Next Article in Journal
MPPT Control Algorithm Based on Particle Swarm Optimization and Adaptive Linear Active Disturbance Rejection Control
Next Article in Special Issue
Analysis of Residential Buildings in Poland for Potential Energy Renovation toward Zero-Emission Construction
Previous Article in Journal
Feasibility of Photovoltaic Module Single-Diode Model Fitting to the Current–Voltage Curves Measured in the Vicinity of the Maximum Power Point for Online Condition Monitoring Purposes
Previous Article in Special Issue
Heat Pump Installation in Public Buildings: Savings and Environmental Benefits in Underserved Rural Areas
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Challenges of Energy Management in the Food Industry in Poland in the Context of the Objectives of the European Green Deal and the “Farm to Fork” Strategy

1
Department of Agribusiness and Bioeconomy, Institute of Agricultural and Food Economics National Research Institute, 00-002 Warsaw, Poland
2
Department of Agricultural Markets and Quantitative Methods, Institute of Agricultural and Food Economics National Research Institute, 00-002 Warsaw, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Submission received: 28 October 2022 / Revised: 24 November 2022 / Accepted: 28 November 2022 / Published: 30 November 2022

Abstract

:
The Common Agricultural Policy defines the framework directions for the structural changes of the agri-food sector until 2030. The main reason for the actions is a fundamental change in the European Union’s approach to environmental protection issues and the dynamically changing conditions on the market for energy and agricultural raw materials. The European Green Deal, the key element of which is the “Farm to Fork” strategy, is the expression of the announced changes. The assumption of the documents is the long-term restructuring and modernization of the EU economy, which will be characterized, among others, by a closed cycle, low greenhouse gas emissions, and food and energy security. The challenges and the current situation in the markets of energy carriers are of significance in the activities of the food industry, which shows a high demand for energy. The aim of the article is to assess the level of consumption and energy efficiency of food industry enterprises in Poland, to identify challenges related to energy management and to formulate conclusions and recommendations in the field of changes adapting to the new conditions. The research results indicate that many positive changes took place in the energy economy of Polish food industry enterprises, among others, as a result of the implemented investments, the energy consumption of production, CO2 emissions and the amount of generated waste decreased. Due to unfavorable external conditions, it is necessary, however, to further improve the energy efficiency of enterprises, so that they can maintain cost competitiveness and meet the growing requirements in the field of environmental protection.

1. Introduction

Ensuring energy security has become a significant issue in the 21st century, mainly due to the growing contradiction between the current model for the development of the food production sector in highly developed countries and the challenges faced in the world economy, caused by the forecast increase in the number of people [1] and worsening limitations on natural resources with progressive long-term climate change. This situation has been aggravated recently by unfavorable socio-economic conditions, including the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. Guaranteeing broadly understood access to food in a situation of energy and water shortages, exacerbated by unfavorable environmental and climatic conditions, is a growing challenge both on a global, European and national scale. The issue also applies to Poland, being a recognized producer and exporter of food products.
The “Farm to Fork” strategy, which is an element of the European Green Deal dedicated to the agri-food sector, is to support the provision of affordable and sustainable food, combating climate change, protecting the environment and preserving biodiversity, and increasing the share of ecological agriculture. The strategy emphasizes the need for moving to more sustainable food systems, covering all links in the food chain [2]. The essence of the proposed actions consists of departing from the principle of maximizing profits in favor of the rational use of resources and limiting the negative externalities of economic activity, e.g., implementation of the circular economy model, thanks to which energy and water consumption, and air and soil pollution will decrease, and waste will become raw materials in subsequent production processes [3,4].
The main goal and original contribution of the article is to identify challenges related to energy management in the food industry in Poland, to assess the level of consumption and energy efficiency of industries in the sector, and to formulate conclusions and recommendations regarding changes aimed at adapting to new conditions. This study is also intended to fill the research gap observed in the current state of knowledge on energy management in EU countries, including Poland, from the perspective of the European Green Deal and the “Farm to Fork” strategy dedicated to the agri-food sector. In addition, although the conducted analysis focuses on Poland, the formulated conclusions can be applied to most developed EU countries. This is due to the fact that the Polish food industry is among European leaders and has strong multi-directional links with the EU market.
The beginning of the study discusses the research methods and empirical data. The next section presents the assumptions and goals of the “Farm to Fork” strategy, with particular emphasis on activities related to the food industry. The most important issues regarding energy management are discussed in theoretical terms in the next section. Then, the current market conditions of the energy economy are characterized with reference to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the armed conflict in Ukraine and adverse climate changes. The further part of the study concerns the socio-economic importance of the food industry, i.e., both its role in the national economy, trade and functions in the food chain. The energy economy in the food industry in Poland is described in detail in the last section, emphasizing at the same time that food production is strongly dependent on energy production. Among other things, consumption of energy resources, gas emissions and the course of modernization processes in energy management in the Polish food industry, are presented. High diversification of energy consumption indicators between particular sectors is highlighted.
The study ends with a summary and conclusions, in which an attempt was made to assess the opportunities and challenges related to the implementation of the “Farm to Fork” strategy in the food industry in Poland with reference to ensuring energy security. It was indicated that the research results have both application and scientific importance useful in further research and projects.

