 |
| Every manufacturing site can be made more sustainable, and this is NOT only about technology |
Manufacturing sites are but one
component of the value chain, in many cases not even the most important part
from a sustainability perspective. Often, the suppliers of raw materials,
packaging materials, logistical services, water and energy can have very
significant life-cycle impacts. For manufacturing companies however, production
sites represent the face of operations. Hence they are a natural place from
which to start the sustainability journey.
An organisation’s sustainability
strategy will include its entire value chain, and an examination of the life
cycle impacts associated with individual products. Strategies at the factory
level should of course be integrated with this broader organisational strategy,
and hence factories should not develop strategies in isolation from the broader
business within which they operate. Factory-level sustainability strategies do
however require focus, and there are generic areas I tend to look at when I
assess factories, in combination with industry-specific issues, which are
typically very well known. Examples of industry-specific issues could be
persistent organic pollutants arising from bleaching in the pulp and paper
sector, hexavalent chromium pollution in the plating industry, food safety in
the food processing industry or the water intensity of wet-cooled power generation
processes. You will need to fully understand the issues relevant to your
industry in addition to the generic sustainability matters I’ll discuss in this
post in making your factory more sustainable.
What then does a sustainable
factory look like, and what are the key focus areas that senior factory
management should have in mind when embarking on a sustainability programme? My
views on this issue are that one needs to take a simple, common-sense approach,
identifying the broader issues and then taking action in each key area in an
integrated way i.e. appreciating the interrelationships between individual
aspects of sustainability. Of course, there is an awful lot of technical detail
underneath the conceptual approach I’ll outline in this post, but there are
many resources on the web and elsewhere that you can access to fill in the
blanks. Simple and simplistic are two distinctly different things – incomplete
analysis that does not take a systems view will yield incorrect conclusions
that if acted upon will not lead to results, or worse, will lead to unintended
consequences. However, when sustainability is made overly complicated the risk
is that you will spend all of your time over-analysing and not implementing
anything. So it’s important to strike a balance.
In line with keeping things
simple, let’s step out of the detail for a moment and consider a broad view of
the factory as a point of departure. The generic manufacturing site receives
resources across its boundary, transforms these into products, and in the
process also produces wastes. Sites interface with the environment, the local
economy and local communities, but their influence can also extend to other
countries, by virtue of aspects such as emissions to air and water and the geography
of the markets for their products. At the factory level, sustainability
strategy is not about saving the world. Rather, it is necessary to understand
the basics of what sustainability means for a factory, and then to reduce that
down to the key drivers of sustainable practice for your specific manufacturing
site.
In my mind, the
following issues represent the bare bones of the characteristics of a
sustainable factory.
1.
The work environment would be safe to work
in, not just in terms of the
minimisation of safety incidents, but also in terms of long term occupational
health. If this sounds like a basic issue to you, be warned that it is fraught
with complexity. The safety issues are typically straightforward to identify
and manage, and while I often see sites where glaringly obvious safety risks
abound, it is the occupational health risks that worry me more. What I can tell
you is that generally, even where detailed risk assessments have been
undertaken, workers can still easily be exposed to hazardous substances. In
most cases it is due to a lack of information on the dangers posed, but there
really can be no excuse in this information age. It is necessary for you to
research the hazards unique to your industry and to find out what the best
practices are in terms of their mitigation. Just because something is not
regulated in your country does not make it acceptable to ignore it. Not if you
are serious about sustainability. It is useful to involve specialists, who can
also assist you with measurements.
2.
The products produced should be safe to use
and consume. At the site level this typically does not involve product
design, though of course nothing prevents the site from giving feedback to the
product development team. Manufacturing sites can render well-designed products
unsafe to use or consume by virtue of deficient manufacturing processes. A
simple example would be the contamination of a food product. The risks at every
stage of the manufacturing process should be identified and mitigated, either
through process redesign or the institution of robust control measures.
3.
Emissions to air should be understood and
managed accordingly. Of course this includes GHG’s arising from local
fossil fuel combustion and it is also a fairly simple matter to estimate the
emissions associated with electrical energy use. However, other pollutants also
require consideration, and are best assessed by investigating individual unit
operations. A lot of attention is given to the GHG’s, particulates and sulphur
compounds associated with coal combustion, for example, but what of the associated
mercury pollution? A detailed emissions inventory is therefore essential. Air
emissions are not necessarily a consequence of combustion. Dust, volatile
organic compounds, fumes emitted from high-temperature manufacturing processes
– all require assessment, and many are linked to occupational health as well as
broader environmental issues.
