June2020

SAMINT-MILI 2021

Master’s Thesis 30 credits

A case study of a tool manufacturing company

C

Sustainable Manufacturing: Green

Factory

Rohan S. Jagtap (Linköping University)

Smruti Smarak Mohanty (Uppsala University)

Master’s Programme in Industrial Management and Innovation

Masterprogram i industriell ledning och innovation

Abstract

Sustainable Manufacturing

Smruti Smarak Mohanty and Rohan Surendra Jagtap

Efficient use of resources and utility is the key to reduce the price of the

commodities produced in any industry. This in turn would lead to reduced price

of the commodity which is the key to success. Sustainability involves integration

of all the three dimensions: environmental, economic and social. Sustainable

manufacturing involves the use of sustainable processes and systems to produce

better sustainable products. These products will be more attractive, and the

industry will know more about the climate impact from their production.

Manufacturing companies use a considerable amount of energy in their

production processes. One important area to understand the sustainability

level at these types of industries is to study this energy use. The present work

studies energy use in a large-scale tool manufacturing company in Sweden.

Value Stream Mapping method is implemented for the purpose of mapping the

energy use in the different operations. To complement this, an energy audit has

been conducted, which is a method that include a study and analysis of a facility,

indicating possible areas of improvements by reducing energy use and saving

energy costs. This presents an opportunity for the company to implement

energy efficiency measures, thus generating positive impacts through budget

savings. Less energy use is also good for the environment resulting in less

greenhouse gas emissions level. This also helps in long-term strategic planning

and initiatives to assess the required needs and stabilize energy use for the long

run. Social sustainability completes the triad along with environmental and

economic sustainability. In this study, the latter is reflected with the company’s

relationship with its working professionals, communities and society.

Key words: energy audit, energy efficiency, Value Stream Mapping

Supervisor: Peter J. Jonsson Subject reader: Ines Julia Khadri Examiner: David Sköld SAMINT-MILI 2021 Printed by: Uppsala Universitet

Faculty of Science and Technology

Visiting address: Ångströmlaboratoriet Lägerhyddsvägen 1 House 4, Level 0 Postal address: Box 536 751 21 Uppsala Telephone: +46 (0)18 – 471 30 03 Telefax: +46 (0)18 – 471 30 00 Web page: http://www.teknik.uu.se/student-en/

Popular Scientific Summary

Sustainable development is a hot topic trending across the world in the 21st century. It is

important to grasp the definition of ‘Sustainable Development’. One popular definition of

sustainable development is from the United National World Commission on environment and

Development is “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the

ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. In the 4th industrial revolution the whole

world is moving in a sustainable direction in the three domains - environmental, economic and

social. The term Sustainable Manufacturing refers to the integration of processes and systems

capable to produce high quality products and services using less and more sustainable resources

(energy and materials), being safer for employees, customers and communities surrounding,

being able to mitigate environmental and social impacts throughout its whole life cycle.

The thesis report presents a method to track energy use in the production line for a product

family. This is done by carrying out a bottom-up energy audit and creating a map of the energy

use in the entire production process by implementing Value Stream Mapping (VSM) method.

This analysis of the energy use will help developing an energy cost tool which quantifies the

carbon footprints from the manufacturing of tools as well as from the facility. Another outlook

of the study is to develop new Energy Performance Indicators (EnPIs) for the production and

support processes. The EnPIs presents an opportunity to monitor the energy use closely by

integrating them into the energy software. Finally, another purpose of the thesis study is to

study the social sustainability dimension wherein the working environment is analysed and

discussed.

The case study result presents a huge potential in achieving higher sustainability in tool

manufacturing industries. By implementing sustainable manufacturing, the organizations could

achieve efficient productivity, such as higher quality of manufacturing, waste elimination from

the production line, re-use of the essential resources and product durability improvement

resulting in less carbon footprint. This thesis work could serve as a base for future sustainability

projects for the tool manufacturing industries.

Foreword

This Master Thesis has been written within a master program at Uppsala University. The work

has been jointly developed by Smruti Smarak Mohanty (Uppsala University) and Rohan

Surendra Jagtap (Linköping University) with the help of AB Sandvik Coromant. The Master

Thesis report is published at both Universities (Linköping and Uppsala). We both authors have

worked in most of the areas prioritized to our field of studies. I have specially focused in the

sustainable value stream mapping and the social sustainability, whereas my thesis partner

Rohan (Linköping University) focused on the energy auditing, energy cost tool and energy

performance indicators.

I would first like to say thanks to my supervisor Peter J. Jonsson and subject reader Ines Julia

Khadri, Ph.D. student at the Department of Engineering Sciences, Industrial Engineering &

Management in Uppsala University. My subject reader helped me all through this broad work

in an exceptionally academic way and prevailing with regards to managing me towards an

academic writing. She guided me throughout the study of this paper with its structural flow by

allowing me to conduct the research independently with my own thoughts. I’d also like to thank

Simon Johnsson, Research Engineer in the Department of Management and Engineering (IEI)

within the Division of Energy Systems, Linköping University who supervised Rohan and has

indirectly also helped me with the thesis.

Second, I would like to thank AB Sandvik Coromant for their assistance in the collection of

my data including all the respondent and managers that took part in our study and gave us the

opportunity to interview them with thorough input and full support. I would further like to

thank Martin Kolseth, Lovisa Svarvare and Peter P. Andersen (Supervisors at AB Sandvik

Coromant) for their help and guidance.

Finally, I would like to appreciate the department Industrial Engineering & Management at

Uppsala University involving all the faculties that I had throughout my two years masters at

this University.

Last but not the least, I would like to pass on my sincere gratitude to my loved ones in India. I

would like to notably thank my mother Mrs. Minati Das, who always encouraged me to do

things in my life. My Father Mr. Prafulla Kumar Mohanty has inspired me a lot. Life far away

from home is a major test, yet the endeavors has given me a chance to make my parents proud,

which has consistently been the dream I have strived to accomplish.

Table of Contents 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1

1.1. Problematization.......................................................................................................... 3

1.2. Need of SM in tool manufacturing industries ............................................................. 3

1.3. Objective and Research questions ............................................................................... 4

1.4. Delimitation ................................................................................................................. 5

1.5. Case company description ........................................................................................... 5

1.5.1. About Sandvik Group ........................................................................................... 5

1.5.2. About Sandvik Coromant ..................................................................................... 6

2. Theory ................................................................................................................................ 7

3. Literature Review............................................................................................................. 11

3.1 Sustainable Manufacturing ........................................................................................ 13

3.2 Energy Audit ............................................................................................................. 13

3.3 Energy Efficiency ...................................................................................................... 14

3.4. Energy Management ................................................................................................. 15

3.5. Value Stream Mapping.............................................................................................. 15

3.6. Cost tool in manufacturing ........................................................................................ 17

3.7. Social sustainability................................................................................................... 17

3.8. Energy Performance Indicators ................................................................................. 18

4. Methodology .................................................................................................................... 19

4.1. Research Design............................................................................................................ 19

4.2. Research approach ........................................................................................................ 20

4.3. Empirical case data collection approach ....................................................................... 21

4.3.1. Bottom-up audit..................................................................................................... 22

4.3.2. Formation of Sus-VSM diagrams .......................................................................... 24

4.3.3. Formation of Energy cost tool ............................................................................... 25

4.3.4. Social Sustainability................................................................................................ 26

4.3.5 Energy Performance Indicators .............................................................................. 27

4.4. Motivation of Research Methodology ......................................................................... 28

4.5. Ethical and legal consideration ................................................................................. 28

4.6 Limitations ..................................................................................................................... 30