2. Materials and Methods

Descriptive and comparative statistics methods were used in the research [5,6]. The assessment of the amount of energy consumed and energy consumption in the Polish food industry was carried out using a statistical comparative analysis. The average annual dynamics of changes in energy consumption and CO2 emissions (r) was determined using the compound percentage Formula (1) [7,8,9,10]. The assessment of the volatility tendencies of world natural gas prices and domestic electricity prices was carried out using the exponential regression analysis, the b parameter of which also enables the assessment of their average monthly dynamics (2) [6].
K n = K n 0 ( 1 + r 100 ) n 1 r = ( K n K n 0 n 1 1 ) · 100
where:
  • Kn0—value of the feature in the initial period (in the first year n0);
  • Kn—value of the feature in the end period (in year n);
  • r—growth rate–average annual growth rate in %.
y = a e b x
where:
  • y—dependent variable (domestic selling and export prices);
  • x—explanatory variable (world prices);
  • a—free parameter;
  • b—structural parameter.
The set of empirical data consisted of published and unpublished data of Statistics Poland on energy consumption, waste generation and energy consumption of production as well as material and energy costs in the food industry in Poland. The research also used annual data on energy consumption and CO2 emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels published in the reports of the National Center for Emissions Management [11]. The time range of Statistics Poland and National Center for Emissions Management data covered the years 2004–2020 on an annual basis. Empirical data on world natural gas prices and domestic electricity prices included monthly quotations of the World Bank [12] and the Polish Power Exchange [13] in the years 2021–2022. Analyses conducted on the basis of empirical data were supplemented with the literature on the subject [14].

3. Assumptions and Goals of the “From to Fork” Strategy

Undertaking even greater efforts to protect the environment and climate than ever before is one of the most important challenges for the European Union (EU), deserving special attention in the context of growing global competitive pressure. To meet this challenge, the European Commission (EC) in 2019 developed a communication on the European Green Deal [15]. This communication aims at initiating global activities that are to cause achieving economic goals, with a much stronger respect for pro-environmental and pro-climate practices. It is worthwhile obliging the European Commission to solve the issues related to the natural environment and climate that were considered the most important from the point of view of society’s needs.
The goal of the European Green Deal is to build a modern, resource-efficient and competitive economy that will achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions in 2050, and economic growth will take into account an efficient use of natural resources. Jointly implemented activities are to shift the European economy to a sustainable path, and the transformation is to affect all sectors of the economy, including the agri-food sector as well as regions and inhabitants.
Implementation of the European Green Deal requires a number of measures to improve the condition of the natural environment and stabilize the climate through the development of effective pan-European measures. The communication presents an initial roadmap of the main policies needed to achieve the European Green Deal. From the point of view of the agri-food sector, a particularly significant area of action concerns strengthening the current greening of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), preserving and protecting biodiversity and better adapting to the effects of progressive climate change. As stressed by F. Timmermans [16]: “At the heart of the Green Deal the Biodiversity and “Farm to Fork” strategies point to a new and better balance of nature, food systems and biodiversity to protect the health and well-being of citizens while increasing the EU’s competitiveness and resilience. The strategies are a key part of the great transformation we are just beginning”.
The “Farm to Fork” strategy [2] is a comprehensive program for the modernization of the agri-food sector, the main goal of which is to build a sustainable food chain that will have an impact on producers, consumers, and the climate and the environment. The strategy defines ambitious specific objectives that relate to sustainable agricultural production and food processing, management of natural resources and climate protection, sustainable supply chain and fair distribution of profits among market participants, a guarantee of food security, sustainable consumption and reduction of food waste. They concern:
  • Sustainable food production;
  • Food security;
  • Promotion of sustainable food consumption, which will positively affect the health of consumers and the natural environment by changing eating habits;
  • Reducing food waste;
  • Stimulating sustainable practices in food processing, wholesale and retail, hospitality and catering;
  • Combating food adulteration in the food supply chain;
  • Supporting modernization of agriculture and the food industry.
The “Farm to Fork” strategy applies to all actors in the food chain that have undergone or will be transformed towards sustainable practices, and it assumes that each of them should contribute to the process of this transformation. The entities operating in all cells contribute to air, soil and water pollution, as well as greenhouse gas emissions, and also exert a great influence on biodiversity. In addition, even though it is pointed out that farmers should play a key role in achieving the sustainability of the food chain, in fact food processors, retailers and catering service providers shape the food market and influence consumers’ nutritional choices. The food industry as a whole, playing a significant role in the EU economy, has a direct impact on the environment and climate change. For this reason, it is important that food processing provides healthy, sustainable, affordable food while reducing the overall environmental footprint of food systems. This includes activities such as [2]: changing the composition of food products in line with the guidelines of a healthy and balanced diet; promoting sustainable and socially responsible production methods and closed-loop business models; reducing the environmental footprint and energy consumption by increasing energy efficiency; introducing a sustainable bio-economy; adapting marketing and advertising strategies to the needs of sustainable food systems; widespread use of innovative and sustainable packaging made of environmentally friendly materials, reusable and recyclable, reducing counterfeiting and waste food.
The “Farm to Fork” strategy is a program that formulates goals and presents their implementation in a general manner. The document, however, does not contain detailed guidelines for the implementation of specific goals, but the European Commission has announced the development of appropriate legal regulations. No guidelines regarding financial support results from the fact that at the time of announcing the strategy, the level and structure of CAP expenditure were not known. However, in line with the political agreement on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021–2027 and the new aid fund Next Generation EU, a significant part of the funds is to be allocated to the goals related to the green transformation of food systems. In the period 2021–2027, Poland is to receive EUR 31.2 billion from the CAP budget. Most of the funds are to be allocated to direct payments [17], and some of them to eco-schemes, which will be important for the implementation of the first objective of the strategy [18]. At the same time, greater use of the Cohesion Policy funds in the food sector is planned. A significant part of the funds (37%) of the National Reconstruction Plan is also to be dedicated to activities strictly devoted to climate protection [19]. The funds allocated to digitization will also support the achievement of the goals assumed in the “Farm to Fork” strategy. However, it is not known what will be the interest of potential beneficiaries in the implementation of new environmental and green and digital transformation activities in the EU. Therefore, at this stage, assessing the assumptions and the possibilities of implementing the strategy in the domestic agri-food sector may take the form of theoretical considerations, based on empirical premises [20].

