energies

Article
Towards Improved Energy and Resource
Management in Manufacturing
Sanober Hassan Khattak 1, * ID
, Michael Oates 2 and Rick Greenough 3 ID

1 School of Mechanical, Aerospace and Automotive Engineering, Coventry University, Coventry CV1 5FB, UK
2 Integrated Environmental Solutions Limited, Helix Buildings, West of Scotland Science Park,
Glasgow G20 0SP, UK; [email protected]
3 Institute of Energy and Sustainable Development (IESD), De Montfort University, Queens Building,
The Gateway, Leicester LE19BH, UK; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected] or [email protected]




Received: 15 March 2018; Accepted: 9 April 2018; Published: 20 April 2018


Abstract: Exergy analysis has widely been used to assess resource consumption, and to identify
opportunities for improvement within manufacturing. The main advantages of this method are its
ability to account for energy quality and consumption. However, its application in industrial practice
is limited, which may be due to the lack of its consistent application in practice. Current energy
management standard, that facilitate consistent application of procedures do not consider the quality
aspects of energy flows. An exergy based energy management standards is proposed in this paper
that would take into account energy quality aspects, while facilitating the consistent application
of exergy analysis in industrial practice. Building on ISO50001, this paper presents guidelines for
implementing energy and resource management in factories, incorporating the concepts of exergy
and holistic factory simulation, as illustrated through a manufacturing case study. From the factory
level analysis, a chilling process was identified to have significant improvement potential. A dry
fan cooler, using ambient air was proposed for the improved efficiency of the chillers. Energy based
metrics portrayed a system that operated at high efficiency, however exergy analysis indicated
much room for further improvement, therefore impacting decision making for technology selection.
The contribution of this paper is in presenting a set of prescriptive guidelines that could possibly be
further developed into a new energy management standard that would utilize the advantages of
exergy analysis towards improved energy and resource management in manufacturing.

Keywords: energy management; industrial energy efficiency; resource efficient manufacturing;

exergy analysis; energy management standards

1. Introduction
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), industry was responsible for
more than half (54%) of the worldwide energy consumption in 2016 [1]. Furthermore, the industrial
sector’s energy use is expected to grow by 1.2% yearly up to 2040 [1]. There is a limited availability of
energy, material, and clean water resources that support human activity on planet Earth. Since industry
is a major consumer of natural resources, global efforts are directed to reduce industrial energy and
resource consumption. For example, the European Union designated resource efficiency as one of the
seven flagship initiatives in its Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable, and inclusive growth [2].
Approaches and policies for resource efficiency of 31 countries were surveyed and summarized in [3].
In a similar report for the UK, Dawkins, Roelich [4] outlined broad measures for improved resource
efficiency in the UK. Therefore, this topic is of worldwide importance, and it is the subject of this article.

Energies 2018, 11, 1006; doi:10.3390/en11041006 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2018, 11, 1006 2 of 15

In this paper, a methodology is presented that could possibly lead to improved energy and
resource management in manufacturing. Sections 1.1 and 1.2 provide a background to approaches
for resource accounting in manufacturing and energy management standards, which leads to the
specification of the research objective in Section 1.3. Section 2 is about the research methodology
employed in this work. Section 3 presents the exergy based energy management methodology,
as proposed in this paper, which is illustrated through implementation on a manufacturing case study
(Section 4).

1.1. Approaches to Resource Accounting for Manufacturing

Manufacturing systems are complex entities with multiple subsystems that are interacting
dynamically. With a variety of products in manufacturing, variations in their production design,
and continuous development in technology, different methodologies and tools have been developed
to assess them. Various theoretical paradigms, modelling techniques, and simulation approaches
are present to address the needs of sustainable manufacturing. State of the art literature in this area
is increasingly focused on viewing the factory as a whole system. The factory is considered to be
comprised of the factory building, production processes, and building services, interacting dynamically
with each other [5,6]. The primary reasons for this inclination are as follows;

1. Many production processes require inputs from building services, thus resulting in an
interdependent relationship between the two. Analyzing one while ignoring the other may
therefore lead to misleading results.
2. Often, the use of energy, material, and water is interdependent, where the consumption or
conservation of one can affect the other. Thus, a holistic approach prevents problem shifting,
which may arise from isolated analysis of the factory sub-components.
3. A holistic analysis of the factory resource flows allows identifying greater opportunities for
resource recovery.

Ball et al. [7] proposed a conceptual model that was based on this holistic view of the factory,
to be implemented through computer software. Duflou et al. [8] reviewed the methods and techniques
for improving energy and resource efficiency in discreet parts manufacturing. The review article
highlighted the importance of using building physics principles is resource efficiency analysis at
the factory level, primarily to minimize the energy requirements of the heating, ventilation and
air-conditioning (HVAC) for the factory working environment.
This paradigm shift from conventional approaches towards a need to assess factories as holistic
systems, with added consideration for the building services in addition to the production processes
was recorded by Herrmann et al. [9]. A need for the factories of the future to be adaptive and be
able to develop symbiotic integration with its surroundings was highlighted. An important aspect
in such conceptual models is the reuse of resources through the ‘closed loop’ concept which is an
idealized optimum sustainable solution [10]. Attempts have been made to implement this concept
in practice through tools development. For example, Kovacic et al. [11] implemented an integrated
simulation of an industrial facility that housed machining processes, with a heavy focus on the
building’s modelling and heat gains due to the production line. Caggiano et al. [12] developed a
multi-purpose simulation approach that utilized discreet event simulation (DES) and applied to a
fabrication facility for aircraft parts manufacturing. Garwood et al. [13] reviewed the advances in
holistic factory simulation, from the inception of the idea, to the latest software capable of delivering
the concept practically. Due to the challenges of modelling and simulation across the different levels of
the manufacturing facility, whilst taking into account the interdependencies, the authors concluded
that progress on this front is still in its early stages, and further development is required towards a
comprehensive simulator.
It is clear that a holistic approach to the analysis of manufacturing systems is beneficial for energy
and resource management. However, predominantly, studies from literature are either based on energy
Energies 2018, 11, 1006 3 of 15