5. Result and analysis ............................................................................................................... 31

5.1. Audit ............................................................................................................................. 31

5.2. Sustainable Value Stream Mapping .............................................................................. 45

5.3. Energy Cost Tool .......................................................................................................... 48

5.4. Interpretation of Social Sustainability .......................................................................... 52

5.5. Energy Performance Indicators (EnPIs) ....................................................................... 55

6 Discussion ............................................................................................................................. 57

7. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 60

8. Future Scope ........................................................................................................................ 61

References ................................................................................................................................ 63

Appendix .................................................................................................................................. 70

Appendix 1. PI System Explorer ......................................................................................... 70

Appendix 2. Semi-structured interview template ................................................................ 71

Appendix 3. Social sustainability survey template .............................................................. 73

Appendix 4. VSM Calculation ............................................................................................. 74

List of Figures Figure 1 The three dimensions of sustainability (Sonnemann, et al., 2015) .............................. 1

Figure 2 Different divisions of Sandvik group .......................................................................... 6

Figure 3 Evolution of manufacturing strategies (Jawahir et al., 2006) ...................................... 7

Figure 4 Energy Audit process developed by (Rosenqvist, et al., 2012) ................................... 9

Figure 5 Concept of energy performance indicators (EnPI) in baseline period and

implemented period (ISO, 2020) ............................................................................................. 11

Figure 6 Funneling structure for literature review ................................................................... 12

Figure 7 Mixed Research Method............................................................................................ 20

Figure 8 Data Collection .......................................................................................................... 21

Figure 9 Iterative process for industrial audit, (Rosenqvist, et al., 2012) ................................ 22

Figure 10 System Boundaries for study ................................................................................... 30

Figure 11 Production flow for the products ............................................................................. 31

Figure 12 Active power sum L1-L3 (10m) for 2018 ............................................................... 32

Figure 13 Active power sum L1-L3 (10m) for 2019 ............................................................... 32

Figure 14 Unit Processes of GVP3, Heat Treatment and Packaging ....................................... 33

Figure 15 Sankey diagram: Product A ..................................................................................... 34

Figure 16 Sankey diagram: Product B .................................................................................... 34

Figure 17 Sankey diagram: Product C .................................................................................... 35

Figure 18 Sankey diagram: Product D .................................................................................... 35

Figure 19 Percent energy recycled from compressors ............................................................. 36

Figure 20 Percentage of energy going to the ventilation and preheating the incoming air ..... 37

Figure 21 Working week total energy use in STAMA cells .................................................... 38

Figure 22 Non-working week total energy use in STAMA cells ............................................ 38

Figure 23 Organizational structure of Energy Management .................................................... 39

Figure 24 Energy Pyramid at Volvo CE (Thollander, et al., 2020) ......................................... 40

Figure 25 Procedure for implementation of energy efficiency measures (Hessian Ministry of

Economics, Transport, Urban and Regional Development, 2011) .......................................... 41

Figure 26 Pump energy use during production week in STAMA cells ................................... 42

Figure 27 Pump energy use during non-production week in STAMA cells............................ 43

Figure 28 VSM diagram for Product A ................................................................................... 46

Figure 29 VSM diagram for Product B.................................................................................... 46

Figure 30 VSM diagram for Product C.................................................................................... 47

Figure 31 VSM diagram for Product D ................................................................................... 47

Figure 32 Reference Chart for Energy Cost Tool .................................................................... 49

Figure 33 Energy Cost Tool: Tool Sheet ................................................................................. 50

Figure 34 Energy Cost Tool: Data Sheet ................................................................................. 50

Figure 35 Energy Cost Tool: Output report ............................................................................. 51

List of Tables

Table 1 Structure of unit processes categorization (Sommarin, et al., 2014) ............................ 8

Table 2 Example of losses in a compressed-air system, (Falkner & Slade, 2009) .................. 44

Table 3 Results of social sustainability survey ........................................................................ 52

Table 4 Social Sustainability score matrix ............................................................................... 53

Table 5 List of current EnPIs used in STAMA cells ............................................................... 55

Table 6 List of suggested new EnPIs which can be developed through available data in

STAMA cells ........................................................................................................................... 56

Table 7 List of suggested new EnPIs in STAMA cells ........................................................... 56

Table 8 List of suggested new EnPIs for support processes for the industry .......................... 57

Table 9 Material removal ......................................................................................................... 74

Table 10 Operation and lead time ............................................................................................ 74

Abbreviations

SM Sustainable Manufacturing

VSM Value Stream Mapping

SUS-VSM Sustainable Value Stream Mapping

IEA International Energy Agency

PA Packaging

EnPI Energy Performance Indicator

FSSD Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development

SSD Strategic Sustainable Development

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

GHG Green House Gas

KPI Key performance Indicator

EEM Energy Efficiency Measures

EE Energy Efficiency

EB Energy Baseline

GHE Green House Emission

EHS Environmental Health and Safety

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

1

1. Introduction

The report by UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has highlighted that the

increase in global greenhouse gas emissions is rapidly altering the climate. It states that the

average global temperature will reach the threshold of 1.5 ℃ above pre-industrial levels by

2030. Thus, causing various problems like desertification, increasing sea levels, reducing food

production etc. Energy demand reductions, decarbonization of electricity and other fuels,

electrification of energy end use etc. are some of the mitigation pathways. The tool

manufacturing industry, mining and quarrying industries use about 49,081 GWh, while the

total electricity use is 171,862 GWh (SCB, 2018). This is about 28% of the total use, thus

turning out to be a significant contribution and a considerable share of the energy supplied

worldwide.

Sweden is on track to meet its energy target to reduce the energy intensity of the economy by

at least 20% from 2008 to 2020 (International Energy Agency, 2020). The target of a reduction

of 50% by 2030 also seems to be feasible albeit further improvements are required to achieve

it (Ibid.). Since the energy intensity depends on the structure of the economy, structural changes

in/to energy intensive can potentially have a large impact on a country’s sustainability

performance (Ibid.).

Sustainable development is a hot topic trending across the world in the 21st century. It is

important to understand what it means. One popular definition of sustainable development is

from the United National World Commission on environment and Development is

“Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future

generations to meet their own needs” (Brundtland Commission , 1987). This definition is based

on two key concepts: “needs” which refers to the essential needs of the world’s poor, to which

overriding priority should be given; and “limitations” which refers to the restrictions imposed

by technologies and socio-economic factors on the ability of the environment to meet the needs

of present and future generations.

Figure 1 The three dimensions of sustainability (Sonnemann, et al., 2015)

2

To achieve long-lasting sustainable development in an organization, there is a need to balance

environmental, economic and social sustainability factors in equal. The three dimensions of

sustainability are defined as follows.

• Environmental Sustainability:

Environmental sustainability means that we are bounded within the means of our

natural resource. To achieve true environmental sustainability, there is a need to ensure

that the use of natural resources like materials, energy fuels, land, water etc. are at a

sustainable rate or by circularity. There is a need to consider material scarcity, the

damage to environment from extraction of these materials and if the resource can be

kept within circular economy principles (Circular Ecology, 2020).

• Economic Sustainability:

Economic sustainability refers to the need for a business or country to use its resources

efficiently and responsibly in order to operate in a sustainable manner to consistently

produce an operational profit. Without the operational profits, businesses cannot sustain

its activities. Without responsible acting and efficient use of resources, a company will

not be able to sustain its operations in the long run (Ibid.). It is about building long

lasting economic models to ensure sustainability.