4. Energy Management–Theoretical Approach

Energy management in enterprises is becoming an increasingly important research issue in economic sciences, as energy is a key factor determining production and service activities [21]. The main reason for the growing interest in this issue is the economic, environmental and social consequences of the efficient use of energy. The energy crisis that occurred in the 1970s had a global character and made producers and consumers aware of the real problem of depletion of energy resources and the need for rational energy management. Therefore, these issues have become the subject of economic considerations at the international and national levels [22]. This is confirmed by UN [23] and EU [15] strategic documents, whose main objective is to ensure sustainable development of economies. In the linear economy model, economic growth is strictly dependent on the use of non-renewable natural resources, including energy resources. The dynamics of economic development of individual countries and regions of the world, which is reflected in the level of GDP, is strongly correlated with energy consumption in production and consumption [24]. For this reason, the strategic goal of sustainable development is the implementation of a circular economy, the key element of which is effective energy management [25].
Energy management issues in economic sciences concern a relatively new issue, which is very complex in its matter, as it is related to both energy production and consumption. In the literature, energy management is often defined as the management of energy consumption or the systematic application of management to improve the energy efficiency of the entity. In scientific publications, issues related to energy management are defined by numerous categories that should be treated as close synonyms (e.g., “optimization and rationalization of energy consumption”) [26]. The issue of energy production and consumption in enterprises is becoming an increasingly important element of organizational management for economic and image reasons. In the area of modern energy management, two models should be distinguished, which should be implemented complementarily. The first model is based on the search for new and renewable energy sources. The second model, which should be implemented obligatorily in all organizations, focuses on improving efficiency, rationalization and optimization of energy consumption (e.g., reducing energy intensity). Energy management models are determined by a wide spectrum of factors that can be aggregated into the following groups: political [27] (e.g., legal regulations), socio-economic [28] (e.g., number of working days, energy prices), technological [29], meteorological [30] and climatic [31]. Large industrial and service enterprises implement formalized energy management systems (ISO 50001:2012) [32] and environmental management systems (ISO 14,001 [33], EMAS [34]), but in smaller entities the implementation of such systems remains economically and organizationally unjustified. Therefore, small and medium-sized enterprises should implement individual solutions on their own to improve the efficiency of energy management.