analysis, or material analysis that may not allow for identifying the full range of opportunities [14].
Hernandez and Cullen [15] analyzed a Blast furnace, for which improvement options were identified
based on (i) an energy analysis; (ii) material efficiency analysis; and, (iii) exergy analysis. The results
showed that the greatest opportunities were identified by considering both material and energy on a
common unit basis, using exergy.
A truly holistic approach to analysis of manufacturing systems, in addition to considering
the factory building resource consumption, should allow concurrent comparison of improvement
options that may involve material or water flows in addition to energy. For this reason, some
researchers have attempted the modelling of flows in this manner to identify greater resource reuse
opportunities. Mousavi et al. [16] presented a hierarchal framework for the simultaneous consideration
of water flows alongside energy in manufacturing facilities. Thiede et al. [17] proposed a ‘multi-level’
simulation approach which again catered to the interdependency between energy and water. An exergy
based approach to modelling of resource flows within the manufacturing context was presented by
Khattak et al. [18,19], to allow for the concurrent assessment of improvement options that may involve
energy, material or water.
Studies based on mass and energy balances exclude any notion of resource consumption since we
know that mass and energy are conserved quantities. Additionally, energy flows are not completely
defined by their quantity alone, as their quality is equally important Khattak et al. [20]. Therefore,
the application of exergy analysis may therefore lead to clearer information about resource consumption
improvement options in the factory environment. For this reason, exergy analysis is a mature
concept in the field of environmental science and has been applied to a range of industrial systems.
For examples, see Wall [21] (a paper mill and a steel plant), Atmaca and Yumrutas [22] (a cement plant)
and McKenna [23] (glass manufacturing). Many other such examples are present in the literature,
from which it is clear that exergy analysis is gaining increased importance in the field of industrial
energy management and resource efficiency.
With these advantages of exergy analysis and acceptance in academia, one would expect it to
be the tool of choice when making energy and resource efficiency assessments in industrial practice.
However, this is not the case in reality. There are inconsistencies in the theoretical formulation of
the exergy concept [24], but this has not been recorded as the main reason for its non-penetrance in
industrial energy management. According to Rosen [25], unfamiliarity of the exergy concept in the
industry, and viewing the analysis method as too cumbersome and complicated are among the main
reasons that impede its application in practice. The results of a survey on this topic revealed similar
results [26]. There are also limitations in the exergy concept with regards to the selection of the reference
environment [27]. Nonetheless, owing to its advantages, it has potential in delivering improved energy
and resource management in comparison to methods based on the first law of thermodynamics [28].
As such, it has been identified as a useful tool that can provide clearer information about energy
efficiency opportunities, thus addressing a barrier to improved industrial energy management [29].
The following sections provide information on how this useful tool can be put into greater practice.

1.2. Energy Management Standards

As discussed in Section 1.1, exergy analysis can be a powerful tool for industrial resource
accounting and may lead to improved energy management in comparison with energy analysis
based techniques alone. However, its use is impeded by the lack of acceptance by industry and its
consistent application in practice. Perhaps encapsulating the concept of exergy in energy management
standards can help in tackling these barriers to improved energy management. Energy management
standards allow organizations to achieve and maintain energy efficiency in their processes. In doing
so, the energy auditing, analysis and monitoring processes are consistently applied. A number of
such standards were developed in the first decade of the 21st century, originating from a range of
different countries [30]. Notable among them were the EN 16001:2009 and ANSI/MSE 2000:2008.
The ANSI/MSE 2000:2008 was developed in the United States and specified the requirements for
Energies 2018, 11, 1006 4 of 15
Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 15

Management
to reduce the systems for Energy
non-renewable (MSE)consumption
resource [31]. The objective of the
and costs bystandard
addressing wastheto guide
life cycleorganizations
aspects of
to reduce the non-renewable resource consumption and costs
energy resources. The EN 1600:2009, which was developed by the British Standards Instituteby addressing the life cycle aspects
(BSI),
of
wasenergy
anotherresources.
standard, The ENsimilar
with 1600:2009, which was
objectives, developed
but with by theon
more focus British Standards
continual Institute
improvement.
(BSI),
Nationalwasstandard
another standard,
bodies such withassimilar
the BSIobjectives,
and ANSI butare
withnow more focus onofcontinual
members the ISO improvement.
(International
National
organization for standardization), and the latest energy management standard, ISO
standard bodies such as the BSI and ANSI are now members of the the ISO(International
50001 has
organization for standardization),
essentially succeeded previous standards, and thesuchlatest
asenergy
the EN management
16001:2009 [32]. standard, the ISO 50001 has
essentially
The ISO succeeded
50001 previous
is basedstandards,
on the such as the EN 16001:2009
Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) [32]. framework for continual
The ISO 50001
improvement. is basedfrom
As evident on thethePlan-Do-Check-Act
name, the PDCA is(PDCA) comprised framework for continual
of four phases, improvement.
(i) Planning energy
As evident from
management the name,
activities; (ii) the PDCA is comprised
Implementing improvement of four phases, (i)
measures; Planning
(iii) Monitoring energy the management
performance
activities; (ii) Implementing
of the improvement measures;improvement measures;
and, (iv) Correction (iii) Monitoring
and scoping for furtherthe performanceThrough
improvement. of the
improvement
the implementation measures;of theand,
PDCA, (iv) ISO
Correction and scoping
50001 requires for furthertoimprovement.
an organization develop and implement Through the an
implementation of the PDCA, ISO 50001 requires an organization
energy policy, identify significant areas of energy usage, followed by continual improvement. Theto develop and implement an
energy policy,
policy, identify significant
energy targets and areas of energy
objectives, usage,
together followed
with by continual improvement.
the implementation of the step-by-step The
energy policy,
prescriptive energy targets
approach leads to andanobjectives, together with
energy management the implementation
system (EnMS). The ISO of the50001 step-by-step
has been
prescriptive approach leads to an energy management system (EnMS).
widely applied by organizations around the world as a total of 1,644,357 certifications had The ISO 50001 has been widely
been
applied
awardedbybyorganizations
2016 [33]. Since aroundit is the worldenergy
a generic as a total of 1,644,357methodology,
management certifications ithad hasbeenbeenawarded
applied
by 2016 [33].
outside Since it is a generic
of manufacturing energy management
[32], however methodology,
its main application it has for
has been beenindustrial
applied outside
energy
of manufacturing [32], however its main application has been for industrial
management. For example, Fabrizio et al. [34] surveyed the state of energy management penetration energy management.
For example,
in the Fabrizio et
Italian industry, al. found
and [34] surveyed
that 35%the of state of energy
companies were management penetration
ISO 50001 certified in the aItalian
indicating need
industry, and found that 35% of companies were ISO 50001 certified
for further improvement. Gopalakrishnan [35] developed an energy analyzer software to facilitate indicating a need for further
improvement.
the applicationGopalakrishnan
and the certification [35] developed an energy
of ISO 50001 analyzer software
in industrial facilities.toOther
facilitate
suchtheexamples
application of
and the certification
implementing industrialof ISO
energy50001 in industrial
management andfacilities.
standardsOther such examples
can readily be found of in implementing
literature [36–
industrial
38]. May et energy
al. [28]management and standards
reviewed literature can readily
from 1995 to 2015, beand
found in literature
identified four[36–38].
key aspects May of et energy
al. [28]
reviewed
management literature from 1995 to 2015,
for manufacturing, one of andwhich
identified
are thefourtools
key and
aspects of energy
methods thatmanagement
support energy for
manufacturing,
management, see oneFigure
of which 1. are
Asthe tools and
Section 1.1 methods
providedthat support of
a review energy
suchmanagement,
modelling and see Figure
analysis 1.
As Section 1.1 provided a review of such modelling and analysis methodologies
methodologies for manufacturing, the following Section 1.3 will clearly outline the contribution of for manufacturing,
the
thisfollowing
paper. Section 1.3 will clearly outline the contribution of this paper.