• Social Sustainability:

Social sustainability refers to the ability of society or any social system to persistently

achieve a good well-being. Achieving social sustainability would ensure the social

well-being of a country, an organization or a community can be maintained in the long

run (Ibid.). From a business perspective, it is about understanding the impacts of

corporations on people and society (ADEC Innovations, 2020). Social sustainability is

the least quantifiable aspect of the three sustainability factors.

The thesis primarily focuses on how energy use tracking may impact environmental

sustainability and economic sustainability dimensions and how it can be made more efficient.

This will in turn present an opportunity to generate operational profits in the long term. The

social sustainability dimension will be briefly touched upon which reflects the well-being of

employees working in the organization. The authors tried to find journal articles which

established a relationship between an audit process, VSM and social sustainability aspect. After

analyzing the studied journal articles, the gap in the literature was identified. To be specific,

there was no research found regarding the bottom-up energy audit approach with Sus-Value

Stream Mapping (Sus-VSM) and working environment study of organization. The bottom-line

of the thesis is to present a case study of a tool manufacturing company linking the three topics.

The following chapters present the research design of the study and its related.

3

1.1. Problematization

For the tool manufacturing industry, it is very important to minimize the environmental impact

caused by their production and operation process, as investors, suppliers and the customers are

more concerned with the sustainability ( Klassen, 2000). Managers assume a basic job in

deciding the environmental effect of manufacturing operations through decisions of crude

materials utilized, energy used, toxins radiated, and wastes generated. In the course of recent

decades, theoretical thinking on environmental issues have gradually extended from a restricted

spotlight on contamination control to incorporate a huge arrangement of the board choices,

projects and technologies. In this 4th industrial revolution most of the organization want to

increase the productivity, while the environmental burdens are the major challenges for them.

Increasing rate of carbon footprint in the production facility and other supply process involved

in the complete manufacturing process is a major problem. By implementing the Sustainable

Manufacturing in the tool manufacturing industry could be a solution to this (Ibid).

1.2. Need of SM in tool manufacturing industries

Manufacturing is experiencing a significant progress period. The presentation of applied

autonomy and robotics, 3D printing, and a changing worldwide economy have created

tremendous changes in the business, and these progressions give no indication of easing back

down (Pivot International, 2020). There is an another area where manufacturing is

encountering changes, i.e. sustainability While sustainability in manufacturing industry has

been a subject of enthusiasm for the area for a considerable length of time, as of late makers

have started looking unquestionably more truly at how to manufacture in an increasingly

productive, environmentally-friendly manner (Pivot International, 2020). Many industries

consider “sustainability” as an important aspect in their operations for increasing growth,

global competitiveness and brand awareness (Gray, 2020). Apart from that some key benefits

to sustainable manufacturing are:

• Improve operational efficiency

• Cost and waste reduction from the production process

• Long haul business feasibility and achievement

• Lower administrative consistence costs

• Improved deals and brand acknowledgment

• More prominent access to financing and capital

Sustainability implies working with an eye toward what's to come. Manufacturing in a

sustainable manner is a way to indicate that less environmental harm results from the

manufacturing procedure, and that is consistently something worth being thankful for (Pivot

International, 2020). Sustainability is actually very basic: If you utilize less assets today, the

industry will have more for tomorrow - regardless of whether "tomorrow" signifies quite a

while from now. It's simple for most of the manufacturing industry to think about "the

environment" as a theoretical formulation, however manufacturers know better, managing as

they do in crude materials. As assets become rare, costs go up (Ibid). Sometimes, manufacturers

need to begin utilizing substitution materials (Ibid). These issues can make logistical issues,

4

also an expansion in costs - and these issues can rapidly swell into significant issues for your

organization (Ibid).

1.3. Objective and Research questions

It's always good to develop strategies for a task, but to implement those strategies is more

challenging (Epstein & Buhovac, 2010). The purpose of this thesis is to understand what affects

the energy use most in the manufacturing processes such as the use of compressed air and

cutting fluid as well as machine and method choices for a tool manufacturing company. This

will facilitate a prioritization of improvement areas in the future. There is also a need to study

social aspects to understand the conditions for implementing new sustainability measures

within the case company. Since sustainability stands on three different pillars, where one of

them is concerned with the social aspect. Primarily this study is focused on three aspects of

sustainability i.e. environmental, economic and social. To achieve the objectives, the study

focuses on energy use in a modern tool manufacturing industry, mapping energy use in the tool

manufacturing plant by creating comparable measurement figures for the various energy

sources of the machines, also to develop a model for how to calculate the total energy cost for

manufacturing a certain product item in a product from a sustainability perspective, to develop

EnPIs which would help to monitor energy use and to assess social sustainability by studying

the working environment (Sandvik Coromant, 2019).

As this research is focusing on the three parameters of sustainability, the research questions

were designed accordingly. The 1st research question covers the environmental perspective.

The 2nd research question supports environmental as well as economic perspectives. The 3rd

research question satisfies the social perspective of sustainability. To address the problem, an

investigation around the following research questions will be presented in this Master thesis:

The research questions are formulated as follows:

1. How can energy use be studied, mapped and its efficiency be improved in a tool

manufacturing industry?

2. How can EnPIs, energy cost tool be developed and implemented in a tool

manufacturing industry?

3. What are the improvements needed to be considered while implementing social

sustainability in a tool manufacturing industry?

The above questions will be answered in following way:

Regarding RQ 1, a bottom-up energy audit along with Sus-VSM is implemented in this study.

The first phase of the audit is survey, followed by energy analysis and energy efficiency

measures. The audit helps to study the energy use as well as leads to the suggestion of energy

efficiency measures based on current use. While Sus-VSM complements the audit to map the

energy use of different energy carriers for four prioritized products in production line. This

reflects the environmental sustainability as it would help the case company to reduce energy

use and equivalent GHG emissions in the future.

RQ 2 involves the development of new EnPIs and an energy cost tool. The proposed EnPIs for

the support and production processes helps to support energy related decision making or future

5

investments. The energy cost tool incorporates the production and facility in its calculation of

cost of manufacturing, energy use and GHG emissions. The two aspects eventually reflect the

economic sustainability as well as supports environmental sustainability.

With regards to RQ 3, it involves conducting a survey with ten explicit statements to study the

working environment of case company. The statements present an opportunity to investigate

and suggest improvements in their respective areas if required. This research question reflects

the social sustainability viewpoint, thus completing the triad.

1.4. Delimitation

Sustainable manufacturing is a broad concept which has different aspects to it like

manufacturing technologies, product lifecycles, value creation networks and global

manufacturing impacts (Bonvoisin, et al., 2017). The researchers in this study have confined

the scope only till manufacturing technologies perspective and briefly touched upon the value

creation networks. The Sus-VSM, energy audit, EnPIs fall under the category of the prior while

the social sustainability falls under the category of the latter. The delimitations were considered

based on the objectives and purpose described by the case company. Apart from this no specific

or direct limitation was set by the researchers on the study.

1.5. Case company description

This chapter is an empirical contextualization of a progressively tight investigation of the case

company AB Sandvik Coromant, Gimo. This sections briefs about the Sandvik Groups’

structure, history (Both Sandvik Group and Sandvik Coromant), Sandvik Coromant’s

sustainable work, sustainable objectives, current and future sustainable challenges in the

manufacturing area. This also includes a basic analysis of Sandvik Coromant’s annual and

sustainable historical reports. This empirical study background study concludes with a detailed

analysis of the need of sustainable manufacturing in Sandvik Coromant and the tool

manufacturing companies.