5. Market Conditions of the Energy Economy

In the years 2020–2022, market conditions in the global, EU and national energy sector were characterized by high dynamics of changes and, as a result, by increasing production and trade risk, which determined the situation in all sectors of the economy. The main determining factors were the socio-economic impacts:
  • The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus;
  • The armed conflict in Ukraine;
  • Long-term unfavorable climate changes.
The COVID-19 pandemic caused a global humanitarian crisis in 2020–2021, resulting in negative socio-economic implications, including being the main macroeconomic and market factor affecting the energy sector. The cyclical course of the pandemic was illustrated by the variable number of infections and the need for periodic application of restrictive preventive measures. The measures resulted in a significant reduction in economic activity on both the demand and supply of the market. The negative impact of the pandemic on the economy is illustrated by the global recession. According to the World Bank, the global GDP in 2020 decreased by 3.4%, as compared to 2019, including in the United States by 3.6% and in the EU by 6.0%. In the EU, a very deep recession was recorded by those Member States that showed a large share of the HoReCa sector in the GDP structure: Spain (−10.8%), Italy (−8.9%) and France (−7.9%) [35]. In Poland, GDP decreased relatively slightly (−2.0%) [36].
In 2021, the global economy returned to its growth path with the implementation of vaccination programs and the lifting of preventive measures. World GDP increased by 5.8%, including in the U.S. by 5.7%, China by 8.1% and the EU by 5.4%. The Polish economy also showed high dynamics of development, as GDP was 5.7% higher than in 2020. High dynamics of economic growth was characterized by EU Member States which experienced a deep recession in 2020 (France, Italy) [35]. However, economic development was accompanied by inflationary factors, the source of which in many countries were rising prices of energy and agricultural commodities. In 2021, the Consumer Price Index in the global economy amounted to 3.4%, as compared to 1.9% the year before. In the EU and the U.S., inflation was 2.6% and 4.7%, respectively, but only 1.0% in China. In Poland, inflation in December 2021 as compared to December 2020 was 8.6%, but in annual terms it reached 5.1% [37].
In 2022, market conditions in the energy sector underwent further complications, which were due to Russia’s armed aggression against Ukraine. The political aspect of hostilities primarily concerned the sanctions that had been imposed on Russia and Belarus. The economic effects of the sanctions are visible primarily in the markets for energy and agricultural resources, of which Russia and Ukraine are large exporters [38]. The limited supply of energy raw materials resulted in a tense situation in energy balances in many regions of the world and a dynamic increase in prices, which strengthened inflationary impulses in the global, EU and national economy. According to the estimates of the International Monetary Fund, in 2022, inflation in the world economy will increase to 8.8%, as compared to 4.1% a year ago [39]. In Poland, according to Statistics Poland, inflation from January–September 2022 amounted to 12.8% compared to the corresponding period in 2021, but in September prices were 16.1% higher than in the previous year [40]. The tense supply-and-demand situation in energy balances and very high prices mean that energy security is at risk in many countries. According to data from the World Bank, world prices of natural gas showed an upward trend in the years 2021–2022, but their dynamic increase occurred in the summer of 2022, when supplies from Russia were limited. A statistical analysis showed that between 2021 and 2022, world natural gas prices increased on average by 11.8% per month, reaching a record level in August 2022 (USD 70/MMBTU). Similar trends were shown by domestic electricity prices on the Polish Power Exchange, which in the period under review increased by 7.5% per month and also reached a record level in August 2022 (PLN 1391/MWh) (Figure 1).
In most EU countries, including Poland, not only very high prices of energy carriers are a serious economic problem, but also their availability. In the domestic economy, this mainly concerns the supply of natural gas and hard coal, used to generate heat and electricity. The energy crisis, which is a consequence of the war in Ukraine, is a huge challenge for the national economy, including the food industry. Food-producing companies will have to carry out deep adaptation processes that will guarantee energy security, but at the same time they will enable the achievement of the goals set out in the European Green Deal and the “Farm to Fork” strategy. Diversification of the sources of energy used and further improvement of the production energy consumption indicators should be, first of all, the effect of modernization and innovative investments. Improved energy efficiency is necessary not only due to the rising prices of energy carriers, but also due to the growing prices of CO2 emission allowances (ETS) [41], which increased from EUR 8.57 to EUR 89.74 in the years 2012–2022 EUR/t [42]. Reduced costs related to energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions will be an important condition for maintaining the competitiveness of the domestic food industry.