Figure 1. Supporting tools and methods to support energy management in manufacturing as

Figure 1. Supporting tools and methods to support energy management in manufacturing as identified
identified from current literature (May et al., 2017).
from current literature (May et al., 2017).

1.3. Derivation of Research Demand

1.3. Derivation of Research Demand
Based on the literature presented in the preceding sections, the following key points are
Based on the literature presented in the preceding sections, the following key points are identified.
identified.
1.
1. When considering
When considering manufacturing
manufacturing facilities
facilities as
as holistic
holistic systems
systems that
that are
are comprised
comprised of
of the
the
manufacturing processes and the factory building, allows for identifying greater opportunities
manufacturing processes and the factory building, allows for identifying greater opportunities
for resource
for resource recovery.
recovery.
Energies 2018, 11, 1006 5 of 15

2. Modelling resource flows in terms of exergy has the benefits of (i) energy quality is considered in
addition to its quantity; (ii) resource flows other than energy can be modelled on a common unit
basis, thus allowing for identifying greater resource recovery opportunities.
3. The use of exergy analysis for energy and resource management is widespread in academic
literature, however its use in the industry is limited. This may be due to lack of acceptance of the
exergy concept in the industry and the lack of consistent application in practice.
4. Tools and methods pertaining to energy management can benefit from including non-energy
based flows in the analyses [28].

For the reasons that have been summarized above, it would be logical to make efforts to
incorporate the exergy concept within energy management standards. However, in very few articles,
some authors have either suggested or have attempted to develop such standards. Based on a review
of literature and a case study of a building’s HVAC system, Karakasli et al. [39], suggested the
conversion of energy management standards, such as the ISO 50001, to exergy management standards.
Hepbasli [40] proposed an exergy management standard and conducted a case study of a university
building. However, some important concepts, such the need for holistic analysis were not recorded.
To the best of the author’s knowledge, these are the only attempts in literature to incorporate the exergy
concept in the energy management standards. Therefore, the prescriptive guidelines that are presented
in this paper, in the ISO 50001 format, together with a practical example illustration, would be a step
forward in this direction.

2. Methods
From the preceding sections, it has been identified that incorporating the exergy concept
into an energy management standard may lead to improved energy and resource management
in manufacturing. For this purpose, Section 3 provides the exergy based resource management
methodology in the form of prescriptive guidelines in an ISO 50001 format. Section 4 illustrates
the use of this methodology through a case study of a biscuit manufacturing facility. The factory
building is modelled using conventional physical based approach for energy modelling in the built
environment [41]. On the other hand, the manufacturing processes are data driven, and their
performance is represented using historical metered data. Similar approaches have previously been
used to model the material and energy flows in production as they allow the rapidly modelling
complex, changing manufacturing systems [42]. Where metered data was not available, a ‘rough cut’
approach was used to fill the missing gaps. This approach utilized monthly utility bills, operational
profiles of the production machines and equipment characterization data to approximate time series
energy data. Since the overall simulation approach combined physics based modelling and data driven
approaches, the overall modelling methodology that was employed in this study can be termed as a
hybrid simulation approach. Data about the manufacturing facility was acquired as part of the project
REEMAIN [43]. There are two main objectives of Section 4; (i) To illustrate application of the energy
and resource management methodology proposed in this paper; and, (ii) To demonstrate the impact
of using exergy analysis on decision making for the selection of technologies towards reduction in
resource use.

3. Towards Improved Industrial Energy and Resource Management

The methodology that is presented in this section is in a format that supports implementation
in practice, as a guide that may facilitate industrial day-to-day operation. It should complement
other energy efficiency related standards such as ISO 50000 series. Application of this methodology is
relevant to any operational context in which resource efficiency is important. It is likely to be applicable
to operations that involve transformations of material, energy, and water resources, such as agriculture,
manufacturing, facilities management, and water treatment. On the other hand, it is not likely to be
applicable to retail, financial services, or education as they involve intangible flows, such as economic
Energies 2018, 11, 1006 6 of 15

Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 15

value, knowledge or information, etc. In order to achieve energy and resource efficient systems, it is
implemented
insufficient which results
to implement a linearinapproach
energy savings, without
where some continual
efficiency feedback
measure for improvement.
is implemented which The
results in energy savings, without continual feedback for improvement. The methodology that isPlan-
methodology that is proposed in this paper is based on the continual improvement framework,
Do-Check-Act
proposed (PDCA),
in this paper is basedtoonallow for manufacturing
the continual improvementfacilities to incorporate
framework, improved
Plan-Do-Check-Act resource
(PDCA),
efficiency
to allow in their dailyfacilities
for manufacturing practice.toFigure 2 provides
incorporate its pictorial
improved resourcedescription,
efficiency infollowed bypractice.
their daily a listing of
the prescriptive guidelines.
Figure 2 provides its pictorial description, followed by a listing of the prescriptive guidelines.

Figure 2. Methodology for improved resource efficient manufacturing.

Figure 2. Methodology for improved resource efficient manufacturing.

3.1. Scope and Boundaries

3.1. Scope and Boundaries
Selection of analysis boundaries is an important first step in implementing any efficiency
Selection of analysis boundaries is an important first step in implementing any efficiency
analysis methodology. Expanding system boundaries leads to a more holistic analysis that is better
analysis methodology. Expanding system boundaries leads to a more holistic analysis that is better
representative of reality, which prevents problem shifting and allows for the identification of a greater
representative of reality, which prevents problem shifting and allows for the identification of a
number of improvement opportunities. However, doing so is associated with problems of data
greater number of improvement opportunities. However, doing so is associated with problems of
availability, reliability, and issues of practical implementation. The focus here is the manufacturing
data availability, reliability, and issues of practical implementation. The focus here is the
facility and therefore the physical and analysis boundaries are defined as such. The decision making
manufacturing facility and therefore the physical and analysis boundaries are defined as such. The
resulting from implementing this methodology lies with the manufacturing facility management.
decision making resulting from implementing this methodology lies with the manufacturing facility
3.1.1.management.
Physical Boundaries
— A physical
3.1.1. boundary
Physical is drawn in line with a gate-to-gate analysis. For a production facility,
Boundaries
the factory building is the physical boundary.
— A physical boundary is drawn in line with a gate-to-gate analysis. For a production facility, the
factory
3.1.2. Analysis building is the physical boundary.
Scope
— The analysis
3.1.2. Analysisscope
Scopedepends on the factory flows modelling method and analysis type.
— The analysis must incorporate a holistic view of the factory, while taking into considering the
— The analysis
interaction scope
between thedepends on the
production factory flows
equipment modelling
and factory method and analysis type.
building.
— The analysis must incorporate a holistic view of the factory, while taking into considering the
— This methodology is designed to be applied to a broad range of industries, energy intensive and
interaction between the production equipment and factory building.
non-energy intensive alike, as resource flows includes material and water as well.
— This methodology is designed to be applied to a broad range of industries, energy intensive and
non-energy intensive alike, as resource flows includes material and water as well.
While the analysis boundary may be around a single component in a factory, its performance
assessment is based on a whole systems simulation approach. This means that, even though the
Energies 2018, 11, 1006 7 of 15

While the analysis boundary may be around a single component in a factory, its performance
assessment is based on a whole systems simulation approach. This means that, even though the
analysis may be for a single component in the factory, its interaction with other components and the
factory building is taken into account through the whole systems simulation approach.

