Energy consumption in the yogurt supply chain(French and Greek cases)
COST meeting Arcueil 19505
FMikiki (CERTHHIT) CRizet (INRETS)
Energy consumption in the yogurt supply chain
Objectives Analyse energy consumption in yogurt supply
chain according to Companiesrsquo 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 amp method
Energy consumed per1 kg of yogurt (goekg) 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 (goeyogurt 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 truckMilk farm
2 Yogurt factory 4 producer
Platform
6retailer Platform8 shop
Consumerrsquos home
5 Reefer truck
7 Reefer truck
9 consumerrsquos car
The 7 steps of the yogurt Supply chain(Greek case)
Milk farm 2 Yogurt factory 4 producer
Platform
6 shopConsumerrsquos home
5 Reefer truck
7 consumerrsquos car
3Reefer truck 1tanker
The two cases (i)
(i) France
Carte V Guilbault
The two cases (ii)
ii) Greece
Step1 Milk sourcing
France Milk is collected from the farms around thefactory
46 goekgIf not enough bought from other towns at a longer distance
119 goekgAverage
62 goekg
Greece (2 cases)Milk is collected from thefarms around the factory No further milk
purchased
Case 1 (Evr) 126goe kgCase 2 (F) 157 goekg
Step 1 Milk collection
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2F Factory
Milk collected
(1000 tyear)128 219 151
Averdist(Km)Aver tontrip
201 215389115
480120
1000 oil lyear
449 210 1796
Goekg yogurt 46 126 157
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 goeyogurt kg French factory Total 32 goeyogurt kg Greek factory Total 33 goeyogurt kg 2nd Greek companyFor the first two activities
Step 2 YogurtProduction
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2
F Factory
Annual production(tyear)
106000
997 48717
Electricity Consumption(MWhyear)Gas (tyear)
1484037100
2433 210
37065
Energy consumption(toe year)
4133 457 3188
Goekg yogurt 39 32 33
Steps 3 5 (amp 7) road transport by reefer vehicles
Consumption is linked to
-Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer 15) Consump Between 08 amp 130 goeYogurtkg journey
Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform
French case study 104 goeYogurtkg Greek case study 83 goeYogurtkg
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
Energy consumption in the yogurt supply chain
Objectives Analyse energy consumption in yogurt supply
chain according to Companiesrsquo 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 amp method
Energy consumed per1 kg of yogurt (goekg) 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 (goeyogurt 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 truckMilk farm
2 Yogurt factory 4 producer
Platform
6retailer Platform8 shop
Consumerrsquos home
5 Reefer truck
7 Reefer truck
9 consumerrsquos car
The 7 steps of the yogurt Supply chain(Greek case)
Milk farm 2 Yogurt factory 4 producer
Platform
6 shopConsumerrsquos home
5 Reefer truck
7 consumerrsquos car
3Reefer truck 1tanker
The two cases (i)
(i) France
Carte V Guilbault
The two cases (ii)
ii) Greece
Step1 Milk sourcing
France Milk is collected from the farms around thefactory
46 goekgIf not enough bought from other towns at a longer distance
119 goekgAverage
62 goekg
Greece (2 cases)Milk is collected from thefarms around the factory No further milk
purchased
Case 1 (Evr) 126goe kgCase 2 (F) 157 goekg
Step 1 Milk collection
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2F Factory
Milk collected
(1000 tyear)128 219 151
Averdist(Km)Aver tontrip
201 215389115
480120
1000 oil lyear
449 210 1796
Goekg yogurt 46 126 157
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 goeyogurt kg French factory Total 32 goeyogurt kg Greek factory Total 33 goeyogurt kg 2nd Greek companyFor the first two activities
Step 2 YogurtProduction
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2
F Factory
Annual production(tyear)
106000
997 48717
Electricity Consumption(MWhyear)Gas (tyear)
1484037100
2433 210
37065
Energy consumption(toe year)
4133 457 3188
Goekg yogurt 39 32 33
Steps 3 5 (amp 7) road transport by reefer vehicles
Consumption is linked to
-Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer 15) Consump Between 08 amp 130 goeYogurtkg journey
Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform
French case study 104 goeYogurtkg Greek case study 83 goeYogurtkg
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
Supply chain approach amp method
Energy consumed per1 kg of yogurt (goekg) 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 (goeyogurt 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 truckMilk farm
2 Yogurt factory 4 producer
Platform
6retailer Platform8 shop
Consumerrsquos home
5 Reefer truck
7 Reefer truck
9 consumerrsquos car
The 7 steps of the yogurt Supply chain(Greek case)
Milk farm 2 Yogurt factory 4 producer
Platform
6 shopConsumerrsquos home
5 Reefer truck
7 consumerrsquos car
3Reefer truck 1tanker
The two cases (i)
(i) France
Carte V Guilbault
The two cases (ii)
ii) Greece
Step1 Milk sourcing
France Milk is collected from the farms around thefactory
46 goekgIf not enough bought from other towns at a longer distance
119 goekgAverage
62 goekg
Greece (2 cases)Milk is collected from thefarms around the factory No further milk
purchased
Case 1 (Evr) 126goe kgCase 2 (F) 157 goekg
Step 1 Milk collection
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2F Factory
Milk collected
(1000 tyear)128 219 151
Averdist(Km)Aver tontrip
201 215389115
480120
1000 oil lyear
449 210 1796
Goekg yogurt 46 126 157
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 goeyogurt kg French factory Total 32 goeyogurt kg Greek factory Total 33 goeyogurt kg 2nd Greek companyFor the first two activities
Step 2 YogurtProduction
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2
F Factory
Annual production(tyear)
106000
997 48717
Electricity Consumption(MWhyear)Gas (tyear)
1484037100
2433 210
37065
Energy consumption(toe year)
4133 457 3188
Goekg yogurt 39 32 33
Steps 3 5 (amp 7) road transport by reefer vehicles
Consumption is linked to
-Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer 15) Consump Between 08 amp 130 goeYogurtkg journey
Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform
French case study 104 goeYogurtkg Greek case study 83 goeYogurtkg
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
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 truckMilk farm
2 Yogurt factory 4 producer
Platform
6retailer Platform8 shop
Consumerrsquos home
5 Reefer truck
7 Reefer truck
9 consumerrsquos car
The 7 steps of the yogurt Supply chain(Greek case)
Milk farm 2 Yogurt factory 4 producer
Platform
6 shopConsumerrsquos home
5 Reefer truck
7 consumerrsquos car
3Reefer truck 1tanker
The two cases (i)
(i) France
Carte V Guilbault
The two cases (ii)
ii) Greece
Step1 Milk sourcing
France Milk is collected from the farms around thefactory
46 goekgIf not enough bought from other towns at a longer distance
119 goekgAverage
62 goekg
Greece (2 cases)Milk is collected from thefarms around the factory No further milk
purchased
Case 1 (Evr) 126goe kgCase 2 (F) 157 goekg
Step 1 Milk collection
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2F Factory
Milk collected
(1000 tyear)128 219 151
Averdist(Km)Aver tontrip
201 215389115
480120
1000 oil lyear
449 210 1796
Goekg yogurt 46 126 157
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 goeyogurt kg French factory Total 32 goeyogurt kg Greek factory Total 33 goeyogurt kg 2nd Greek companyFor the first two activities
Step 2 YogurtProduction
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2
F Factory
Annual production(tyear)
106000
997 48717
Electricity Consumption(MWhyear)Gas (tyear)
1484037100
2433 210
37065
Energy consumption(toe year)
4133 457 3188
Goekg yogurt 39 32 33
Steps 3 5 (amp 7) road transport by reefer vehicles
Consumption is linked to
-Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer 15) Consump Between 08 amp 130 goeYogurtkg journey
Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform
French case study 104 goeYogurtkg Greek case study 83 goeYogurtkg
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
The 9 steps of the yogurt Supply chain(French case)
1tanker 3Reefer truckMilk farm
2 Yogurt factory 4 producer
Platform
6retailer Platform8 shop
Consumerrsquos home
5 Reefer truck
7 Reefer truck
9 consumerrsquos car
The 7 steps of the yogurt Supply chain(Greek case)
Milk farm 2 Yogurt factory 4 producer