6. Socio-Economic Significance of the Food Industry in Poland

The food industry is one of the key links in a sustainable food chain. Food products are produced as a result of cooperation of all entities in the chain, but it is the food industry that naturally acts as an integrator of the food production process, connecting the remaining cells, i.e., the raw material base in agriculture and the distribution of agri-food products. The leading position of the food industry in the food chain is also due to its primary function of creating added value by processing agricultural raw materials in order to make them consumer or commercially usable. In other words, the food industry determines the increase in demand for agricultural raw materials, develops the market for processed products and affects food consumption. Through introducing products to the market, the food industry creates models of food consumption and at the same time meets the growing demands of consumers, which are clearly unified as a result of globalization processes [43]. Specificity of food products makes them absolutely necessary for the existence of consumers, which is well-illustrated by the considerations of A. Maslow in the hierarchy of needs [44] and E. Engel’s ones concerning the level and structure of household expenses [45]. Therefore, food security is a key element of the socio-economic policy of most countries. In the EU, food security is an important goal of the “Farm to Fork” strategy, as in many Member States, including Poland, food has a large share in the structure of consumer spending (approx. 28%) [46]. In addition to food production, the food industry also produces numerous products that are intended for non-food purposes, including products used for energy purposes (e.g., bioethanol, methyl esters).
The food industry in Poland is one of the important sectors of the economy, as in 2020 its share in global production and in GDP was 6.2 and 2.7%, respectively. The share of the food industry in the total industrial production sold remains at a stable level of approx. 20.0%. Structural and ownership transformations caused the number of food industry enterprises to decrease by 27.4% to 2086 in the years 2004–2020, but they generated many jobs, as employment increased by 3.7% to 333.1 thousand people. The share of the food industry in the number of employees in Poland is relatively high and amounts to approx. 4–5%. The profound restructuring and modernization changes that had been experienced by food enterprises resulted in a significant improvement in the efficiency of management. In the years 2004–2020, the total value of investment outlays in current prices amounted to PLN 142.8 billion and significantly exceeded the depreciation cost, which proves the absolute development of fixed assets [47]. The changes are mainly confirmed by the concentration of the entity structure and the growing economies of scale, as the value of production in constant prices per enterprise increased in this period by two and a half times. Similar trends concerned labor productivity and financial result, also expressed in constant prices, which increased by 80.3 and 87.5%, respectively. The increase in the productivity of inputs is also reflected in the relatively high return on equity (ROE), which was a significant incentive for investors (Table 1).
The agri-food sector also plays an important role in Poland’s foreign trade. In the years 2004–2020, foreign trade in agri-food products was characterized by high dynamics of turnover and a systematic increase in the positive balance from USD 1.0 to 14.1 billion. The commodity structure of agri-food trade is dominated by processed products, which constitute 80–90% in exports, and approx. 70% in imports. The positive trade balance with food industry products in the analyzed period increased from USD 1.6 to 17.0 billion and compensated for the growing deficit in trade in agricultural raw materials from USD 0.6 to 2.9 billion (Figure 2). The trade surplus in agri-food products positively influences the total foreign trade balance and contributes to a large extent to a reduction in the deficit, and in some years even to the generation of the total trade surplus of Poland. The agri-food sector is one of the few branches of the national economy that systematically obtains a positive balance in foreign trade. This is also confirmed by the growing share of exports of agricultural products and food in total exports from 9 to 13%, and in imports from 6 to 9%. Trade exchange enables the food industry to effectively use modern production potential, integrate with international markets and positively affect the economic situation in many related industries.
The food industry in Poland is therefore one of the most important sectors of the economy. It is the largest recipient of agricultural raw materials and at the same time the main supplier of food for wholesale and retail trade, being the leading link in the food chain. Industrial enterprises integrate entities involved in the entire process of “Farm to Fork” food production. The technological level of the food industry in Poland is high; in terms of modernity, it is among European leaders, which affects the health safety of food and the growing interest in it in the world. The food industry is one of the few sectors of the economy with a positive balance of trade. Results of foreign trade position the Polish food industry among the most important producers and exporters of food in the international arena.
The food industry is distinguished by its ability to adapt to changing market, macroeconomic and global conditions. This is the result of the influence of many factors, among which these deserve special emphasis [50]: the rapid construction of market mechanisms and competition, creating the basis for the development of the domestic market, export growth and modernization of the production potential, as well as integration with the EU, resulting in gaining free access to the large and prosperous European market. They are factors that influence the functioning of the Polish food industry and involve it in global processes, creating both opportunities and challenges. Until then, they strengthened this sector and revealed the competitive advantages of Polish producers on the European and global market. At the same time, however, the processes of globalization and geopolitical conditions create restrictions on the growth of this sector, which may result in a weakening of the dynamics of development. They certainly include the growing production and commercial risk in the energy resources market.