3.2. Planning for Improved Resource Efficiency

Data Collection
— Data about the manufacturing system, factory building, production equipment, and production
schedule is acquired.

For manufacturing facilities, there is a large amount of data that needs to be collected. For a
factory building, data will be regarding the building geometry, construction, HVAC systems, and
operation. For the production, it will be energy consumption data, equipment related information
that includes its technical specifications as well as operation schedule. In such a case, it is likely that
parts of the data will not be available for which appropriate techniques need to be used. A list of data
collection methods that may be used are provided below,

• Acquisition of data through BMS (Building Management Systems) or SCADA (Supervisory

Control and Data Acquisition) system.
• Installation of data collection equipment (sensors).
• Application of rough-cut methodology to fill missing gaps in data.

3.3. Baseline
— The baseline resource consumption of the manufacturing system is established by modelling
and simulation.
— The resource flows in the facility are mapped and visualized based on either energy or material
basis, generating Sankey diagrams.

The model must be generated by usage of a software tool that allows for dynamic energy
simulation of the factory that takes into account temporal variations, to be validated against actual data.

Identification of Resource Reuse/Recovery Opportunities

— Based on resource flows visualization, opportunities for resource reuse or consumption
minimization are identified.

Following this, suitable technologies and strategies are suggested. System modifications are
proposed based on the following six steps/attitudes;

1. Stop: Identify opportunities to stop equipment when not in use,

2. Eliminate: Eliminate unnecessary usage of resources,
3. Repair: If equipment is not operating within its intended parameters, repair it,
4. Reduce: Improve efficiency to reduce resource consumption,
5. Recover: Recover resources by linking factory components (building and production related), and
6. Change: Replace low efficiency components in the factory with high efficiency ones.

The technologies/strategies suitable to address the identified opportunities are to be screened,

broadly classified as renewable energy supply (RES), energy storage and waste resource recovery.
The initial screening of the identified technologies is to be done using a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities, and threats) analysis. The ranking of technologies is to be done by considering four
factor groups, technical, economic, marketing, and environmental. The top ranking technologies are
then modelled to estimate the payback and resource savings more accurately.
Energies 2018, 11, 1006 8 of 15

3.4. Modelling, Simulation and Analysis of Measures

— The selected technologies after the screening process are to be simulated to estimate savings
in resources.
— A dynamic energy simulation engine is to be used, which allows for modelling the manufacturing
facility from a holistic perspective. For a production facility, the factory needs to be modelled as
an integrated system of the production processes, the factory building, and building services.
— A suitable method for analyzing the consumption of resources has to be used (such as
exergy analysis).
— The predicted performance profile of the selected technologies will serve as ‘target desired
performance’ of the measure.

Based on the simulations and estimated savings, a final list of technologies to be implemented
will emerge.

3.5. Implementation and Operation

— Physically implement the selected technologies.
— Provide relevant training to personnel to ensure correct operation and maintenance of
implemented measure.
— Install appropriate data collection equipment to ensure comparison against simulated
desired performance.

3.6. Monitoring and Correction

— Monitor the performance of the implemented measure, and to identify solutions to possible issues
that impede performing to the desired level.
— Take corrective action at the implemented measure.

3.7. Review and Repeat

— Monitor performance to ensure operation is at targeted desired performance.
— Scope for further opportunities for continual improvement.

4. Implementation and Findings: Case Study

A large biscuit manufacturing facility is studied to illustrate application of the methodology
presented in the previous section. The biscuit company has a production in excess of 100 tons per
year, with a total useful covered area of 87,410 m2 . Implementation of the step-by-step methodology is
now presented.

4.1. Physical Boundaries

The factory building (gate to gate) is selected as the physical analysis boundary.

4.2. Analysis Scope

The analysis methods used are energy and exergy analysis, where the system boundary was
selected according to the objectives of the specific task. To gain an understanding of the overall resource
use in the factory, the whole factory is analyzed, however, in the case of a sub-system, the analysis
boundary is sub-system chosen suitably.
Energies 2018, 11, 1006 9 of 15

4.3. Planning for Improved Resource Efficiency

4.3.1. Data Collection

Data collection was done through factory audits, essentially analyzing an investigating the facility
to gather the relevant data [44]. Subject to the availability of coarse level data (annual or monthly energy
Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 15
consumption at process/department/factory level), rough cut data profiles were generated from either
standardized profiles, adjusted profiles by experienced users, or questionnaires. Other information
questionnaires. Other information gathering from the site included; detailed information about
gathering from the site included; detailed information about production processes, factory building
production processes, factory building construction materials, and production schedules.
construction materials, and production schedules.
4.3.2. Baseline
4.3.2. Baseline
Based on the collected information, a detailed description of production processes was formed.
Based on the collected information, a detailed description of production processes was formed.
The modelling and simulation of the baseline scenario for the biscuit factory was carried out using
The modelling and simulation of the baseline scenario for the biscuit factory was carried out using
IES-VE [43]. The model of the factory can be seen in Figure 3 where the manufacturing processes are
IES-VE [43]. The model of the factory can be seen in Figure 3 where the manufacturing processes are
modelled within the factory building, which are visible through the wireframe display. The factory
modelled within the factory building, which are visible through the wireframe display. The factory
building was modelled using a typical building physics based energy modelling approach [45].
building was modelled using a typical building physics based energy modelling approach [45].
Modelling of production processes in the tool was done through a data driven approach (actual and
Modelling of production processes in the tool was done through a data driven approach (actual
rough-cut data). This modelling methodology follows a hybrid approach as described previously in
and rough-cut data). This modelling methodology follows a hybrid approach as described previously
Section 2.
in Section 2.

Figure
Figure 3.
3. Whole
Whole factory
factory model
model of
of the
the biscuit
biscuit factory.
factory.