1.5.1. About Sandvik Group

The Sandvik Group was established in 1862 by Göran Fredrik Göransson, who was first on the

planet to prevail with regards to utilizing the Bessemer strategy for steel creation on a modern

scale (Sandvik, 2020). At a beginning period, tasks concentrated on high caliber and included

worth, interests in R&D, close contact with clients, and fares. This is a methodology that has

stayed unaltered as the years progressed. As ahead of schedule as the 1860s, the item run

included drill steel for rock-penetrating (Ibid). The organization's posting on the Stockholm

Stock Exchange occurred in 1901. The manufacturing of hardened steel started in 1921 and

cemented carbide in 1942. Manufacturing of cemented carbide apparatuses started during the

1950s in Gimo, Sweden. Sandvik Group has three major business areas such as Sandvik

Machining Solutions (SMS), Sandvik Mining and Rock Technology (SMRT) and Sandvik

Materials Technology (SMT) (Ibid).

Sandvik has persuaded that sustainability is a genuine business advantage and a driver that

upgrades Sandvik's competitiveness. Most of the clients need to work with feasible providers.

6

Investors and shareholders are setting sustainable guidelines to put resources into

organizations. By aligning the presentation of Sandvik's new financial objectives with its

sustainability objectives the organization needed to underline the significance of long-term

sustainable goals. Sandvik takes a comprehensive perspective on the sustainability objectives.

It thinks about its operations, supply chain and customer offerings with specific targets for each

of them that complement each other, and the organization continually attempting to see the full

picture and have the greatest constructive outcome.

Figure 2 Different divisions of Sandvik group

Sandvik Machining Solutions fabricates all types of tools and tooling frameworks for cutting

edge metal cutting (Sandvik, 2020). The business zone involves a few brands that offer their

own items and administrations, for example, Sandvik Coromant, Seco Tools, Dormer Pramet

and Walter (Ibid).

Sandvik Mining and Rock Technology supplies gear, devices, administration and backing for

the mining and development ventures (Sandvik, 2020). The major business areas of SMRT is

rock penetrating and cutting, crushing and screening, loading and hauling,

burrowing/tunneling, quarrying and demolition work (Ibid).

Sandvik Materials Technology creates and makes items produced using propelled hardened

steels and uncommon alloys, including cylindrical items, metal powder, strip and items for

mechanical warming (Sandvik, 2020).

1.5.2. About Sandvik Coromant

The tool manufacturing company in the present study is AB Sandvik Coromant in Gimo,

Sweden. It was established in 1942. The company is a world leader in manufacturing cemented

carbide tools like turning, milling and drilling in metallic materials (Sandvik Coromant, 2020).

Sandvik Group

Sandvik Machining Solutions (SMS)

Sandvik Mining and Rock Technology

(SMRT)

Sandvik Materials Technology (SMT)

7

It has around 1500 employee, making it a large-scale enterprise. There are various industrial

solutions in the following sectors: Aerospace, Automotive, Die & mould, Medical, Oil and gas,

Power Generation and Wind Power (Ibid).

Sustainable business is one of its primary focus. The company intends to have customers to cut

faster or use the tools longer than in the past (Sandvik, 2019). It continues to improve circularity

for customers through recycling and buy-back programs for the used tools. Another focus is on

raw materials and the packaging which will reduce CO2 emissions and increase circularity. The

commitment has led to 80% circularity through the buy-back program (Sandvik Coromant,

2020). It implements green factory and sustainable facilities concept where the efforts lead to

reduction in cost, energy and CO2 emissions. The emissions have been consistently monitored

over the past few years which has led to 20% reduction overall (Ibid.).

The production in Gimo is divided into two factories – manufacturing of cemented carbide

inserts and tool holders. Sandvik Coromant’s biggest customers are the metal, automotive and

aerospace industries. The plant works with cutting edge technology for the manufacturing of

products. Hence, there is a constant need to adapt to new technologies and to find more efficient

ways to produce the tools.

2. Theory Sustainable manufacturing is defined as “the integration of processes and systems capable to

produce high quality products and services using less and more sustainable resources (energy

and materials), being safer for employees, customers and communities surrounding, being able

to mitigate environmental and social impacts throughout its whole life cycle’’ (Machado, et al.,

2019). Some of the reasons companies are pursuing sustainability in manufacturing are: to

increase operational efficiency by reducing costs and waste; to respond to or reach new

customers and increase competitive advantage; to protect and strengthen brand and reputation

and build public trust; to build long-term business viability and success; to respond to

regulatory constraints and opportunities (EPA, 2018).

Figure 3 Evolution of manufacturing strategies (Jawahir et al., 2006)

8

Abdelaziz et al. (2011) defined energy audit as “an inspection, survey and analysis of energy

flows for energy conservation to reduce the amount of energy input into the system without

negatively affecting the output.” It is a method which helps in proposing possibilities to reduce

energy expenses and carbon footprints, thus becoming a key point in the area of energy

management. The energy audit, for an organization, helps to understand, quantify and analyze

the utilization of energy. The detection of waste takes place as well as it identifies critical points

and discovers opportunities where the energy use can be potentially reduced. Through the

means of eco-efficient and feasible practices as well as energy conservation methods, overall

energy efficiency of the organization will be more profitable. This in turn would lead to reduced

energy costs (Saidur, 2010). While performing an energy audit, it is important to identify unit

processes. Unit processes are used to divide the energy use of an industry into smaller parts.

They are defined by the energy service to be performed and are further divided into two

categories: Production processes and support processes (Rosenqvist, et al., 2012). The unit

processes are general for all industries, thereby provides an opportunity for comparison of a

given unit process between different industries or businesses. Sommarin et al. (2014) put

forward two approaches in order to perform a bottom-up energy audit, first one being ‘The

Unit Process-approach’ and the second being ‘The KPI-approach’. The latter approach is

divided into three different levels.

• Overall figures like MWh/ton, kWh/m2, MWh/turnover etc.

• Support process-specific figures like ventilation, compressed air etc.

• Production process-specific figures such as melting, moulding etc.

The Unit Process-approach for bottom-up audit is adopted for the thesis which answers the

“study” aspect of energy use in RQ 1. The first part of an audit is setting up an energy balance

diagram (Sommarin, et al., 2014). Using the unit process categorization method, a general way

of structuring data is obtained. A unit process is based on the purpose of a given industrial

process for example cooling, drying, internal transport etc. (see Table 1) (Ibid.). There are three

parts of an audit: Energy survey, Energy analysis and Suggested measures (see Figure 4)

(Rosenqvist, et al., 2012). Energy survey phase defines the system boundary, identifies unit

processes, quantifies energy supply and allocates energy to unit processes. Energy analysis

phase identifies problems within systems, idling, outdated technologies, assesses potential for

energy efficiency. Suggested measures identify possible solutions to the problems, calculates

impact of the solutions by analysis and evaluates economic impact (Ibid.).

Table 1 Structure of unit processes categorization (Sommarin, et al., 2014)

Production process

Disintegrating

Support process

Ventilation

Disjointing Space heating

Mixing Lighting

Jointing Pumping

Coating Tap water heating

Moulding Internal Transport

Heating Cooling

Melting Steam

Drying Administration

Cooling/freezing

Packing

9

Figure 4 Energy Audit process developed by (Rosenqvist, et al., 2012)

Energy efficiency is defined as “the ratio of useful energy or energy services or other useful

physical outputs obtained from a system, conversion process, transmission or storage activity

to the input of energy” (IPCC, 2018). The 2012 Energy Efficiency Directive (2012/27/EU) set

of binding measures for the European Union to reach 2020 energy efficiency target. The target

here is defined as “20% reduction of energy use (in primary and final energy) compared to the

business-as-usual projections”. There was further increase in the target which proposed to

target 32.5% energy savings compared to a reference case, with a clause for an upwards

revision by 2023. The EED Article 8 states “large enterprises in all EU member countries must

conduct energy audits every four years, starting from December 2015”. This was established

in Sweden in 2014, through the law on Energy Auditing of Large Companies (2014:266). It

states the first audit should be done in the four-year period 2016-19. The Swedish government

introduced “Energisteget” (the Energy Step) which is a programme to support implementation

of energy efficiency measures. The large companies that have carried energy audits in

accordance with EED requirements may apply for financial support to invest in energy

efficiency measures. The total budget for the program is around SEK 125 million for the years

2018-20 (International Energy Agency , 2019).

