sealing Solutions Malta set a target of reducing their energy consumption by 10% within one year. Through their structured improvement process they measured current consumption, set targets for improvement and used display boards for communicating progress. Their improvements ranged from stopping demand (e.g. switching off equipment and lighting when not needed), reducing service provision to meet not exceed demand (e.g. reduced compressed air pressure and isolating some transformers) and using more energy efficient devices (e.g. more energy efficient lighting). These show a disciplined, cost effective approach to energy reduction rather than major investments.

Water: Water conservation is perhaps an obvious area for attention but sometimes investment in alternative sources such as rainwater harvesting suggests significant investment. One company invested in large water butts for collecting rainwater from their roofs. It has saved significant sums in water consumption for the cleaning of their yard. Condensers recover water from steam systems and return it to boilers saving on energy use. APW Electronics Ltd reduced demand in their existing facility through analysis of use and reducing consumption in PCB manufacture.

Figure 5. Examples of changes towards sustainable manufacturing practice

Value-add products: Changing the product specification or its packaging can save on direct costs as well as enable customers machines to run faster or more accurately. One example is Fibercore Ltd who changed their drum size to save on material and shipping cost and allowed the customer to control their process more easily.

In many of the examples of sustainable programmes it is very common for manufacturers to cite an external influence in initiating their activity, e.g. a key customer or transfer onto a new energy tariff. Once started it is clear, just like lean manufacturing and other improvement campaigns, that internal leadership is key. The leaders in these companies are relentless in promoting sustainable manufacturing and challenging all staff to reduce waste of all forms and thereby reduce costs.

A simple start

Whilst the pressures on manufacturing to become more sustainable and awareness of this imperative are increasing, techniques are just developing to support manufacturers on this journey. Technology is developing to generate energy more cleanly and consume less material and energy as well as how these technologies can be most effectively combined with existing technologies and facilities. By taking a systems view there is potential to reduce net consumption in manufacturing. Prior to adopting a wider view there are many simple ways of making changes to manufacturing systems that can reduce material and energy use and reduce waste production. Here is a starting list of such early changes.

|Back to TITLE|

Page 1      Page 2      Page 3      Page 4      Page 5      Page 6      Page 7      Page 8      Page 9

Supplement 1      Supplement 2      Supplement 3      Supplement 4      Supplement 5

PelicanWeb Home Page