4.3.3.
4.3.3. Identification
Identification of
of Resource
Resource Reuse/Recovery
Reuse/RecoveryOpportunities
Opportunities
Through
Through modelling of the factory building, and within
modelling of the factory building, and within itit the
the production
production processes,
processes, aa dynamic
dynamic
simulation
simulation was was carried
carried out
out thus
thus implementing
implementing holistic
holistic modelling
modelling and and analysis
analysis at
at the
the factory
factory level.
level.
This approachresulted
This approach resultedininthethe visualization
visualization of factory
of factory levellevel
energyenergy
flows,flows,
whichwhich are displayed
are displayed in Sankeyin
Sankey
diagramdiagram
format. format. The factory
The factory level Sankey
level Sankey provided provided
a visuala visual
that aidsthatinaids in deciding
deciding wherewhere
the majorthe
major efforts should be directed. Upon inspection of the factory level energy flows,
efforts should be directed. Upon inspection of the factory level energy flows, ovens and the chilling ovens and the
chilling
systems systems
representedrepresented the most significant
the most significant source
source of energy of energy consumption.
consumption. Therefore, anyTherefore,
improvements any
improvements
to efficiency into efficiency
the oven and inthethecooling
oven and the cooling
systems wouldsystems
impactwould impact
the factory the factory
resource resource
consumption
consumption positively. The immediate action would be to consider energy
positively. The immediate action would be to consider energy recovery options for the waste heatrecovery options for theto
waste heat to reduce natural gas consumption. However, the added objective
reduce natural gas consumption. However, the added objective of this section is to demonstrate the of this section is to
demonstrate the advantage of considering exergy analysis alongside energy analysis, to provide
advantage of considering exergy analysis alongside energy analysis, to provide clearer information
clearer information to inform decision making. For this purpose, the energy flows of a sub-section of
to inform decision making. For this purpose, the energy flows of a sub-section of the factory were
the factory were visualized. The Sankey diagram resulting from considering only the electricity that
visualized. The Sankey diagram resulting from considering only the electricity that was used at the
was used at the facility level was generated (Figure 4).
facility level was generated (Figure 4).
From an inspection of Figure 4, it can be seen that the chillers (cooling lines) use the major
From an inspection of Figure 4, it can be seen that the chillers (cooling lines) use the major portion
portion of electricity used at the facility level. Furthermore, the chiller for cooling line 5 was the
of electricity used at the facility level. Furthermore, the chiller for cooling line 5 was the largest energy
largest energy consumer of electricity toward which further efforts needed to be directed.
consumer of electricity toward which further efforts needed to be directed.

4.3.4. Modelling, Simulation and Analysis of Measures

For electricity that is used at factory level, it was found that efficiency improvement measures
needed to be directed towards cooling line 5. When considering the cold average ambient air
temperature conditions at the factory location (5.5 °C based on historical data), and the required
temperature of the chilled water (5 °C), the electrical energy consumption of the chillers could be
reduced somehow by utilizing the outdoor weather conditions. A dry cooler was the selected
 Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 15

coming from the thermal load. Therefore, the supply water (at 10 °C) that reaches the electric chiller
does 2018,
Energies so at11,
a lower
1006 temperature in comparison with the baseline. This expected to reduce the 10
thermal
of 15
load on the chiller.

Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 15

coming from the thermal load. Therefore, the supply water (at 10 °C) that reaches the electric chiller
does so at a lower temperature in comparison with the baseline. This expected to reduce the thermal
load on the chiller.

Figure
Figure 4. 4. Energy
Energy Sankey
Sankey depicting
depicting the
the use
use ofof electricity
electricity at at factory
factory level.
level.

4.3.4. Modelling, Simulation and Analysis of Measures

For electricity that is used at factory level, it was found that efficiency improvement measures
needed to be directed towards cooling line 5. When considering the cold average ambient air
temperature conditions at the factory location (5.5 ◦ C based on historical data), and the required
temperature of the chilled water (5 ◦ C), the electrical energy consumption of the chillers could
be reduced somehow by utilizing the outdoor weather conditions. A dry cooler was the selected
technology as it was expected to be feasible in the technological, economic, and environmental aspects.
Figure 5 shows the baseline and the proposed chilling system, as modelled in IES-VE. The proposed
modified chilling system employs an external heat exchanger in the return water flow coming from the
thermal load. Therefore, the supply water (at 10 ◦ C) that reaches the electric chiller does so at a lower
temperature in comparison
Figure Figure withofthe
4. Energy
5. Modelling the baseline.
Sankey
baseline This
depicting
and expected
the to reduce
use ofscenario
proposed electricity
forat the thermal
factory
cooling level.
line load
5 in on the chiller.
IES-VE.

Next, the efficiency of the system is assessed using energy and exergy analysis. First, the
performance indicators are defined, followed by results that were generated through computer
simulation. The supplied input to the system is electricity to the electric chillers, while the useful
output of the system is the thermal energy that was extracted from the water supply to cool it to 5 °C.
Therefore, the energy efficiency ratio (EER), adjusted for standard international units, of the system
is defined as follows [46],
𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑜𝑣𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑡𝑜 𝑑𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑡 5°𝐶 𝑚̇𝑐𝑝 ∆𝑇
𝐸𝐸𝑅𝒄𝒐𝒐𝒍𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒔𝒚𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒎 = = (1)
𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑑𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑

The exergy efficiency (𝜂𝐸𝑥 ) of a system in general is defined as follows [47],

𝑈𝑠𝑒𝑓𝑢𝑙 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑒𝑥𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦
𝜂𝐸𝑥 = (2)
𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑑
Figure 5. Modelling of the baseline and 𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡
proposed 𝑒𝑥𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦
scenario for cooling line 5 in IES-VE.
Figure 5. Modelling of the baseline and proposed scenario for cooling line 5 in IES-VE.
For the case of the chilling system, the useful output is the heat lost or extracted from the water
Next,
flow in the the efficiency of the system is assessed using energy and exergyaanalysis. First, the
Next, thechilling circuit.
efficiency of theIn order
system istoassessed
define the useful
using output
energy and exergy, consider
exergy analysis. simple
First, pipe through
the performance
performance
which water indicators are defined, followed by results that were generated through computer
indicators are flows,
defined,andfollowed
it is cooled
bybyresults
losing that
heat were
to the generated
surrounding that arecomputer
through at a lower simulation.
temperature
simulation.
(Figure 6). The
Sincesupplied
the input to
chemical the systemofisthe
composition electricity
water to the
flow electricthe
remains chillers,
same while
and nothe useful
significant
The supplied input to the system is electricity to the electric chillers, while the useful output of
output of the
pressure system isare
variations theexpected,
thermal energy
only thatthermal
the was extracted
exergy from the water
content of supply
the mass to cool
flow
◦
it to 5to
needs °C.be
the system is the thermal energy that was extracted from the water supply to cool it to 5 C. Therefore,
Therefore,
considered.the energy efficiency ratio (EER), adjusted for standard international units, of the system
the energy efficiency ratio (EER), adjusted for standard international units, of the system is defined as
is defined as follows [46],
follows [46],
𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑜𝑣𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑡𝑜 𝑑𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑡 5°𝐶 𝑚̇𝑐𝑝 ∆𝑇
𝐸𝐸𝑅𝒄𝒐𝒐𝒍𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒔𝒚𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒎 = = . (1)
Rate𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠
o f heat removal 𝑜𝑓 deliver
f rom water to 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚
at 5 C 𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐mc
◦
p ∆T
𝑑𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑
EERcooling system = = (1)
The exergy efficiency (𝜂𝐸𝑥 )Electrical power
of a system requirements
in general o f the
is defined as system
follows [47], Elecdemand
𝑈𝑠𝑒𝑓𝑢𝑙 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑒𝑥𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦
𝜂𝐸𝑥 = (2)
𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑒𝑥𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦
For the case of the chilling system, the useful output is the heat lost or extracted from the water
flow in the chilling circuit. In order to define the useful output exergy, consider a simple pipe through
Energies 2018, 11, 1006 11 of 15