Platform
6 shopConsumerrsquos home
5 Reefer truck
7 consumerrsquos car
3Reefer truck 1tanker
The two cases (i)
(i) France
Carte V Guilbault
The two cases (ii)
ii) Greece
Step1 Milk sourcing
France Milk is collected from the farms around thefactory
46 goekgIf not enough bought from other towns at a longer distance
119 goekgAverage
62 goekg
Greece (2 cases)Milk is collected from thefarms around the factory No further milk
purchased
Case 1 (Evr) 126goe kgCase 2 (F) 157 goekg
Step 1 Milk collection
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2F Factory
Milk collected
(1000 tyear)128 219 151
Averdist(Km)Aver tontrip
201 215389115
480120
1000 oil lyear
449 210 1796
Goekg yogurt 46 126 157
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 goeyogurt kg French factory Total 32 goeyogurt kg Greek factory Total 33 goeyogurt kg 2nd Greek companyFor the first two activities
Step 2 YogurtProduction
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2
F Factory
Annual production(tyear)
106000
997 48717
Electricity Consumption(MWhyear)Gas (tyear)
1484037100
2433 210
37065
Energy consumption(toe year)
4133 457 3188
Goekg yogurt 39 32 33
Steps 3 5 (amp 7) road transport by reefer vehicles
Consumption is linked to
-Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer 15) Consump Between 08 amp 130 goeYogurtkg journey
Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform
French case study 104 goeYogurtkg Greek case study 83 goeYogurtkg
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
The 7 steps of the yogurt Supply chain(Greek case)
Milk farm 2 Yogurt factory 4 producer
Platform
6 shopConsumerrsquos home
5 Reefer truck
7 consumerrsquos car
3Reefer truck 1tanker
The two cases (i)
(i) France
Carte V Guilbault
The two cases (ii)
ii) Greece
Step1 Milk sourcing
France Milk is collected from the farms around thefactory
46 goekgIf not enough bought from other towns at a longer distance
119 goekgAverage
62 goekg
Greece (2 cases)Milk is collected from thefarms around the factory No further milk
purchased
Case 1 (Evr) 126goe kgCase 2 (F) 157 goekg
Step 1 Milk collection
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2F Factory
Milk collected
(1000 tyear)128 219 151
Averdist(Km)Aver tontrip
201 215389115
480120
1000 oil lyear
449 210 1796
Goekg yogurt 46 126 157
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 goeyogurt kg French factory Total 32 goeyogurt kg Greek factory Total 33 goeyogurt kg 2nd Greek companyFor the first two activities
Step 2 YogurtProduction
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2
F Factory
Annual production(tyear)
106000
997 48717
Electricity Consumption(MWhyear)Gas (tyear)
1484037100
2433 210
37065
Energy consumption(toe year)
4133 457 3188
Goekg yogurt 39 32 33
Steps 3 5 (amp 7) road transport by reefer vehicles
Consumption is linked to
-Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer 15) Consump Between 08 amp 130 goeYogurtkg journey
Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform
French case study 104 goeYogurtkg Greek case study 83 goeYogurtkg
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
The two cases (i)
(i) France
Carte V Guilbault
The two cases (ii)
ii) Greece
Step1 Milk sourcing
France Milk is collected from the farms around thefactory
46 goekgIf not enough bought from other towns at a longer distance
119 goekgAverage
62 goekg
Greece (2 cases)Milk is collected from thefarms around the factory No further milk
purchased
Case 1 (Evr) 126goe kgCase 2 (F) 157 goekg
Step 1 Milk collection
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2F Factory
Milk collected
(1000 tyear)128 219 151
Averdist(Km)Aver tontrip
201 215389115
480120
1000 oil lyear
449 210 1796
Goekg yogurt 46 126 157
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 goeyogurt kg French factory Total 32 goeyogurt kg Greek factory Total 33 goeyogurt kg 2nd Greek companyFor the first two activities
Step 2 YogurtProduction
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2
F Factory
Annual production(tyear)
106000
997 48717
Electricity Consumption(MWhyear)Gas (tyear)
1484037100
2433 210
37065
Energy consumption(toe year)
4133 457 3188
Goekg yogurt 39 32 33
