Search

Research has revealed the existence of an energy-efficiency gap – the difference between optimal and actual energy end-use, suggesting that energy efficiency can be improved. Energy management (EnM ...

Our study looked at the extent to which firm characteristics such as total firm capital affect electricity saving in energy-intensive industry in Sweden from 2007 to 2015. Specifically, the most influential variables for systematic variation in electricity saving in the energy-intensive companies participating in Sweden’s voluntary programme for improving energy efficiency in energy-intensive industry (the PFE) were studied by analysing monetary investment, payback time and firm characteristics. Monetary investment and payback time influenced electricity savings during the PFE more than firm characteristics, with monetary investment being most influential. Nevertheless, the total systematic variation in firm characteristics may account for ∼16% of the systematic variation in electricity saving, where ∼74% (32 of 43) of the studied firm characteristics seemed to merit further investigation and where ∼49% (21 of 43) of firm characteristics appeared most influential. The most influential firm characteristics were total firm capital, stock turnover ratio, machinery, short-term liabilities per turnover ratio and goodwill. The overall results showed that firm characteristics can influence a firm’s energy-saving activities and indicated a tendency for more energy savings in companies that were financially weaker or had done less work to improve energy efficiency prior to the PFE.

The Swedish pulp and paper industry (PPI) must increase energy efficiency to remain competitive on the global market, which has experienced entries from countries with cheaper energy and raw material supplies. Interactions among variables for energy use, production, energy management, electricity price and firm characteristics (FC), in different types of mills, i.e., pulp, paper and integrated mills, in Sweden from 2006 to 2015 indicate that correlations among the studied variables were different in different types of mills. This difference between types of mills seemed to originate partly from varying accessibility to production residue that could be used for energy. For all types of mills, variation of electricity prices did not correlate significantly with energy efficiency during the study period. The studied FC were firm's age, number of employees, number of companies in company group, net sales and profit for the year. Energy efficiency was more affected by the variables characterizing energy and production compared to the variables representing FC. This study also suggested presence of possible discrepancies between FC that were perceived as barriers to energy management towards energy efficiency, according to previous studies, and what was shown by the data combining variables representing energy use, production and FC.

Although several research studies have adopted specific energy consumption (SEC) as an indicator of the progress of improved energy efficiency, publications are scarce on critical assessments when using SEC. Given the increasing importance of monitoring improved industrial energy efficiency and the rising popularity of SEC as an energy key performance indicator (e-KPI), an in-depth analysis and problematization on the pros and cons of using SEC would appear to be needed. The aim of this article is to analyse SEC critically in relation to industrial energy efficiency. By using SEC in the pulp and paper industry as an example, the results of this exploratory study show that although SEC is often used as an e-KPI in industry, the comparison is not always straightforward. Challenges emanate from a lack of information about how SEC is calculated. It is likely that SEC is an optimal e-KPI within the same study, when all deployed SECs are calculated in the same way, and with the same underlying assumptions. However, before comparing SEC with other studies, it is recommended that the assumptions on which calculations are based should be scrutinized in order to ensure the validity of the comparisons. The paper remains an important contribution in addition to the available handbooks. Funding Agencies|Swedish Energy Agency [40537-1]; Swedish Environmental Protection Agency [802-0082-17]; Division of Energy Systems at the Department of Management and Engineering, Linkoping University