The exergy efficiency (ηEx ) of a system in general is defined as follows [47],

Use f ul output exergy

ηEx = (2)
Supplied input exergy

For the case of the chilling system, the useful output is the heat lost or extracted from the
water flow in the chilling circuit. In order to define the useful output exergy, consider a simple pipe
through which water flows, and it is cooled by losing heat to the surrounding that are at a lower
temperature (Figure 6). Since the chemical composition of the water flow remains the same and no
significant pressure variations are expected, only the thermal exergy content of the mass flow needs to
be considered.
Energies 2018,
Energies 11,11,
2018, x FOR
x FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW 11 of11
15of 15

Figure 6. Exergy destruction due to heat loss from a fluid flowing in a simple pipe.
Figure 6. Exergy destruction due to heat loss from a fluid flowing in a simple pipe.
Figure 6. Exergy destruction due to heat loss from a fluid flowing in a simple pipe.
The heat transfer through the pipe wall is an irreversible process and it directly translates into
The heat transfer through the pipe wall is an irreversible process and it directly translates into
irrecoverable exergy destruction. For the simple pipe shown above, the exergy destruction due to
Theirrecoverable
heat transferexergy destruction.
through the pipeFor wall
heat loss is then calculated as follows,
the simple
is anpipe shown above,
irreversible the exergy
process and it destruction due to
directly translates into
heat loss
irrecoverable is thendestruction.
exergy calculated as For
follows,
the simple pipe shown above, the exergy destruction due to heat
𝑇1 𝑇2
loss is then calculated as follows, 𝐸𝑥𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 = 𝑚𝑐𝑝 (𝑇1 − 𝑇2 − 𝑇0 𝑙𝑛 𝑇+1 𝑇0 𝑙𝑛 𝑇 )𝑇2 (3)
𝐸𝑥 𝑝 1
𝑇
= 𝑚𝑐 (𝑇 − 𝑇 − 𝑇 𝑙𝑛0 + 𝑇 𝑙𝑛0 )
𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 2 0 0 (3)
𝑇0 𝑇0
For the case of the chilling system, it is this exergy destructionTthat is the useful
T2 output of the
1 that is the
For the
system, andcase of
Exthe
therefore chilling
the
dest exergy
f rom system, it is
f low =
efficiency
heat forthis
mc pthe 1 − T2destruction
( Texergy
chilling − T0 lnis defined
system ln useful
+ T0as, ) output of the (3)
system, and therefore the exergy efficiency for the chilling system Tis0defined as,
T0
𝑇 𝑇 1 2
𝑚𝑐𝑝 (𝑇1 − 𝑇2 − 𝑇0 𝑙𝑛 + 𝑇0 𝑙𝑛 )
0𝑇 𝑇
0 𝑇2 𝑇 (4)
𝜂𝐸𝑥,𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔
For the case of the chilling system, 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 = this
it is exergy
𝑚𝑐𝑝 (𝑇 𝑇0 𝑙𝑛 1 + 𝑇0 𝑙𝑛 that
𝑇2 −destruction
1 − 𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐 ) is the useful output of the
𝑑𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑇0 𝑇0 (4)
𝜂
system, and therefore the exergy efficiency
𝐸𝑥,𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 =
𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 for the chilling system is defined as,
𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐
A week in January was taken as the analysis period to 𝑑𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑 assess the predicted performance of the
baseline
A week and inproposed system
January was based
taken on the
as the energy
analysis and exergy
period approaches.
to assess The exergy
the predicted efficiency
performance of the
profile for the baseline and the proposed system 1−
mc p ( Tcan 2 − in
Tseen ln TT10 +
T0Figure T0 ln TT102provides
)
baseline and proposed ηEx,system based on
= the energy and exergy approaches. The exergy results
be 7. Table the efficiency (4)
obtained from chilling system
the analysis.
profile for the baseline and the proposed system can beElec seendemand
in Figure 7. Table 1 provides the results
obtained from the analysis.
A week in Table 1. The results
January of the energy
was taken as theandanalysis
exergy analysis for the
period baseline and
to assess thethe proposed case
predicted for
performance of the
cooling line 5 (Based on a week’s data in January).
baseline andTable
proposed system
1. The results based
of the energyonandthe energy
exergy and
analysis forexergy approaches.
the baseline The case
and the proposed exergy
for efficiency
cooling
profile for the line 5 Scenario
baseline (Based
and theon aproposed Baseline
week’s data (%) Proposed (%) Improvement over Baseline (%)
in January).
system can be seen in Figure 7. Table 1 provides the results
Mean Energy Efficiency Ratio 14.11 17.73 25.7
obtained from theMean analysis.
Scenario
Exergy Efficiency Baseline
13.94 (%) Proposed
20.42 (%) Improvement 46.5over Baseline (%)
Mean Energy Efficiency Ratio 14.11 17.73 25.7
Mean Exergy Efficiency 13.94 20.42 46.5

Figure 7. Performance comparison of the baseline and the proposed scenario based on exergy
Figure 7. Performance comparison of the baseline and the proposed scenario based on exergy analysis.
analysis.

Figure 7. Performance comparison of the baseline and the proposed scenario based on exergy
analysis.
Energies 2018, 11, 1006 12 of 15

Table 1. The results of the energy and exergy analysis for the baseline and the proposed case for cooling
line 5 (Based on a week’s data in January).

Scenario Baseline (%) Proposed (%) Improvement over Baseline (%)

Mean Energy Efficiency Ratio 14.11 17.73 25.7
Mean Exergy Efficiency 13.94 20.42 46.5

4.4. Implementation and Operation

Based on the analysis that was conducted, decisions relating to the implementation of the selected
technology were to be taken. Within the REEMAIN project, on which this analysis is based, the proposed
modification was accepted. The modification to the system was an external heat exchanger in the
return water loop. The heat exchanger was placed on top of the factory roof, above the technical room
where the chillers were located. A bypass valve was installed in this new connection for the case where
outside temperature did not allow for free cooling. To match this modification, the control strategy of
the system was also modified accordingly.

4.5. Monitoring and Correction

The modified system was installed together with its required instrumentation and amendments
in control systems. In order to identify any problems in the commissioning of the efficiency measure,
the system needed to be monitored. The performance of the new system was compared to the
targeted performance as set by the simulation results. Measurements over the first ten months showed
below par performance. The reasons for this were wrong positioning of a temperature sensor, and a
malfunctioning of the modified control systems. As the performance was monitored, the faults were
detected and removed accordingly.

4.6. Review and Repeat

The performance of the implemented measures is to be monitored continuously to ensure
operation at targeted desired level. In addition, scoping for further opportunities for the continual
improvement in the factories is to be carried out in the future.

