“Is Energy That Different from Labor?” Similarity in Determinants of Intensity for Auto Assembly Plants

This paper addresses the question “Is energy that different from labor?” from the perspective of efficiency. It presents a novel statistical analysis for the auto assembly industry in North America to examine the determinants of relative energy intensity, and contrasts this with a similar analysis o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Amir Abolhassani, Gale Boyd, Majid Jaridi, Bhaskaran Gopalakrishnan, James Harner
Formato: Artículo
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI AG 2023-02-01
Colección:Energies
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/4/1776
_version_ 1827757722478575616
author Amir Abolhassani
Gale Boyd
Majid Jaridi
Bhaskaran Gopalakrishnan
James Harner
author_facet Amir Abolhassani
Gale Boyd
Majid Jaridi
Bhaskaran Gopalakrishnan
James Harner
author_sort Amir Abolhassani
collection DOAJ
description This paper addresses the question “Is energy that different from labor?” from the perspective of efficiency. It presents a novel statistical analysis for the auto assembly industry in North America to examine the determinants of relative energy intensity, and contrasts this with a similar analysis of the determinants of another important factor of production, labor intensity. The data used combine two non-public sources of data previously used to separately study key performance indicators (KPIs) for energy and labor intensity. The study found these two KPIs are statistically correlated (the correlation coefficient is 0.67) and the relationship is one-to-one. The paper identifies 11 factors that may influence both energy and labor intensity KPIs. The study then contrasts which of the empirical factors the two KPIs’ share and how they differ. Two novel statistical methods, Huber estimators and Multiple M-estimators, combined with regularized algorithms, are identified as the preferred methods for robust statistical models to estimate energy intensity. Based on our analysis, the underlying determinants of energy efficiency and labor productivity are quite similar. This implies that strategies to improve energy may have spillover benefits to labor, and vice versa. The study shows vehicle variety, car model types, and launch of a new vehicle penalize both energy and labor intensity, while flexible manufacturing, production volume, and year of production improve both energy and labor intensity. In addition, the study found that the plants that produce small cars are more energy-efficient and productive compared to plants that produce large vehicles. Moreover, in a given functional unit, i.e., on a per-unit basis, Japanese plants are more energy-efficient and productive compared to American plants. Plant managers can use the proposed data-driven approach to make the right decisions about the energy efficiency targets and improve plants’ energy efficiency up to 38% using hybrid regression methods, mathematical modeling, plants’ resources, and constraints.
first_indexed 2024-03-11T08:53:17Z
format Article
id doaj.art-de138140d4624492b9236e0f7d188cee
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1996-1073
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-11T08:53:17Z
publishDate 2023-02-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series Energies
spelling doaj.art-de138140d4624492b9236e0f7d188cee2023-11-16T20:17:39ZengMDPI AGEnergies1996-10732023-02-01164177610.3390/en16041776“Is Energy That Different from Labor?” Similarity in Determinants of Intensity for Auto Assembly PlantsAmir Abolhassani0Gale Boyd1Majid Jaridi2Bhaskaran Gopalakrishnan3James Harner4Social Science Research Institute & Department of Economics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USASocial Science Research Institute & Department of Economics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USAIndustrial and Management Systems Engineering Department, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506, USAIndustrial and Management Systems Engineering Department, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506, USADepartment of Statistics, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506, USAThis paper addresses the question “Is energy that different from labor?” from the perspective of efficiency. It presents a novel statistical analysis for the auto assembly industry in North America to examine the determinants of relative energy intensity, and contrasts this with a similar analysis of the determinants of another important factor of production, labor intensity. The data used combine two non-public sources of data previously used to separately study key performance indicators (KPIs) for energy and labor intensity. The study found these two KPIs are statistically correlated (the correlation coefficient is 0.67) and the relationship is one-to-one. The paper identifies 11 factors that may influence both energy and labor intensity KPIs. The study then contrasts which of the empirical factors the two KPIs’ share and how they differ. Two novel statistical methods, Huber estimators and Multiple M-estimators, combined with regularized algorithms, are identified as the preferred methods for robust statistical models to estimate energy intensity. Based on our analysis, the underlying determinants of energy efficiency and labor productivity are quite similar. This implies that strategies to improve energy may have spillover benefits to labor, and vice versa. The study shows vehicle variety, car model types, and launch of a new vehicle penalize both energy and labor intensity, while flexible manufacturing, production volume, and year of production improve both energy and labor intensity. In addition, the study found that the plants that produce small cars are more energy-efficient and productive compared to plants that produce large vehicles. Moreover, in a given functional unit, i.e., on a per-unit basis, Japanese plants are more energy-efficient and productive compared to American plants. Plant managers can use the proposed data-driven approach to make the right decisions about the energy efficiency targets and improve plants’ energy efficiency up to 38% using hybrid regression methods, mathematical modeling, plants’ resources, and constraints.https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/4/1776energy-efficient manufacturingproductivityunit energy intensityautomotive industry
spellingShingle Amir Abolhassani
Gale Boyd
Majid Jaridi
Bhaskaran Gopalakrishnan
James Harner
“Is Energy That Different from Labor?” Similarity in Determinants of Intensity for Auto Assembly Plants
Energies
energy-efficient manufacturing
productivity
unit energy intensity
automotive industry
title “Is Energy That Different from Labor?” Similarity in Determinants of Intensity for Auto Assembly Plants
title_full “Is Energy That Different from Labor?” Similarity in Determinants of Intensity for Auto Assembly Plants
title_fullStr “Is Energy That Different from Labor?” Similarity in Determinants of Intensity for Auto Assembly Plants
title_full_unstemmed “Is Energy That Different from Labor?” Similarity in Determinants of Intensity for Auto Assembly Plants
title_short “Is Energy That Different from Labor?” Similarity in Determinants of Intensity for Auto Assembly Plants
title_sort is energy that different from labor similarity in determinants of intensity for auto assembly plants
topic energy-efficient manufacturing
productivity
unit energy intensity
automotive industry
url https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/4/1776
work_keys_str_mv AT amirabolhassani isenergythatdifferentfromlaborsimilarityindeterminantsofintensityforautoassemblyplants
AT galeboyd isenergythatdifferentfromlaborsimilarityindeterminantsofintensityforautoassemblyplants
AT majidjaridi isenergythatdifferentfromlaborsimilarityindeterminantsofintensityforautoassemblyplants
AT bhaskarangopalakrishnan isenergythatdifferentfromlaborsimilarityindeterminantsofintensityforautoassemblyplants
AT jamesharner isenergythatdifferentfromlaborsimilarityindeterminantsofintensityforautoassemblyplants