Value Stream mapping (VSM) is an important technique used in lean manufacturing to identify

waste, by adapting, as necessary, for green and sustainable manufacturing (Faulkner &

Badurdeen, 2014). A value stream is defined as “all the actions, both value added and non-

value added, currently required to bring a product through the main flows essential to every

product: the production flow from raw material into the arms of the customer, and the design

flow from concept to launch” (Rother & Shook, 1999). Value stream mapping can be utilized

to improve any procedure where there are repeatable advances – and particularly when there

are various hand offs. They would then be able to stop the line to take care of that issue and get

the procedure streaming once more (Mukherjee, 2019).

Lean manufacturing instruments are concerned about environmental and societal benefits

advantages. The prosaic value stream mapping (VSM) system looks at the financial matters of

an assembling line, a large portion of which are with respect to time (process duration, lead

time, change-out time, and so on.) (Ciptomulyono, et al., 2017). Consolidating the capacity to

catch environmental and societal execution outwardly through VSMs will build its handiness

as an apparatus that can be utilized to evaluate producing tasks from a sustainability viewpoint.

Various investigations have tended to the augmentation of VSM to fuse extra rules. Majority

share of these endeavors have concentrated on adding vitality related measurements to VSMs,

while a few different examinations allude to 'practical' VSM by remembering natural execution

10

for ordinary VSMs (Ibid). This examination has built up a technique for VSM coordinated with

condition metric and social measurement for ensuring sustainable manufacture (Ibid).

Sustainable VSM recently created has a general arrangement of measurements that will have

wide application across numerous enterprises. In any case, further customization might be

expected to evaluate explicit parts of different organization (Ibid). In general, the sustainable

VSM (Sus-VSM) is normally used to evaluate economic, environmental and social

sustainability performance in manufacturing industry. In order to evaluate the, existing

measurements for sustainable manufacturing execution appraisal are analyzed to recognize

basic rules and measurements to be included for the Sus-VSM (Faulkner & Badurdeen, 2014).

Social sustainability is about identifying and managing business impacts considering both

positive and negative impacts on people (United Nations Global Compact, 2020). The quality

of a company’s relationship along with engagement with its stakeholders is deemed to be

critical. Whether directly or indirectly, companies affect what happens to its employees,

working professionals in the value chain, customers and local communities. And it is

imperative to manage these impacts proactively (Ibid.). There is an increasing awareness

among customers and stakeholders of organizations to think about the product as well as

process from a sustainable perspective right from the early stages of manufacturing (Digalwar,

et al., 2020). This global demand from the businesses and customers initiates the need to

develop methodology for sustainability assessment for manufacturing organizations (Ibid.).

Scientists argue that organizations are important actors for creating wellbeing for the society

as well as environment (Fobbe, et al., 2016). The roles of organizations are evident when

looking at the impacts of financial crisis on society. For instance, the financial crisis of 2008

lead to austerity programs, thus affecting the social element of communities. Thus,

employment, income levels, quality of life and work determined by the companies have an

impact on social framework even beyond the economy (Ibid.).

When it comes to Energy Performance Indicators (EnPIs), it is important to know what it

implies. “Energy Performance Indicator (EnPIs) is a measure of energy intensity used to gauge

the effectiveness of your energy management efforts” (50001 Store, 2020). EnPIs are used to

understand energy performance corresponding to energy use and energy efficiency (EE) (ISO,

2020). Thus, playing a vital role in evaluating efficiency as well as effectiveness of Energy

Efficiency Measures (EEM). The implementation and monitoring of EnPIs is imperative to

support energy related decision making. EnPI and energy baseline (EB) represent two key

interlinked elements enabling measurements pertaining to EE, use and performance. EnB forms

the basis to quantify the energy performance before and after the implementation of

improvement actions. Figure 5 represents the relation between EnPI, EnB, energy target and

measurement of performance before and after implementation (Ibid.).

11

Figure 5 Concept of energy performance indicators (EnPI) in baseline period and implemented period (ISO, 2020)

Based on characteristics, there are four types of EnPIs according to ISO 50006 and IEA reports:

energy use, simple ratio, statistical modeling and simulation modeling used for EE

improvement (ISO, 2020; Shim & Lee, 2018). Energy use is “using the total energy use over a

period of time” for instance kWh, GJ etc. (Ibid.). Energy intensity is an example of single ratio

which is defined as “rate of energy use per unit activity data” like specific energy use (SEC),

energy use (kWh) per production (ton) (ISO, 2020; Shim & Lee, 2018; Lawrence, et al., 2019).

A statistical model could be a linear regression model or a non-linear regression model (Shim

& Lee, 2018). A simulation model can be applied over each boundary to measure the

improvements in EE as well as energy performance (Ibid.). There are three primary EnPI

boundary levels according to ISO 50006: individual, system and organizational (ISO, 2020).

Organizational level represents major interactions between departments, total energy use,

related expenses and overall performance (Schmidt, et al., 2016). System level refers to the

evaluation of process line level where a comparison can be drawn with similar processes if

possible. EnPIs on individual level are usually done for a detailed assessment of energy use

and related cost per manufacturing step or equipment level (Ibid.). One other categorization

according to REF divides into three explicit levels: overall figures, support process-specific

figures and production process-specific figures (Thollander, et al., 2014).

3. Literature Review This chapter intends to look further at the bodies of literature that have emerged around the key

theoretical concepts. It gives a picture of what is sustainable manufacturing and for what reason

is it significant for organizations. Likewise, brief overview of different factors and practices

utilized for this study has been introduced. To conduct the thesis successfully, it was important

to carry out a literature review of the topics mentioned in the previous chapter. The literature

review chapter consists of existing theories in the following order: sustainable manufacturing,

energy auditing, energy efficiency, Value Stream Mapping (VSM), energy cost tool, social

sustainability and energy performance indicator (EnPIs). The topic names were used as the

keywords for searching the literature. Several academic journals which were relevant to the

topics were searched and analyzed. Science Direct was primarily used as the database to search

the journal articles, while a few articles were searched in Springer database. The relevant

materials included: official websites, books, journal articles, reports and conference

proceedings. Funneling process was used which refers to the process of narrowing possible

ideas into specific research question or purpose (Shields , 2014). This helps to narrow down a

big picture into manageable research project (see Figure 6). By implementing this, the focus of

the research was specified keeping the project objectives as a reference.

12

Figure 6 Funneling structure for literature review

The Figure 6 represents the theoretical research methodology, where the design of the chapters

with the overall study methodology can be linked to a funnel method at the first stage of the

study. The theoretical research methodology begins with the introduction which includes the

scope of this study and the structure. After that many literatures have been identified and

categorized then the three-research questions was developed. The following are parts that

describe the approach, the methods for data collection, the structure and the quality of the

report. The data collection phase is concluded for both, Energy Audit and VSM, remaining

work would be conducted further as the thesis progresses.

The bottom-up energy audit method is necessary in order to track the energy use of the products

requires measurement and analysis from the machine level. This will give rise to a bigger

complex system, thus making the original system a sub-system of the new emerging system.