5. Conclusions
In this paper, prescriptive guidelines for energy management in the format of the ISO 50001 were
presented. The presentation was done through an illustrative case study of a biscuit manufacturing
facility. The factory level Sankey diagram of the energy flows indicated that natural gas consumption
and electricity consumption in the baking and the chilling lines were the greatest energy consumers.
For the purposes of demonstrating the utility of exergy analysis in generating clearer information to
support decision making for energy management, the largest electricity consuming chilling line 5 was
further explored. Since the required water temperature was 5 ◦ C, and when considering the cold local
climate, a dry fan cooler was proposed as an appropriate efficiency measure. The baseline and the
proposed case were modelled holistically and simulated using IES-VE, with the results being tabulated
in Table 1.
The mean energy efficiency ratio improved from 14.11 to 17.73 for the baseline and proposed
systems, respectively, which is an improvement of 25.7% over the baseline performance. On the
other hand, the exergy efficiency improved from only 13.94 to 20.42% over the same period of
analysis, an improvement of 46.5% over the baseline. Comparing the energy and exergy based
results, a drawback with the energy efficiency ratio is that there is no indication of how much
further improvement is possible, as a theoretical ideal reference is not defined. For the exergy results,
even though a greater improvement over the baseline was recorded (46.5%), the proposed case is
still highly exergy-inefficient, with a theoretical 79.27% further improvement being possible. Such a
difference in results that was produced by the energy and exergy analyses may lead the decision makers
Energies 2018, 11, 1006 13 of 15

of the factory energy management in different directions. The marked difference in results is due to the
fact that an energy analysis disregards the quality aspects of energy. For example, the same quantity of
a thermal energy in water at 5 ◦ C and electrical energy are considered to be equal, even though more
useful work is possible with the electrical energy. Furthermore, exergy is a property of the system
and the surrounding (in this case the outside natural environment) and represents variation from
the reference environment. When considering that the local climate is close to the required water
temperature (5 ◦ C) for a significant amount of time, very little exergy is imparted to the water flow.
On the other hand, on the supply side, high quality energy (electricity) is used. This mismatch between
the high energy quality at the supply and low energy quality at the demand side in the cooling system
leads to low exergy efficiency values.
Although, this example provided a case to demonstrate the added insight that could be achieved
through employing the exergy approach, it was not the primary objective of this paper. Rather, the main
contribution of this paper is to present a set of prescriptive guidelines, in the ISO 50001 standard
format, which incorporate the useful concept of exergy and is based on holistic simulation of factories.
The generic guidelines presented in Section 3 can be considered to be a step towards an exergy based
energy management standard to deliver improved energy and efficiency in the industry.
The holistic factory simulation software tool that is presented in this paper was restricted to the
generation of Sankey diagrams of energy and material flows. The exergy based methodology that is
presented may be readily expanded to take into account water flows in addition to energy and material,
thus expanding the scope to resource management in factories (as suggested by recent literature [28]).
Future work may be directed towards expanding the capability of such tools to generate Grassmann
diagrams to visualize all of the resource flows on a common unit basis. Such a development would
further aid the holistic analysis of manufacturing systems and decision making for resource efficiency.
Finally, the adoption of technologies and techniques is not entirely dependent on technical analysis and
results. Non-technical factors, such as the common perception about the tools, are equally important.
To date, there is still scant literature on the barriers and drivers to the widespread use of exergy analysis
in the industry. Perhaps investigations along such lines merit further research to uncover the reasons
that impeded improved energy and resource management in factories through the greater use of
exergy analysis.

Acknowledgments: This work was supported by the project REEMAIN (Resource and Energy Efficient Manufacturing).
It received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Programme for research, technological development and
demonstration under grant agreement No. 608977. The authors would like to thank Vincent Murray and Stephen
Earl for their contribution towards development of the computer models used.
Author Contributions: Sanober Hassan Khattak designed the study, conducted the analysis and is the main
author of the paper. Michael Oates developed the computer models used in the study. Rick Greenough provided
critical feedback on the design of the study.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Administration, E.I. Industrial Sector Energy Consumption—International Energy Outlook; U.S. Energy Information
Administration: Washington, DC, USA, 2016.
2. European Commission. A Resource-Efficient Europe—Flagship Initiative under the Europe 2020 Strategy;
European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2011; Volume 21, pp. 1–17.
3. Kaźmierczyk, P.; Stenbaek Hansen, M.; Günther, J.; McKinnon, D.; Loewe, C.; Lingvall, F.; Kallay, T.K.;
Szlezak, J.; Bahn-Walkowiak, B.; Herczeg, M. Resource Efficiency in Europe: Policies and Approaches in 31 EEA
Member and Cooperating Countries; European Environment Agency: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2012.
4. Dawkins, E.; Roelich, K.; Barrett, J.; Baiocchi, G. Securing the Future—The Role of Resource Efficiency; WRAP:
Banbury, UK, 2010.
5. Herrmann, C.; Thiede, S.; Heinemann, T. A Holistic Framework for Increasing Energy and Resource Efficiency in
Manufacturing; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; pp. 3–4.
Energies 2018, 11, 1006 14 of 15