7. Energy Management in the Polish Food Industry

In the years 2004–2020, the food industry in Poland underwent very profound ownership, restructuring and modernization changes [51,52]. The main purpose of the changes was to adapt production to the changing demand conditions in the country and abroad, as well as to changing market regulations in the EU, including in the area of energy management (e.g., development of the biofuel sector) [53]. Modern and effective energy management is also an important element of cost competitiveness, especially in the international market due to the large share of exports in the sales structure of the food industry [54,55].
The food industry in Poland, like other branches of industry, shows a high demand for energy, and this is determined by:
  • Large mass of processed raw materials and materials, including mainly domestic and imported agricultural raw materials, food preservatives, water and packaging;
  • Production technology that requires the use of high and low temperatures, high pressure, as well as automated processes;
  • Activities related to the distribution of products, including storage and transport in conditions that guarantee food health safety for consumers [56].
In the analyzed period, there were significant positive changes in the energy economy of the food industry, which mainly concerned the reduction of the level of energy consumption from the combustion of energy resources. The main purpose of the transformations in plants was to improve energy consumption, technical efficiency of management and reduction of operating costs, being the basis for building sustainable competitive advantages [57]. Protection of the natural environment and climate was also an important goal of the discussed adaptation processes, as lower amounts of waste, lower emissions of greenhouse gases and dust (e.g., PM10) result in lower fees for ETS allowances. The achievement of the assumed goals related to energy management was possible thanks to large investments, the total value of which in the years 2004–2020 amounted to approx. PLN 142.8 billion in current prices [58]. Enterprises invested mainly in modern and energy-saving production technologies, heating and cooling systems, as well as in means of transport and buildings [47].
As a result of the implemented modernization processes, the consumption of energy from fuel combustion in the food industry, according to the National Center for Emissions Management data, decreased in the years 2004–2020 by 6.7% to 60,768.9 TJ, and its average annual dynamics amounted to −0.4%. Similar trends are confirmed by Statistics Poland data, showing a decrease in total energy consumption by 5.3% to 87,480 TJ. Combustion of energy resources was compensated by the growing consumption of electricity, which, according to Statistics Poland, increased by 72.0% to 7450 GWh [58]. The share of the food industry in the consumption of energy from fuel combustion in the entire industry decreased from 9.8 to 8.7% and increased from 10.2 to 13.7% in the consumption of electricity. Increased demand for electricity was not only a consequence of an increase in the processing potential of enterprises, but also of the growing automation of technology, which is reflected in the substitution of labor with fixed capital [59]. In the context of the growing demand for electricity in the food industry, it should be mentioned that in some industries large plants have combined heat and power (CHP) installations [60] for generating electricity from the combustion of solid and gaseous fuels (e.g., sugar industry, dairy). Possible surpluses of produced energy are sold to power grids.
In the years 2004–2020, major changes concerned the use of individual energy resources. According to the National Center for Emissions Management, consumption of energy generated from solid fuels decreased by 39.2% to 22,749.5 TJ, as many plants closed hard coal and coke-fired boiler houses. The consumption of energy from liquid fuels decreased by 77.5% to 2498.4 TJ, mainly due to major changes in logistics. Many enterprises have given up their own means of transport and use services of transport companies. Efficient logistics models and vehicles with energy-saving drive units (e.g., hybrid) are also used in transport. The second reason for the decrease in the consumption of liquid fuels was also the resignation of boiler houses using mazout, replaced with natural gas and biomass. Natural gas has become the primary energy carrier in the food industry, as its consumption more than doubled to 34,270.2 TJ, and the average annual consumption dynamics amounted to 4.8%. The EU policy on renewable energy sources promotes the use of biomass, especially in biogas plants [61]. As a result, plants have invested in both biogas plants with CHP systems and biomass-fired boiler houses (e.g., straw, pulp, wood waste). Due to that, consumption of energy from biomass combustion in the Polish food industry increased almost threefold to 1250.8 TJ (Table 2).
In the analyzed period, very large changes took place in the structure of the use of individual energy resources. The share of gas in energy production in the food industry increased from 24.8 to 56.4%, and biomass from 0.7 to 2.1%. The share of solid and liquid fuels in energy consumption decreased from 57.4% to 37.6% and from 17.1% to 4.1%, respectively (Figure 3).
Positive modernization processes in the energy management of the food industry are confirmed by large changes in the level and structure of CO2 emissions and waste. According to the National Center for Emissions Management, in the years 2004–2020, total CO2 emissions from the combustion of energy resources in the food industry decreased by 17.5% to 4340.9 Kt, which was caused by a significantly greater decrease in the consumption of solid and liquid fuels than the increase in the use of gaseous fuels and biomass. CO2 emissions from solid fuel combustion decreased by 39.3% to 2158.4 Kt, and from liquid fuels by 78.5% to 175.5 Kt. Even though emissions from gas and biomass combustion more than doubled, they amounted to 1901.4 and 105.6 Kt, respectively (Table 2).