4.
Water pollution risks should be understood
and dealt with. Industrial
sites can pollute both surface and groundwater resources, and can do so through
a wide range of mechanisms. These problems are not necessarily localised, albeit
that many arise from point sources. While the obvious control point would be to
carefully monitor effluent discharges from the site, other pollution transport
mechanisms could include:
·
Airborne pollution that is deposited in surface
water bodies
·
Seepage of contaminants into groundwater
·
Site runoff, which can find its way into rivers
or to municipal effluent treatment plants that are not designed to handle
industrial pollutants
5.
Land pollution risks should be identified
and managed. These are generally to do with spills, runoff and
localised fumes that can result in deposition onto land. The nature of site
surfaces plays an important role. Paving is attractive, but does not form an
impermeable barrier between potential spills and the land underneath a site, as
a simple example. Be wary of effluent streams that are discharged into un-lined dams or onto open fields.
6.
Resources should be used as efficiently as
possible. The resources of interest on industrial sites are raw
materials, energy and water, all of which have significant life-cycle impacts,
and hence offer significant leverage for the reduction of an organisation’s
footprint through actions taken at the site level. The cost reduction impacts
associated with resource efficiency are generally high, providing good
incentive to pursue this aspect of sustainability vigorously.
7.
Wastes should be recycled as much as
possible. The first prize in terms of resource efficiency is to tackle
problems at source, thereby limiting the amount of waste produced. While “zero
waste” should be the intent of a sustainable manufacturing site, in most cases
the production of some waste is unavoidable. Where possible, these wastes
should be recycled. If waste can be employed in production processes, this is
ideal, but where this can’t be done, supply chains should be set up to process
the waste such that it becomes an input to downstream production processes,
either for use elsewhere in the business or for sale on the open market. This
is often a way to generate additional revenues, reduce the amount of waste
diverted to landfills and create jobs. Where waste is recycled internally, take
care that your ability to recycle does not divert your focus from the
minimisation of this waste at source. Recycling is certainly not free.
8.
The local economy should be supported as far
as possible, particularly where it makes sound financial sense to do
so. This means providing locals with jobs and also procuring goods and services
from local suppliers. This helps to ensure that the site is not an island of
economic prosperity in an otherwise impoverished area, but also helps to build
rapport with local communities, who are important stakeholders in the site’s
sustainability initiatives. This can be particularly important for industrial
sites in outlying areas, since a vibrant local economy attracts more residents,
who may in turn contribute to economic and social upliftment. This may even
support local demand for the organisation’s products.
9.
Social programmes should be in place to
support local communities. While these could include charities, the
idea is to make these programmes sustainable, and to structure them such that
they help people to help themselves, while also contributing directly to the
sustainability of the business. For example, a bursary programme could be
instituted to assist students to finance their studies in skill areas critical
to the site, thereby creating a pipeline of skills while also empowering local
communities.
10.
Operational management systems should be
well developed and continuous improvement should be part of the culture on the
site. In general, good business practice contributes to sustainability.
Maintaining productive assets effectively, managing operational risks, ensuring
quality standards are met, developing a solid skills pipeline, instituting
transparent management systems and all of the various aspects of operations
management necessary for efficiency and effectiveness are integral to
sustainable operations, not least because they help to ensure economic
sustainability. The sustainable factory is hence not a goal requiring
reinvention of every aspect of the enterprise. While operational excellence
does not necessarily translate into sustainability, it certainly does support
it. And hence, in organisations that are leading the way, the lines between
operational excellence and sustainability are becoming increasingly blurred as
sustainability is integrated into operations.
Is there really such a thing as a
“sustainable factory”? To some this may sound like an oxymoron. Of course, this
concept is something to aspire to rather than to treat as an end goal, since as
I have mentioned many times in previous posts, sustainability is a journey
rather than a destination. But as long as we humans are here on earth, the products
we consume will continue to impact on the planet, and manufacturing can be
considered to be a “hotspot” in this regard. Making factories more sustainable
is an opportunity to be taken advantage of by forward-thinking organisations.