The audit helps in studying and analysis of the energy use within the system boundary. The

suggested energy efficiency measures could serve as a basis for the company in their job to

become more energy efficient. The Sus-Value Stream Mapping method helps to visualize with

clarity the present state of performance of a production line (Faulkner & Badurdeen, 2014).

The identification of relevant metrics and their visual representation helps to develop

comprehensive sustainable VSM (Sus-VSM). The energy cost tool would be developed

through the analysis from the energy audit which will help the company in the future to

approximate costs generating from the total electricity use for products. The social

sustainability surveys statements present an opportunity to investigate and suggest

improvements in their respective areas if required. This research question reflects the social

sustainability viewpoint, thus completing the triad.

13

3.1 Sustainable Manufacturing

The environmental concerns have become exponentially inferable from the expanding

utilization of characteristic assets and contamination. Subsequently, to address the previously

mentioned concerns it gets essential to effectively execute the sustainable manufacturing

frameworks (Zindani, et al., 2020). Various definitions have been proposed to characterize the

word sustainability. For example, sustainability has been characterized by previous Prime

Minister of Norway Gro Harlem Bruntland as the casing work where in the necessities of the

present age are met without trading off the capacity of people in the future in meeting their

prerequisites (Jawahir, 2008).

Another significant perspective that assumes a basic job in accomplishing a sustainable

manufacturing framework is the understanding of necessities in characterizing the way to

reception of sustainable manufacturing (Cherrafi, et al., 2016). As showed by the literature,

there are three noteworthy parts that describe and delineate absolutely the requirements of

sustainable manufacturing: Information, management and culture, and methods. Successful

evaluation can be made by giving the necessary qualitative and quantitative data. Particular

divisions arranged to sustainability must be worked inside an association to advance the

improvement of sustainable culture (Zindani, et al., 2020). Procedures must be set up to

guarantee the utilization of the methodologies and the targets for sustainable association.

It is imperative to discuss about the overall context about Sustainable Manufacturing in general

to get a wider perspective. Bonvoisin et al. (2017) defined sustainable manufacturing solutions

in four dimensions with overlapping scopes which they identify in literature as “layers”. They

discuss the layers as follows:-

• Manufacturing technologies (how things are manufactured) where the research is

oriented based on processes and equipment, development of new or improved

manufacturing processes, maintenance of equipment, determination of process

resource use, process simulations and energy efficiency of building.

• Product lifecycles (what is to be produced) where the research is primarily based on

product (good or service). The linked discipline is product design aspects like product

lifecycle management, intelligent product, product sustainability assessment.

• Value creation networks (organization context) where the research is oriented based

on companies or manufacturing networks. Examples of the approaches include

resource efficient supply chain planning, industrial ecology.

• Global manufacturing impact (mechanism context) where the research exceeds the

conventional scope of engineering. Examples of approaches include development of

sustainability assessment methods, education and competence development,

development of standards.

Based on the above classification of layers, it can be said the focus of this thesis falls somewhat

under the first category of “Manufacturing technologies” and also briefly under “value creation

network”. This is since the core theme in the case study is about tracking energy use in the

production line while also analyzing social sustainability dimension.

3.2 Energy Audit

According to Yeager Vogt PE et al. (2003), there are two distinct and fundamental approaches

to model a facility’s energy use: top-down and bottom-up. The requirements of bottom-up

14

model are metering installation and an exhaustive inventory of all facility equipment, as well

as the energy use pattern of each facility device. It is necessary to sum the energy use of all

facility’s equipment in order to determine a facility’s total energy use. While the top-down

model uses the high-level information that a facility regularly collects regarding its activities

and performance and further associating that data with the corresponding energy use. Sathaye

and Sanstad (2004) state that the bottom-up approach focuses on individual technologies for

delivering energy services such as the household durable goods and industrial process

technologies. And the top-down method assumes a general equilibrium or macroeconomic

perspective, where costs are defined in terms of losses in economic output, income, or gross

domestic product (GDP) typically coming from imposition of energy/emissions taxes.

According to them, the fundamental difference between the two is the perspective taken by

each on consumer and firm behavior and the performance of markets for energy efficiency.

3.3 Energy Efficiency

The Energy Policies of IEA Countries for Sweden (2019) report recommends that the

government could complement the adopted targets with a different metric to better capture

improvements in energy efficiency in the final use. It also further states the energy efficiency

targets should be aligned with Sweden’s climate targets ensuring with actions that energy

efficiency effectively helps reduce emissions. The government also should regularly assess the

contribution of taxation on energy efficiency improvements and ensure it is sufficient to

incentivize energy efficiency further in order to fulfil the energy savings requirements for 2030

(International Energy Agency , 2019).

Energy efficiency for a machine tool, is affected by intrinsic characteristics and processing

conditions (Zhou, et al., 2016). The energy efficiency for energy losses such as motor loss,

mechanical loss and hydraulic system etc. if affected by intrinsic characteristics. While from

the perspective of machining process of machine tools, reactive power losses affect energy

efficiency mainly for real output like standby energy use, air cutting energy use, reactive power

use of acceleration and deceleration etc. that are related to inertia force (Zhou, et al., 2016)

categorized the existing energy use models into three: 1) the linear type of cutting energy use

model based on Material Remove Rate (MRR), detailed parameter of cutting energy use

correlation models and 3) process-oriented machining energy use model. They drew two major

conclusions for future study: 1) through introduction of correlation analysis of machine tools,

parts, tools and processing conditions, accuracy of current energy use models could be

improved, 2) more scientific evaluation system is required for the assessment and test of

machining tools energy efficiency.

Mert et al. (2015) presented how services can improve the energy efficiency of a machine tool

based on a case of machine tool manufacturer. They identified existing and potential services

to increase the energy efficiency of machine tools. The existing services are: Process

consulting, training, condition monitoring, retrofit; the potential services are commissioning,

training, hotline service, maintenance agreement, spare part supply, retrofit. A machine

structure tree of the components and function modules regarding energy demand was presented

(BINE Information Service, 2014). The high energy demand in the following components

were: Sealing air in Main Spindle; Sealing Air in Axis; Hydraulics, Switch cabinet cooling,

Machine cooling, Suction device, Cooling lubricant supply in Peripheral equipment; Filter and

Low-voltage distributor in Electronics/Miscellaneous.

15

Sorrell et al. (2000) and Palm & Thollander (2010) discussed about the barriers for the adoption

of cost-effective energy efficiency measures in industry which can be categorized into three

factors: economic, behavioral and organizational. Cagno et al. (2013) have extended this

categorization and further divided the barriers into technology-related, organizational,

information, economic, behavioral, market, competence, awareness and government/policies.

There has also been attempts to categorize the driving forces for improved energy efficiency.

Thollander & Ottosson (2008) in their research, categorized driving forces into market related,

current and potential policy instruments, and organizational and behavioral factors. Thollander

et al. (2013) categorized these driving forces into financial, informational, organizational and

external and organizational and behavioral factors. Trianni et al. (2017) further conducted a

recent study where they classified the driving forces according to the type of action the driving

force represents, for instance, regulatory, economic, informative and vocational training.