A significant reduction in dust emissions and waste generation was also a positive effect of the adaptation processes in the area of energy management in enterprises. According to Statistics Poland, in the years 2004–2020 dust emissions decreased from 7.5 thousand to 1.5 thousand tons, including dust emissions from fuel combustion, from 7.0 to 0.9 thousand tons. Total amount of waste generated in the food industry decreased from 9.0 to 2.4 million tons, which was mainly due to lower amounts of ashes from the combustion of hard coal and coke [61].
Positive modernization changes in the energy economy in the Polish food industry are also illustrated by changes in the values of energy consumption indicators for production and electricity consumption per employee. Energy intensity at the macro- and meso-economic (industry) level is defined as inputs of energy carriers per production unit [62,63]. The energy consumption of production in mathematical terms is the opposite of its technical efficiency, which is defined by G. Debreu and M.J. Farella as the relation of effects (outputs) to inputs (3) [64,65]. Energy consumption makes it possible to assess the expenditure of energy carriers necessary to produce a unit of specific products. Efficiency of energy carriers illustrates their productivity, as it represents the production obtained per a unit of inputs [66].
E C i = I i O i T E i = 1 E C i = O i I i
where:
  • ECi—energy consumption in production,
  • TEi—technical energy efficiency,
  • Oi—product production i,
  • Ii—inputs of energy carriers i.
Assessment of energy consumption in individual branches of the food industry in Poland was carried out using production energy consumption indicators, calculated by Statistics Poland, being the ratio of electricity consumption in KWh per PLN 100 of production value [58]. The analysis of energy consumption showed that individual industries, due to their specificity and large technological differences, are characterized by different demand for electricity and its technical efficiency. In the years 2004–2020, energy consumption of food industry production decreased by 31.5% to 3.7 KWh/100 PLN. Energy consumption improved in most industries, but the degree was the greatest in the processing of poultry meat, fish, fruit and vegetables, and in the production of starch. Increased energy consumption in production was recorded only in the production of tobacco and confectionery products (cocoa, chocolate, other sweets) and in the processing of potatoes. Due to the technology that requires the use of very high or low temperatures, the most energy-consuming directions of economic activity in the Polish food industry are the production of: processed potatoes, starch, sugar, ice cream and frozen fruit and vegetables (also frozen ready meals). In the production of potato products, starch and sugar, the demand for energy is so great that plants often have their own installations for the production of electricity from the combustion of coal or natural gas. The lowest demand for electricity is recorded in the production of spirits, spices, fish and fish preserves, coffee and tea, and poultry products (Table 3).
Changes in the energy economy of the food industry are also illustrated by the electricity consumption expressed in MWh per employee (the index calculated by Statistics Poland) [58]. In the years 2004–2020, the average electricity consumption per employee increased by 57.7% to 26.5 MWh, as was caused by the reduction of employment and large investments in fixed capital, automation and digitization of production technologies. Individual sectors of the food industry show very differentiated consumption of electricity per employee. In this approach, the production of sugar, vegetable fats, potato preparations, fodder for livestock and grain milling is the most energy-consuming. The lowest energy consumption per employee is characteristic of labor-intensive production of spices, bread and pastry products, spirits, fish products and poultry meat products. The above-mentioned industries show a fragmented entity structure and relatively high employment, and therefore they are based on small production scale effects (Table 3).
Considerable diversification of energy consumption may occur in each industry and concern the production of individual food products. The dairy industry is an example, where the plants producing milk and whey powder are the most energy-intensive, and the companies producing fresh dairy products (food milk, milk drinks, cream) are the least energy-consuming [67].
In the years 2004–2020, direct energy expenditure in the food industry accounted for a small share in the structure of operating production costs (2.7–3.4%). Dominant in the structure of the costs were agricultural raw materials (42.1–45.8%) and other raw materials and materials (51.0–55.2%), which, however, could also contain energy raw materials for production energy (e.g., hard coal, coke, natural gas, fuels) (Figure 4). Rising prices of agricultural raw materials and other materials and energy in the years 2021–2022 may result in significant changes in the structure of operating costs of the food industry. Therefore, it will be necessary to further improve the energy consumption and technical efficiency of the production of food products in order to maintain cost competitiveness and meet the increasing requirements in the field of environmental protection, including the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and waste.

