Energy consumption in the yogurt supply chain (French and Greek cases) COST meeting , Arcueil 19/5/05 F.Mikiki (CERTH/HIT), C.Rizet (INRETS)

Energy consumption in the yogurt supply chain Objectives Analyse energy consumption in yogurt supply chain according to Companies’ logistical choices How to reduce this consumption : changes in logistical behaviors and their determining factors At a disagregated level Yogurt : Just in time and cold chain Funded by ADEME via PREDIT, 2003-2005

Supply chain approach & method Energy consumed per1 kg of yogurt (goe/kg) according to the Supply chain organisation Geography(clients and plat-forms localisation) Type of distribution : Hypermarket/ corner shop Cooperation between partners: information sharing We started from the clients and retailers and went upstream Energy consumption is estimated at each step, with the operators, then converted into gram of oil equivalent (goe/yogurt kg)

Limitations Differences between the two surveys: different response from the agents involved, commercial schemes, mix of energy sources, no such e-commerce in Greece etc General limitations : environmental performance and energy consumption, a rather neglected question especially within private companies; private sector involvement: not familiar with such research works; rather skeptical with researchers that question their proper strategies, choices and practices adopted; confidentiality of data As regards Greek survey, withdrawal of certain agents, time constraints and budget limitations were also penalizing.

The 9 steps of the yogurt Supply chain (French case) 1tanker 3Reefer truck 2 Yogurt factory Milk farm 4 producer Platform 5 Reefer truck 6retailer Platform Consumer’s home 8 shop 7 Reefer truck 9 consumer’s car

The 7 steps of the yogurt Supply chain (Greek case) factory Milk farm 4 producer Platform 1tanker 3Reefer truck 5 Reefer truck 6 shop Consumer’s home 7 consumer’s car

The two cases (i) (i) France Carte : V. Guilbault

The two cases (ii) ii) Greece

Step1 : Milk sourcing Greece (2 cases) Milk is collected from the France Milk is collected from the farms around the factory: 4.6 goe/kg If not enough, bought from other towns at a longer distance : 11.9 goe/kg Average : 6.2 goe/kg Greece (2 cases) Milk is collected from the farms around the factory No further milk purchased Case 1 (Evr) 12.6goe /kg Case 2 (F) 15.7 goe/kg

Step 1 : Milk collection France Greece1 Greece 2 Milk collected 128 Factory Greece1 Evrofarma Greece 2 F Factory Milk collected (1000 t./year) 128 21.9 151 Aver.dist.(Km) Aver ton/trip 201 21.5 389 11.5 480 12.0 1000 oil l./year 449 210 1796 Goe/kg yogurt 4.6 12.6 15.7

Step 2 : yogurt factory A lot of energy is needed in the factory To cool the products(electricity) To warm them up (gaz) For collecting inputs and sending these rum(Gazole) Total 39 goe/yogurt kg French factory Total 32 goe/yogurt kg Greek factory Total 33 goe/yogurt kg 2nd Greek company For the first two activities

Step 2 : France Greece1 Greece 2 106000 997 48717 14840 37100 2433 210 Yogurt Production France Factory Greece1 Evrofarma Greece 2 F Factory Annual production (t./year) 106000 997 48717 Electricity Consumption(MWh/year) Gas (t/year) 14840 37100 2433 210 37065 Energy consumption (toe /year) 4133 457 3188 Goe/kg yogurt 39 32 33

Steps 3, 5 (& 7) : road transport by reefer vehicles Consumption is linked to -Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer: 15%) Consump. Between 0.8 & 13.0 goe/Yogurtkg /journey Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform French case study : 10,4 goe/Yogurtkg Greek case study : 8,3 goe/Yogurtkg

Step 3 : France Greece 369 552 11,5 22,5 12,3 9,8 Goe/kg yogurt 8,3 transportation France Factory Greece Km/trip 369 552 net weight / trip (t.) 11,5 22,5 liters/ton 12,3 9,8 Goe/kg yogurt 10,4 8,3

Step 4 (& 6) : Platforms Step 8 (or 6) : the shops The Greek company did not provide data for the energy consumption in its distribution platform Step 8 (or 6) : the shops Greek case: deficit of data for shops (+ not covering the range of French shops) No such e-commerce in Greece so we covered specific steps of the chain..

Further Greek survey and other conclusions (i) Comparison between 2 greek companies Energy costs for the supply of the same region. The structure of their supply chain is comparable and have opposite origine-destination points. Empty movements of both fleets are common.

Further Greek survey and other conclusions (ii) Contribution of this research Optimisation of the supply services in the region of Thrace, achieving considerable environnemental benefit through the synergy of the two companies via the combinaison of their networks and ressources A mathematical model was developed for the optimisation of trips and the minimisation of the fleet used. A new logistical structure was proposed with one common platform in the middle of their respective origin points with the use of common fleet Of course this work did not aim to tackle the problem exhaustively but it is a good starting point for a change in the companies’ logistical choices.

French survey next steps As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and shops…

Step 4 (& 6) : Platforms The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area, Activities(fresh products, & design … Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes /year)

Step 8 (or 6) : the shops Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + présentoir) / volume sold for average product: 23 - 123 gep/kg for yogurt in the shop: 26-51 gep/kg E-commerce : 11,2 gep/kg

Step 9 : consumer journey Average client’ consumption is linked to: -% of the clients in a car -Distance (0.5 to 10 km)􀂄 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)􀂄 These 3 variables are linked to the shop area (m2) and zone density: 1 – 71 goe/ kg yogurt (France)

French Survey conclusions (I) Energy consumption/yogurtkg according to distribution type if the shop’s surface increases: -factory, consum. identical -logistics, consum. decreases -shop, consum. decreases -client, consum. increases very intensely In total , consumption increases Home delivery: efficient for both shop and clients 50 100 150 200 Hyper Super Proxi E-com gep/ kg factory Logistics shop client

French survey conclusions (II) GHG emission / yogurtkg according to distribution type 200 400 600 Hyper Super Proxi E comm geqCO2/ kg factory Logistics shop client In relation to energy graph: Electricity counts much less (shop, platform) The chains scale is comparable

Overall conclusions Attempting international conclusions is helpful although can be difficult to implement However, respective national conclusions can be of mutual benefit Logistical practices are being mondialized and given the common goal for sustainable freight operations, bilateral initiatives can contribute to better logistical choices Thank you for your attention F.Mikiki