3.4. Energy Management

To have a successful in-house energy management practice, Johannson & Thollander (2018)

outlined ten factors. The factors included are: Top-management support; Long-term energy

strategy; A two-step energy plan; An energy manager position; Correct energy cost allocation;

Clear KPIs (Key Performance Indicators); Energy controllers among floor-level staff;

Education for employees; Visualization and Energy competition. They state these factors

should not be a replacement for energy management standards but as a method or tool to

achieve the outlined factors for success. Their paper was carried out in terms of Swedish

context, it remains to be seen if these factors could be generalized to other countries except

Sweden. Paramonova & Thollander (2016) discussed the possibilities for participation of

industries in industrial energy-efficiency networks (IEENs) to overcome typical industrial

energy-efficiency barriers in small and medium enterprises (SMEs). They suggest that

participating in energy-efficiency networks can shift companies’ attention to behavioral aspects

as IEENs contribute towards changing attitudes and behavior by allowing companies to learn

from their own and others’ experiences. While this may be applicable to most of the cases, but

there might be instances where the companies tend to just “green wash”. It might be so that the

companies would participate in these IEENs just for the sake of it while having no actual

implementation on ground. With regards to the change of attitude and behavior, the top-level

management might turn out to be too stubborn and rigid. Thus, refusing to accept any kind of

changes in their working structure. This calls for a need where the data could be quantified as

to how many SMEs participating in the IEENs contribute to meaningful implementation of

measures. It remains to be seen if the suggested IEENs would be applicable for large scale

enterprises and not only SMEs.

3.5. Value Stream Mapping

Value stream mapping is a venture improvement device to help in envisioning the whole

production process, speaking to both material, information and other carrier stream.

Characterized value stream as assortment of all exercises value included just as non-value

added that are required to bring a productor a group of products that utilization similar assets

through the primary streams, from raw material to the end clients (Agarwal & Katiyar, 2018).

A significant part of the value stream mapping process is recording the connections between

the manufacturing processes and the controls used to deal with these procedures, for example,

16

production scheduling and creation data. Not at all like most procedure mapping strategies that

regularly, just record the essential item stream, value stream mapping likewise archives the

progression of data inside the framework, where the materials are put away (crude materials

and work in process, WIP) and what triggers the development of material starting with one

procedure then onto the next are key snippets of data. value stream maps for deciding the

convictions, practices, and capabilities controlled by business pioneers were portrayed and with

the assistance of present and future states map (Agarwal & Katiyar, 2018).

To comprehend value stream mapping, it is important initially to comprehend what a "value

stream" is. Basically, a worth stream is a progression of steps that happen to give the item or

administration that their clients need or need. To give the item or administration that the clients

want, each organization has a lot of steps that are required. Value stream mapping empowers

to more likely comprehend what these means are, the place the worth is included, where it's

not, and most critically, how to enhance the aggregate procedure. Value stream mapping

(VSM) furnishes the user with an organized representation of the key advances and relating

information expected to comprehend and wisely make upgrades that improve the whole

procedure, not only one segment to the detriment of another (Plutora, 2020).

It's essential to take note of that the beginning and end purposes of the mapping exercise, known

as fenceposts, can vary contingent upon your objectives and destinations. Value stream maps

can be made for each individual item and administration for each kind of business. Be that as

it may, with the end goal of this conversation thus one can more likely see how to apply this.

The thesis concentrates on VSM as it identifies which include improvement for big business

programming arrangements using a rearranged cascade system. The thesis alludes to

programming highlights as the "product" being created right now. Unlike procedure maps, or

flowcharts, that show just the means associated with the procedure, a VSM shows essentially

more data and utilizations a totally different, progressively straight configuration (Ibid.). The

VSM empowers the group and authority to see where the real worth is being included the

procedure, permitting them to enhance the general proficiency related with the conveyance of

a product item or highlight demand, not simply the quantity of steps (Ibid.).

According to Rother & Shook (1999) the way to create basic VSM is all around archived and

generally utilized in industry to evaluate the esteem included and non-esteem included

exercises in tasks. Endless articles exist on the utilization of ordinary VSM the survey of which

isn't the focal point of this paper. This approach inspects endeavors to stretch out ordinary VSM

to catch supportability execution. These endeavors can be partitioned into two general classes

(Ibid.):

• Studies which are delegated environmental/energy VSM, where the centre is joining

environmental/energy appraisal in VSM.

• Concentrates that are characterized 'sustainable' VSM

Torres & Gati (2009) broadened the EPA lean and environmental toolkit, which they call

environmental VSM (E-VSM) and approved the technique with a contextual analysis in the

Brazilian liquor and sugar manufacturing industry. The essential center is water utilization at a

definite level by partitioning water misfortunes into inactive, genuine, inherent, utilitarian, and

genuine useful misfortunes. In any case, the visual ID of water squander inside the procedure

through the progression line approach proposed isn't clear. Recognizing the absence of

accentuation on vitality utilization in VSMs, the US EPA therefore made another toolbox for

17

lean and energy mapping (US EPA, 2007). The utilization of visuals, for example, a vitality

dashboard to imagine if vitality objectives are met is empowered here.

Simons & Mason (2002) proposed a technique called sustainable VSM (SVSM) to upgrade

sustainability in manufacturing by breaking down GHG gas discharges. Even though it is

alluded to as a sustainable VSM, the structure doesn't legitimately consolidate cultural

measurements; they are thought to be fused in a roundabout way by excellence of following

financial or environmental benefits being joined by social benefits. Fearne & Norton (2009)

consolidated the SVSM made by Simons & Mason (2002) with sustainability metrics made by

Norton (2007) to make a reasonable worth chain map (SVCM) method by putting accentuation

on connections and data streams between nourishment retailers and nourishment producers in

the UK. Essential environmental performance indicators (EPI) set by UK Department of

Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) are to be remembered for the SVCM while

other EPI's are to be chosen by the client dependent on the given procedure and industry

(Norton, 2007).

This approach considered a wide exhibit of environmental metrics, for example, vitality

utilization during the procedure, transportation, and any capacity stages just as water utilization

and material use. The SVCM technique was approved through a contextual analysis of sourcing

and pressing of cherry tomatoes over a year time span; as surveying vitality utilization was

troublesome undertaking, they replace that measurement with information from LCA directed

by Guinee (2002). Likewise, with numerous different examinations, this SVCM, as well,

doesn't consolidate any social metrics; the strategies to quantify the diverse Environmental

Performance Indicators (EPIs) or clear visualization of chosen EPI's isn't addressed.

3.6. Cost tool in manufacturing

According to Nord et al. (2015), in order to develop a cost model for an optimized

manufacturing company, the operation time, type of operations and carrier used should be

considered. Since it might have incredible impact on energy use in the production unit. Along

these lines, it is essential to dissect energy use in the production unit for an appropriate analysis.

To empower simple energy planning, leasing, and structure, it is important to have accessible

tools and techniques for energy use prediction based on the driving factors. In that manner, a

production company could budget the energy cost and plan various operations for different

products. For instance, guideline part examination is utilized to recognize significant factors of

vitality use in low energy utilization tasks. Basic direct relapses between day by day or month

to month vitality use and total energy use show great fitting outcomes solid for a further

examination (Ibid).

3.7. Social sustainability

According to Woodcraft, social sustainability is another strand of talk on sustainable

development. It has created over various years because of the predominance of ecological

concerns and technological arrangements in urban turn of events and the absence of progress

in handling social issues in urban areas, for example, disparity, displacement, livability and the

expanding requirement for reasonable housing (Woodcraft, 2015). Even though the Sustainable

Communities strategy plan was presented in the UK a decade prior, the social elements of

sustainability have been to a great extent ignored in discussions, arrangement and practice

18

around sustainable urbanism. Nevertheless, this is starting to change. There is a developing

enthusiasm for comprehension and estimating the social results of recovery and urban

advancement in the UK and globally. A little, however developing, development of engineers,

organizers, designers, lodging affiliations and neighborhood specialists pushing an

increasingly 'social' way to deal with arranging, building and overseeing urban communities.