Steps 3 5 (amp 7) road transport by reefer vehicles
Consumption is linked to
-Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer 15) Consump Between 08 amp 130 goeYogurtkg journey
Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform
French case study 104 goeYogurtkg Greek case study 83 goeYogurtkg
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
The two cases (ii)
ii) Greece
Step1 Milk sourcing
France Milk is collected from the farms around thefactory
46 goekgIf not enough bought from other towns at a longer distance
119 goekgAverage
62 goekg
Greece (2 cases)Milk is collected from thefarms around the factory No further milk
purchased
Case 1 (Evr) 126goe kgCase 2 (F) 157 goekg
Step 1 Milk collection
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2F Factory
Milk collected
(1000 tyear)128 219 151
Averdist(Km)Aver tontrip
201 215389115
480120
1000 oil lyear
449 210 1796
Goekg yogurt 46 126 157
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 goeyogurt kg French factory Total 32 goeyogurt kg Greek factory Total 33 goeyogurt kg 2nd Greek companyFor the first two activities
Step 2 YogurtProduction
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2
F Factory
Annual production(tyear)
106000
997 48717
Electricity Consumption(MWhyear)Gas (tyear)
1484037100
2433 210
37065
Energy consumption(toe year)
4133 457 3188
Goekg yogurt 39 32 33
Steps 3 5 (amp 7) road transport by reefer vehicles
Consumption is linked to
-Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer 15) Consump Between 08 amp 130 goeYogurtkg journey
Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform
French case study 104 goeYogurtkg Greek case study 83 goeYogurtkg
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
Step1 Milk sourcing
France Milk is collected from the farms around thefactory
46 goekgIf not enough bought from other towns at a longer distance
119 goekgAverage
62 goekg
Greece (2 cases)Milk is collected from thefarms around the factory No further milk
purchased
Case 1 (Evr) 126goe kgCase 2 (F) 157 goekg
Step 1 Milk collection
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2F Factory
Milk collected
(1000 tyear)128 219 151
Averdist(Km)Aver tontrip
201 215389115
480120
1000 oil lyear
449 210 1796
Goekg yogurt 46 126 157
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 goeyogurt kg French factory Total 32 goeyogurt kg Greek factory Total 33 goeyogurt kg 2nd Greek companyFor the first two activities
Step 2 YogurtProduction
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2
F Factory
Annual production(tyear)
106000
997 48717
Electricity Consumption(MWhyear)Gas (tyear)
1484037100
2433 210
37065
Energy consumption(toe year)
4133 457 3188
Goekg yogurt 39 32 33
Steps 3 5 (amp 7) road transport by reefer vehicles
Consumption is linked to
-Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer 15) Consump Between 08 amp 130 goeYogurtkg journey
Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform
French case study 104 goeYogurtkg Greek case study 83 goeYogurtkg
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
Step 1 Milk collection
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2F Factory
Milk collected
(1000 tyear)128 219 151
Averdist(Km)Aver tontrip
201 215389115
480120
1000 oil lyear
449 210 1796
Goekg yogurt 46 126 157
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 goeyogurt kg French factory Total 32 goeyogurt kg Greek factory Total 33 goeyogurt kg 2nd Greek companyFor the first two activities
Step 2 YogurtProduction
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2
F Factory
Annual production(tyear)
106000
997 48717
Electricity Consumption(MWhyear)Gas (tyear)
1484037100
2433 210
37065
Energy consumption(toe year)
4133 457 3188
Goekg yogurt 39 32 33
Steps 3 5 (amp 7) road transport by reefer vehicles
Consumption is linked to
-Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer 15) Consump Between 08 amp 130 goeYogurtkg journey
Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform
French case study 104 goeYogurtkg Greek case study 83 goeYogurtkg
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