6. Wright, A.J.; Oates, M.R.; Greenough, R. Concepts for dynamic modelling of energy-related flows
in manufacturing. Appl. Energy 2013, 112, 1342–1348. [CrossRef]
7. Ball, P.D.; Despeisse, M.; Evans, S.; Greenough, R.M.; Hope, S.B.; Kerrigan, R.; Levers, A.; Lunt, P.; Murray, V.;
Oates, M.R.; et al. Factory modelling: Combining energy modelling for buildings and production systems.
IFIP Adv. Inf. Commun. Technol. 2013, 397, 158–165.
8. Duflou, J.R.; Sutherland, J.W.; Dornfeld, D.; Herrmann, C.; Jeswiet, J.; Kara, S.; Hauschild, M.; Kellens, K.
Towards energy and resource efficient manufacturing: A processes and systems approach. CIRP Ann. Technol.
2012, 61, 587–609. [CrossRef]
9. Herrmann, C.; Schmidt, C.; Kurle, D.; Blume, S.; Thiede, S. Sustainability in manufacturing and factories of
the future. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. Green Technol. 2014, 1, 283–292. [CrossRef]
10. Cerdas, F.; Kurle, D.; Andrew, S.; Thiede, S.; Herrmann, C.; Zhiquan, Y.; Jonathan, L.S.C.; Bin, S.; Kara, S.
Defining circulation factories—A pathway towards factories of the future. Procedia CIRP 2015, 29, 627–632.
[CrossRef]
11. Kovacic, I.; Orehounig, K.; Mahdavi, A.; Bleicher, F.; Dimitrou, A.-A.; Waltenbereger, L. Energy Efficient
Production—Interdisciplinary, Systemic Approach through Integrated Simulation. Stroj. J. Theory Appl.
Mech. Eng. 2013, 55, 17–34.
12. Caggiano, A.; Marzano, A.; Teti, R.; Design, S. Sustainability Enhancement of a Turbine Vane Manufacturing
Cell through Digital Simulation Based Design. Energies 2016, 9, 790. [CrossRef]
13. Garwood, T.L.; Hughes, B.R.; Oates, M.R.; Connor, D.O. A review of energy simulation tools for the
manufacturing sector. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 81, 895–911. [CrossRef]
14. Sousa, T.; Brockway, P.E.; Cullen, J.M.; Miller, J.; Cabrera, A.; Domingos, T. The Need for Robust, Consistent
Methods in Societal Exergy Accounting. Ecol. Econ. 2017, 141, 11–21. [CrossRef]
15. Hernandez, A.G.; Cullen, J.M. Unlocking Plant-level Resource Efficiency Options: A Unified Exergy Measure.
Procedia CIRP 2016, 48, 122–127. [CrossRef]
16. Mousavi, S.; Kara, S.; Kornfeld, B. A hierarchical framework for concurrent assessment of energy and water
efficiency in manufacturing systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 133, 88–98. [CrossRef]
17. Thiede, S.; Schönemann, M.; Kurle, D.; Herrmann, C. Multi-level simulation in manufacturing companies:
The water-energy nexus case. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 139, 1118–1127. [CrossRef]
18. Khattak, S.H.; Greenough, R. Resource Accounting in Factories and the Energy-Water Nexus; Springer: New York,
NY, USA, 2017.
19. Khattak, S.H.; Greenough, R. Resource efficient manufacturing: Can reduced energy efficiency lead to
improved sustainability? ECEE Ind. Summer Study Proc. 2014, 163–169. Available online: www.eceee.org
(accessed on 2 March 2018).
20. Khattak, S.H.; Greenough, R.; Korolija, I.; Brown, N. An exergy based approach to resource accounting
for factories. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 121, 99–108. [CrossRef]
21. Wall, G. Exergy flows in industrial processes. Energy 1988, 13, 197–208. [CrossRef]
22. Atmaca, A.; Yumrutaş, R. Thermodynamic and exergoeconomic analysis of a cement plant: Part I—Methodology.
Energy Convers. Manag. 2014, 79, 790–798. [CrossRef]
23. McKenna, R. Industrial Energy Efficiency: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the Thermodynamic, Technical and
Economic Constraints; University of Bath: Bath, UK, 2009.
24. Gaudreau, K.; Fraser, R.A.; Murphy, S. The characteristics of the exergy reference environment and its
implications for sustainability-based decision-making. Energies 2012, 5, 2197–2213. [CrossRef]
25. Rosen, M.A. Does industry embrace exergy? Exergy Int. J. 2002, 2, 221–223. [CrossRef]
26. Khattak, S.H. An Exergy Based Method for Resource Accounting in Factories. Ph.D. Thesis, De Montfort
University, Leicester, UK, January 2016.
27. Sangi, R.; Müller, D. Implementation of a solution to the problem of reference environment in the exergy
evaluation of building energy systems. Energy 2018, 149, 830–836. [CrossRef]
28. May, G.; Stahl, B.; Taisch, M.; Kiritsis, D. Energy management in manufacturing: From literature review to a
conceptual framework. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 167, 1464–1489. [CrossRef]
29. Johansson, M.T.; Thollander, P. A review of barriers to and driving forces for improved energy efficiency in
Swedish industry—Recommendations for successful in-house energy management. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
2018, 82, 618–628. [CrossRef]
Energies 2018, 11, 1006 15 of 15

30. Iker, L.; Ander, I.; Allur, A.; Larrea, E. Contribution to Energy Management of the Main Standards for
Environmental Management Systems. Energies 2017, 10, 1758. [CrossRef]
31. A Management System for Energy. ANSI/MSE 2000:2008. Available online: https://webstore.ansi.org
(accessed on 10 March 2018).
32. Dzene, I.; Polikarpova, I.; Zogla, L.; Rosa, M. Application of ISO 50001 for implementation of sustainable
energy action plans. Energy Procedia 2015, 72, 111–118. [CrossRef]
33. Standardization, I.O. The ISO Survey of Management System Standard Certifications 2016. Available online:
https://www.iso.org/the-iso-survey.html (accessed on 10 March 2018).
34. Bonacina, F.; Corsini, A.; De Propris, L.; Marchegiani, A.; Mori, F. Industrial Energy Management Systems
in Italy: State of the art and perspective. Energy Procedia 2015, 82, 562–569. [CrossRef]
35. Gopalakrishnan, B.; Ramamoorthy, K.; Crowe, E.; Chaudhari, S.; Latif, H. A structured approach for facilitating
the implementation of ISO 50001 standard in the manufacturing sector. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2014, 7,
154–165. [CrossRef]
36. Vermeeren, R.; Mulder, B.; Meta, B.V.; Reijnders, M. Implementation of ISO 50001 in Industry in the
Netherlands. ECEE Ind. Summer Study Proc. 2012, 679–688. Available online: www.eceee.org (accessed on
2 March 2018).
37. Kanneganti, H.; Gopalakrishnan, B.; Crowe, E.; Al-shebeeb, O.; Yelamanchi, T.; Nimbarte, A.; Currie, K.;
Abolhassani, A. Speci fi cation of energy assessment methodologies to satisfy ISO 50001 energy
management standard. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2017, 23, 121–135.
38. Jovanovi, B.; Filipovi, J. ISO 50001 standard-based energy management maturity model e proposal and
validation in industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 2744–2755. [CrossRef]
39. Karakasli, E.; Oztop, H.; Hepbasli, A. Performance assessment of a polyclinic heating and cooling system in
a hospital building. Int. J. Exergy 2016, 21, 70–86. [CrossRef]
40. Hepbasli, A. Towards Developing An Exergy Management System Standard and Its Application to a
University Building. In CLIMA 2016—Proceedings of the 12th REHVA World Congress; Aalborg University,
Department of Civil Engineering: Aalborg, Denmark, 2016.
41. Nguyen, A.; Reiter, S.; Rigo, P. A review on simulation-based optimization methods applied to building
performance analysis. Appl. Energy 2014, 113, 1043–1058. [CrossRef]
42. Wang, J.; Chang, Q.; Xiao, G.; Wang, N.; Li, S. Data driven production modeling and simulation of complex
automobile general assembly plant. Comput. Ind. 2011, 62, 765–775. [CrossRef]
43. Resource and Energy Efficient Manufacturing. Available online: http://www.reemain.eu/ (accessed on
12 March 2018).
44. CETIAT Energy Performance Diagnosis: The Key to Improve Your Performance. Available online: http://
industrie.cetiat.fr/gb/p-gb/energy-performance-diagnosis-the-key-to-improve-your-performance.html
(accessed on 4 April 2018).
45. Harish, V.S.; Kumar, A. A review on modeling and simulation of building energy systems. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 2016, 56, 1272–1292. [CrossRef]
46. Air-conditioning, heating and refrigeration institute. AHRI 550/590 (I-P/2015): Performance Rating
of Water-Chilling and Heat Pump Water-Heating Packages Using the Vapour Compression Cycle.
Available online: https://ahrinet.org/search-standards (accessed on 15 April 2018).
47. Bakshi, B.R.; Gutowski, T.G.; Sekulic, D.P. Thermodynamics and the Destruction of Resources; Thoughts on the
Application of Thermodynamics to the Development of Sustainability Science; Cambridge University Press:
Cambridge, UK, 2011; pp. 477–488.

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).