Project BackgroundBord Iascaigh Mhara (BIM) run a Green Seafood Business Programme to assist seafood producers reduce their operating costs through better management of their environmental inputs. It was through this programme that BIM recognised road transport fuel to be one of the largest energy consumers in the seafood companies with a transport fl eet.

In some cases, road fuel costs were three times the size of the electricity bill and the largest emitter of CO2. These high costs can be attributed to the relatively large fl eet of delivery vans and trucks operated by these companies.

With this in mind, BIM conducted a trial project with 3 seafood companies concentrating solely on transport fuel. The primary aim of this project was to assist seafood processors reduce costs and emissions by reducing transport fuel usage in litres/100km. It is hoped that the fi ndings of this trial project serve as an example of what can be achieved through better management of this fi nite resource, not just in the seafood sector but to the wider food processing industry.

Fuel costs An average of the 3 companies’ fuel transport costs and potential monetary and CO2 savings are outlined below.

Annual Fleet Fuel Costs

Potential Savings (10%)

Potential Savings (CO2)

Total of 3 companies €462,915 €46,291 111,755 kg

This gives potential average savings of €15,430 per company. Saving road fuel takes time and effort, but relatively small investment, so almost 100% of this saving is profi t.

If you think about this fi gure in terms of sales, say a company has a profi t margin of 10%, an extra €154,430 worth of sales would have to be generated to make the same profi t. That’s a lot of fi sh!!!

Initial fi ndingsEven by the standard of hauliers and other similarly busy SME’s, fi sh processors are incredibly busy; getting time each week to consolidate and review fuel performance is very challenging. Vans are the predominant vehicle choice, designed for short run multi-drop work, but many are deployed on long thin routes with vehicles travelling long distances nationwide. The graphic shown illustrates the initial barriers found.

Green SeafoodBusiness

Transport Fuel Reduction Project

Long delivery routes puts pressure on drivers

Fuel management per driver was weak

Vans sized for largest load rather than fuel effi ciency

Little feedback to driver on fuel performance

Drivers not trained in Eco-drive

Little thought given to aerodynamics or similar fuel saving features

1 2 3 4 5 6

Action plan Based on initial fi ndings highlighted above an action plan was drawn up which included:

1. Measure baseline fuel performance per driver

2. Review driver performance each week

3. Give feedback to drivers on performance (litres/100km)

4. Train drivers in Eco-driving

5. Update driver vehicle checklist to include fuel saving initiatives

6. Review fl eet procurement and maintenance procedures.

ResultsWhile initially, each company weekly review of driver performance was strong it could be seen that this practice began to fall away as time had to be given to dealing with production issues as they arose.

It was found that driver performance varied quite a lot; from the graph (blue line) the best driver consumed 11.7 litres/100km and the worst consumed 17 litres/100km.

The green line shown in graph below shows driver performance after Eco-driver training had taken place. It can be seen that the biggest improvement was 59% and the lowest improvement was 12.5%.

While these results were obtained under test conditions it would be expected to average out at around 8% improvement overall. The key to maintaining this improvement is regular monitoring and feedback to drivers.

Conclusionn It can be seen that transport fuel is a very signifi cant costs to these companies.

n While all companies had a good idea of the overall cost of fuel, management of fuel per driver in each company was weak.

n It was noted that the biggest challenge in each company was getting the time and resources to conduct to a weekly fuel review.

n Under test conditions Eco-driver training improved driver performance by an average of 32%, this would be expected to level out at 8% in real world conditions.

n It can be concluded that when all action items are implemented successfully and the correct resources given to fuel management together with Eco-drive training a 10% saving is easily achievable. It has been seen in other sectors when a fuel management plan is put in place, savings have greatly exceeded 10%.

How much is 10% of fl eet fuel transport costs worth to your company?

l/10

0

0

5

10

15

20

Van 4Van 3Van 2Van 1

17.0

7.0

11.7

8.3

12.0

8.7

16.0

14.0 L/100km Before

L/100km After