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 goeyogurt kg French factory Total 32 goeyogurt kg Greek factory Total 33 goeyogurt kg 2nd Greek companyFor the first two activities
Step 2 YogurtProduction
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2
F Factory
Annual production(tyear)
106000
997 48717
Electricity Consumption(MWhyear)Gas (tyear)
1484037100
2433 210
37065
Energy consumption(toe year)
4133 457 3188
Goekg yogurt 39 32 33
Steps 3 5 (amp 7) road transport by reefer vehicles
Consumption is linked to
-Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer 15) Consump Between 08 amp 130 goeYogurtkg journey
Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform
French case study 104 goeYogurtkg Greek case study 83 goeYogurtkg
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
Step 2 YogurtProduction
FranceFactory
Greece1
Evrofarma
Greece 2
F Factory
Annual production(tyear)
106000
997 48717
Electricity Consumption(MWhyear)Gas (tyear)
1484037100
2433 210
37065
Energy consumption(toe year)
4133 457 3188
Goekg yogurt 39 32 33
Steps 3 5 (amp 7) road transport by reefer vehicles
Consumption is linked to
-Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer 15) Consump Between 08 amp 130 goeYogurtkg journey
Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform
French case study 104 goeYogurtkg Greek case study 83 goeYogurtkg
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
Steps 3 5 (amp 7) road transport by reefer vehicles
Consumption is linked to
-Distance -Vehicle type -Load factor -Duration of reefer(reefer 15) Consump Between 08 amp 130 goeYogurtkg journey
Road transport by reefer vehicles to distribution platform
French case study 104 goeYogurtkg Greek case study 83 goeYogurtkg
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
Step 3 Yogurttransportation
FranceFactory
Greece
Kmtrip 369 552
net weight trip (t) 115 225
literston 123 98
Goekg yogurt 104 83
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
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 ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
Further Greek survey and other conclusions (ii)
Contribution of this research
Optimisation of the supply services in the region ofThrace 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 companiesrsquo logistical choices
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
French survey next steps
As regards the French survey and the steps of platforms and
shopshellip
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
Step 4 (amp 6) Platforms
The energy consumption in the platforms is linked to Platform area
Activities(fresh products amp design hellip
Operated tonnage Demand and capacity(Tonnes year)
00
50
100
0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000
superficie frais (m2)
gep
kg
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
Step 8 (or 6) the shops
Energy consumption in the shop = (general consumption + preacutesentoir) volume sold for average product 23 - 123
gepkg for yogurt in the shop 26-51
gepkg E-commerce 112 gepkg
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
Step 9 consumer journey
Average clientrsquo consumption is linked to
- of the clients in a car -Distance (05 to 10 km)1048708 -Average basket weight (2 to 15 kg)1048708 These 3 variables are linked
to the shop area (m2) and zone density 1 ndash 71 goe kg yogurt (France)
0
30
60
10 100 1000 10000 100000m2
gep
kg
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
if the shoprsquos 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
0
50
100
150
200
Hyper Super Proxi E-com g
ep
kg
factory Logistics shop client
French Survey conclusions (I)
Energy consumptionyogurtkg according to distribution type
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
In relation to energy graph
Electricity counts much less (shop platform)
The chains scale is comparable 0
200
400
600
Hyper Super Proxi E comm
geqC
O2
kg factory Logistics shop client
GHG emission yogurtkg according to distribution type
French survey conclusions (II)
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki
Overall conclusions
Attempting international conclusionsis helpful although can be difficult to implement
Howeverrespective 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 attentionFMikiki