This is a piece of a global enthusiasm for social sustainability, an idea that is progressively

being utilized by governments, open offices, arrangement producers, NGOs and organizations

to outline choices about urban turn of events, recovery and lodging, as a feature of an expanding

strategy talk on the supportability and strength of urban areas (Ibid).

One of the most real and predictable drivers for industry is sustainability. This theme opens at

various issues as per the three manageability columns: condition, monetary, and social. With

respect to last one, there is a need for strategies and instruments (Papetti, et al., 2018). As the

fourth industrial revolution is progressing, so this is a second test for ventures that should be

serious decreasing their opportunity to showcase coordinating new advancements on their

creation destinations. From these points of view, the social sustainability in a workplace is

planned for featuring the job of the people under the Industry 4.0 worldview. Another

transdisciplinary technique to support the sustainable manufacturing is social sustainability. It

permits structuring an associated domain (IoT system) planned for estimating and advancing

social sustainability on creation destinations. The work additionally comments the connection

between social sustainability and productivity. In fact, streamlining the human works grants to

improve the nature of the working conditions while improving proficiency of the production

work. The contextual investigation was performed at an Italian sole maker. The objective of

the investigation was to improve and enhance the completing zone of the plant from a social

perspective with the point of view of computerized producing (Ibid).

3.8. Energy Performance Indicators

Kanchiralla et. al (2019) developed a taxonomy for the categorization of EEU and emissions

for the processes as well as identified the intensive processes through analysis of EEU and CO2

emissions in the engineering industry. They presented several potential EnPIs based on system

boundaries like organization, system, process levels for the engineering industry. The study

could not confirm if the results could be extended and generalized to engineering industries

beyond Sweden. Johnsson et al. (2019) investigated potential energy key performance

indicators (KPIs) where the scope of the research was the Swedish wood industry. They

presented currently applied energy KPIs along with their magnitudes while also proposed new

innovative energy KPIs. The authors suggest the findings of their study could be extended to

other countries apart from Sweden which possess prominent wood industry. A framework was

proposed by Assad et. al (2019) which predicts energy KPIs of manufacturing systems at early

design and prior to the physical product. This framework was based on implementing virtual

models to predict energy KPIs at three explicit levels: production line, individual workstations

and components as individual energy use units (ECU) (Ibid.). These energy KPIs assist the

system designers in process engineering as well as component selection by having productivity

and sustainability as a reference. A generalized calculation methodology was proposed with a

set of templates to measure energy efficiency of manufacturing activities based on three levels:

factory, process and product (Schmidt, et al., 2016). The study presented a set of templates for

five KPIs: Type 1 – Energy […] per […], Type 2 – Site energy […], Type 3 – On-site energy

19

efficiency or efficiency increase, Type 4 – Improvement or savings of energy […] and Type 5

– Total value of energy […] (Ibid.). Andersson & Thollander (2019) discussed about the

barriers and drivers in the utilization on energy KPIs. The authors ranked the drivers for the

development of energy KPIs in their study in the following manner: monitoring energy end-

use, energy targets, evaluation of energy efficiency measures, identification of energy

efficiency potential, energy management system, basis for investment decisions, increase

employees awareness, identification of deviations, allocation of energy costs, interpretation of

deviations, energy policy and reference document for best available technology (BERF). While

they ranked the barriers of energy KPIs in the following manner: lack of resources, not

prioritized, lack of skills, lack of information, lack of relevant KPIs and too much available

data (Ibid.). Their study was applied in the context of Swedish pulp and paper industry.

After analyzing the studied journal articles, the gap in the literature was identified. To be

specific, there was no research found regarding the bottom-up energy audit approach with Sus-

Value Stream Mapping (Sus-VSM). The bottom-line of the thesis is to present a case study of

a tool manufacturing company linking the two topics. The following chapters present the case

assignment and its related work.

4. Methodology The methodology section gives a detail comprehension and structure of how the research has

been completed. It initially examines the research approach alongside the research design and

empirical research data collection. It finishes up with a reflection on the techniques being

applied and the restrictions of these.

4.1. Research Design

This is a general case study approach. A case study is a research approach that is utilized to

create an inside and out, multi-faceted comprehension of an intricate issue in its genuine setting

(Crowe, et al., 2011). It is a built-up research design that is utilized broadly in a wide assortment

of disciplines. A case study can be characterized in an assortment of ways the focal precept

being the need to investigate an occasion or wonder top to bottom and in its characteristic

setting (Ibid).

This research will be done as a single case study. That is, after intensive thought the researchers

locate that a case study would be the most fit research structure. To respond to the research

questions while the researchers can focus and increase profound information inside one explicit

association. In this way a case study is generally appropriate for this study. The outcome of

this study may be not only useful for the tool manufacturing industry but also for the other

manufacturing sector. As indicated by Bryman and Bell (2019) there are three essential models

for overseeing research in particular reliability, replication, and validity. Besides, the picked

research design which comprises of a structure for gathering and breaking down the

information will be as a case study since the researchers portray a case study that is occurring

at one explicit association, thus this is the picked research design for this study (Bell, et al.,

2019).

20

As this study was covering a wide area, so there was a continuous data collection process was

going on through meetings, repetitive discussion with the operators and the responsible

managers. The design of the chapters with the overall study methodology can be linked to a

funnel method at the first stage of the study. The following are parts that describe the approach,

the methods for data collection, the structure and the quality of the report. The data collection

phase is concluded for both, Energy Audit, social sustainability and VSM.

4.2. Research approach

Figure 7 Mixed Research Method

The methodology utilized in this study is abductive, which is more towards deductive

methodology than inductive as this study has significantly been impacted by past investigation

and research. The figure 7 represents the methodological approach used in this thesis. There

are two sorts of strategies accessible i.e. Quantitative methods relies upon estimations, science,

measurements, reviews or numerical investigation of information while qualitative method

expects to accumulate an inside and out comprehension of an in depth understanding (Bell, et

al., 2019).

Since the investigation goes to and fro as far as hypothesis and empirical findings the most

proper methodology will comprise of a blend of both deductive and inductive methodologies.

Specifically, the abductive methodology which is a way hypothesis and information have

communicated to and fro, the general methodology in this examination is abductive which is

normal, particularly in qualitative research (Bell, et al., 2019).

The underlying thought of the applied research approach was the purported deductive

methodology which is a connection among hypothesis and research. Where hypothesis is

building speculation, which is basically examined experimentally (Bell, et al., 2019). The

deductive methodology is one of the most widely recognized methodologies in quantitative

approach (Bell, et al., 2019). The inductive methodology is considered as something contrary

21

to the deductive methodology, such that the empirical data is assembled and afterward

contrasted with the hypothesis. For this situation, the empirical data regarding qualitative and

quantitative information was adding to the moderately obscure field of sustainable

manufacturing in a tool manufacturing industry. This could be viewpoints that were not

canvassed in the hypothesis and writing; thus, it is additionally portrayed that the inductive

methodology is regularly utilized in qualitative investigations (Bell, et al., 2019).

4.3. Empirical case data collection approach

Figure 8 Data Collection

The above figure (Figure 8) represents the data collection approach for study. Mainly this study

consists of two major data collection approach i.e. primary and secondary data collection. The

primary data collection consists mainly in two ways. The semi-structured interviews and the

survey helped to get the technical information about the production process and to access the

working environment of the case company respectively to know about the working

environment a survey has been conducted with a 54-sample size and received a response from

33 respondents. The 2nd part of the primary data collection is energy audit which includes the

electricity, compressed air and cutting fluid measurement. The secondary data collection

approach is based on the theoretical perspective, which includes literature review and the

historical data. The l