Advertisement

Environmental Impact of Centralised and Decentralised Production Networks in the Era of Personalisation

  • Dimitris Mourtzis
  • Michalis Doukas
  • Foivos Psarommatis
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Production Engineering book series (LNPE)

Abstract

The current trend of globalisation and decentralisation of the production activities has created a series of environment related issues. The increase of transportation distances, the escalated consumption of natural resources, and toxic emissions are among the generated challenges. Additionally, the manufacturing complexity, due to high product variety leads to increased energy consumption. Nevertheless, natural resources are limited and emission levels must be kept under the limits. This paper presents a methodology, implemented through a software tool, for the investigation of the environmental impact caused by centralised and decentralised manufacturing networks, under heavy product customisation. Simulation models of automotive manufacturing networks were developed, utilising real life industrial data, for the investigation of the impact of the production networks under highly diversified product demand, on environmental aspects. Multiple user-defined criteria have been used for the evaluation of the environmental footprint, including CO2 emissions and energy requirements in terms of depletion of natural resources. This paper aims at identifying optimal configurations of centralised and decentralised production networks, characterised by reduced energy requirements, low consumption of natural resources and reduced toxic emissions.

Keywords

Decentralised manufacturing Environmental impact CO2 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work has been supported by the EC funded project “A web-based collaboration system for mass customisation—e-CUSTOM”.

References

  1. 1.
    Paralikas, J., Fysikopoulos, A., Pandremenos, J., Chryssolouris, G.: Product modularity and assembly systems: An automotive case study. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 60, 165–168 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tolio, T., Urgo, M.: A rolling horizon approach to plan outsourcing in manufacturing-to-order environments affected by uncertainty. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 56, 487–490 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chryssolouris, G.: Manufacturing Systems—Theory and Practice, 2nd edn. Springer, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gunasekaran, A., Ngai, E.W.T.: The future of operations management: An outlook and analysis. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 135, 687–701 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
    Kara, S., Ibbotson, S.: Embodied energy of manufacturing supply chains. CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol. 4, 317–323 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    Chryssolouris, G., Papakostas, N., Mavrikios, D.: A perspective on manufacturing strategy: Produce more with less. CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol. 1, 45–52 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Helu, M., Vijayaraghavan, A., Dornfeld, D.: Evaluating the relationship between use phase environmental impacts and manufacturing process precision. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 60, 49–52 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Diaz, N., Helu, M., Jayanathan, S., Chen, Y., Horvath, A., Dornfeld, D.: Environmental analysis of milling machine tool use in various manufacturing environments. IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology. Arlington (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yang, B., Yang, Y., Wijngaard, J.: Impact of postponement on transport: an environmental perspective. Int. J. Logistics Manage. 16, 192–204 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ülengin, F., Kabak, O., Önsel, S., Ülengin, B., Aktaş, E.: A problem-structuring model for analysing transportation–environment relationships. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 200, 844–859 (2010)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eagan, P.D., Joeres, E.: The utility of environmental impact information: a manufacturing case study. J. Cleaner Prod. 10, 75–83 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Weinert, N., Chiotellis, S., Seliger, G.: Methodology for planning and operating energy-efficient production systems. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 60, 41–44 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jovane, F., Yoshikawa, H., Alting, L., Boër, C.R., Westkamper, E., Williams, D., Tseng, M., Seliger, G., Paci, A.M.: The incoming global technological and industrial revolution towards competitive sustainable manufacturing. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 57, 641–659 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    OECD Key Environmental Indicators. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/20/40/37551205.pdf(2008)
  17. 17.
    Mourtzis, D., Doukas, M., Psarommatis, F.: A multi-criteria evaluation of centralised and decentralised production networks in a highly customer-driven environment. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. Vol 61. (2012) (To be published)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Michalos, G., Makris, S., Mourtzis, D.: An intelligent search algorithm-based method to derive assembly line design alternatives. Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 25, 211–229 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    EPA. www.epa.gov(2010)
  20. 20.
    Chryssolouris, G., Dicke, K., Lee, M.: On the resources allocation problem. Int. J. Prod. Res. 30, 2773–2795 (1992)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dimitris Mourtzis
    • 1
  • Michalis Doukas
    • 1
  • Foivos Psarommatis
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering/Laboratory for Manufacturing Systems and Automation (LMS)University of PatrasPatrasGreece

Personalised recommendations