8. Conclusions and Recommendations

The food industry in Poland is an important branch of the national economy and is of great economic, social and environmental significance. The economic importance of the sector is illustrated by its relatively large share in GDP, industrial production and a positive foreign trade balance. The food industry also occupies an important place in the domestic labor market, which is confirmed by the relatively stable level of employment and growing labor productivity. Large investment expenditures resulted not only in adapting the production potential of enterprises and the supply of products to the changing market conditions, but also had a positive impact on the natural environment and climate.
The Common Agricultural Policy defines the framework conditions for the functioning of the Polish food industry until 2030, which results mainly from a fundamental change in the EU approach to issues related to the protection of the natural environment and climate. The expression of the announced changes is the European Green Deal, which sets the program of sustainable social and economic development until 2050. Its main goal is the long-term modernization of the EU economy. In the agri-food sector, the specific goals resulting from the European Green Deal have been defined in the “Farm to Fork” strategy, which is its key element. In the above-mentioned documents, issues related to energy management play a special role, as a rational use of resources and reduced greenhouse gas emissions and the amount of generated waste are among the most important goals of the strategy. Implementation of the circular economy model in the agri-food sector will require, above all, deep modernization processes related to energy management, including, in particular, reduced energy consumption in production, improved technical efficiency and implementation of innovative and renewable sources of energy supply. The crisis phenomena in the years 2020–2022, as were caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine, clearly showed the great socio-economic importance of food and energy security.
In the years 2004–2020, the food industry in Poland carried out thorough modernization changes in the energy economy. The share of solid and liquid fuels, successively replaced with natural gas and biomass, decreased in the combustion structure of energy raw materials. At the same time, enterprises showed a growing demand for electricity, as was determined by changes in production technology. Positive changes in the energy economy of enterprises are mainly reflected in the decreasing energy consumption of production in most industries and the reduction of CO2 emissions and waste generation. Improved energy efficiency has a positive effect on the cost competitiveness of enterprises and the natural environment.
The enormous energy shock experienced by the Polish economy in 2022 in connection with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, resulting from record-high prices and the risk of disruptions in energy supplies, may result in unfavorable changes in the structure of operating costs of food industry companies. Therefore, there will be a need for further improvements in the energy consumption and technical efficiency of the production of food products to maintain cost competitiveness and meet the growing requirements related to environmental protection, including the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and the amount of waste generated.
It is also important for producers to look at the energy policy of their companies strategically and in the long term, to develop their own paths towards more economical energy management. In addition to optimizing energy consumption, which is often already done, the choice of energy source is also important. Investments in their own renewable energy sources seem to be an interesting option. Support in the form of even only partial energy supply from their own sources, apart from ecological benefits, may also be a way to achieve significant economic benefits. Green energy can become a very attractive alternative.
The difficult geopolitical situation in Europe and in the world means that decision-makers should, on the one hand, consider whether it is the right time to introduce such an ambitious and extensive action plan as the European Green Deal and the “Farm to Fork” strategy. On the other hand, the armed conflict in Ukraine clearly showed the need to carry out deep reforms in the field of energy management in order to make the EU independent of raw materials imported from Russia. Therefore, the implementation of the strategy for the introduction of a circular economy in the food sector may prove helpful in solving this problem. For these reasons, the direction of research initiated in this study should be the subject of further analyses and discussions conducted in Poland and other EU countries.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.S. and P.S.; methodology, I.S. and P.S.; validation, I.S. and P.S.; formal analysis, I.S. and P.S.; investigation, I.S. and P.S.; data curation, I.S. and P.S.; writing—original draft preparation, I.S. and P.S.; writing—review and editing, I.S. and P.S.; visualization, P.S.; supervision, I.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Vollset, S.E.; Goren, E.; Yuan, C.-W.; Cao, J.; Smith, A.E.; Hsiao, T.; Bisignano, C.; Azhar, G.S.; Castro, E.; Chalek, J.; et al. Fertility, mortality, migration, and population scenarios for 195 countries and territories from 2017 to 2100: A forecasting analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet 2020, 396, 1285–1306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. European Commission. A Farm to Fork Strategy. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM(2020) 381 final. Brussels 2020, 20, 5. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0381 (accessed on 1 March 2022).
  3. Kulczycka, J. Gospodarka O Obiegu Zamkniętym W Polityce I Badaniach Naukowych; Wydawnictwo IGSMiE PAN: Kraków, Poland, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  4. Kirchherr, J.; Reike, D.; Hekkert, M. Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 127, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. McClave, J.T.; Benson, P.G.; Sincich, T. Statistics for Business and Economics, 3rd ed.; Pearson Education: London, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  6. Pułaska-Turyna, B. Statystyka Dla Ekonomistów; Wydanie III zmienione, Difin: Warszawa, Poland, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  7. Luderer, B.; Nollau, V.; Vetters, K. Mathematical Formulas for Economists; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  8. Plaskacz, S. Procent Składany; TNOiK: Toruń, Poland, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  9. Podgórska, M.; Klimkowska, J. Matematyka Finansowa; PWN: Warszawa, Poland, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  10. Aczel, A.D. Statystyka w Zarządzaniu; PWN: Warszawa, Poland, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  11. KOBIZE. Krajowa Inwentaryzacja Emisji; Warszawa, Poland. 2022. Available online: https://www.kobize.pl/pl/fileCategory/id/16/krajowa-inwentaryzacja-emisji (accessed on 3 October 2022).
  12. The World Bank, Commodity Markets. Available online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/research/commodity-markets (accessed on 20 September 2022).
  13. Towarowa Giełda Energii, Dane Statystyczne. Available online: https://tge.pl/dane-statystyczne (accessed on 20 September 2022).
  14. Skrzypek, J. Analiza energochłonności i emisyjności sektorów polskiej gospodarki w latach 1996–2015. Stud. Oeconomica Posnaniensia 2018, 6, 78–103. Available online: https://bazekon.uek.krakow.pl/gospodarka/171536543 (accessed on 18 September 2022). [CrossRef]
  15. European Commission. The European Green Deal. Communication from the Commission, COM(2019) 640 Final. Brussels, 11 December 2019. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1576150542719&uri=COM%3A2019%3A640%3AFIN (accessed on 3 January 2022).
  16. European Commission. Farm to Fork Strategy. 2019. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal/actions-being-taken-eu/farm-fork_en (accessed on 15 September 2020).
  17. Projekt Planu Strategicznego Dla Wpr NA Lata 2023–2027 (Wersja 0.4)—Projekt Przyjęty Przez Radę Ministrów I Przekazany Do KE. Available online: https://www.gov.pl/web/wprpo2020/plan-strategiczny-dla-wpr-na-lata-2023-2027-wersja-40--przyjety-przez-rade-ministrow (accessed on 25 February 2022).
  18. Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 December 2021 Establishing Rules on Support for Strategic Plans To Be Drawn Up by Member States under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP Strategic Plans) and Financed by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and Repealing Regulations (EU) No 1305/2013 and (EU) No 1307/2013PE/64/2021/REV/1. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/PL/TXT/?uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.2021.435.01.0001.01.POL&toc=OJ%3AL%3A2021%3A435%3ATOC (accessed on 25 February 2022).
  19. NextGenerationEU: European Commission Successfully Issues First Green Bond to Finance the Sustainable Recovery, 12 October 2021, Brussels. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_21_5207 (accessed on 25 February 2022).
  20. Szczepaniak, I.; Szajner, P. Strategia ”Od Pola Do Stołu” W Sektorze Przetwórstwa Spożywczego; Fundacja Gospodarki i Administracji Publicznej GAP: Kraków, Poland, 2022; Available online: https://oees.pl/strategia-f2f/ (accessed on 1 September 2022).
  21. Ząbek, J. Uproszczona koncepcja zarządzania energią w organizacjach usługowych na podstawie normy ISO 50001:2011 (A simplified concept of energy management in service organizations based on the ISO 50001:2011 standard). Zesz. Nauk. Małopolskiej Wyższej Szkoły Ekon. W Tarn. 2018, 38, 71–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Koszarek-Cyra, A. Systemy zarządzania energią jako narzędzie wspierające proces racjonalizacji zużycia energii w organizacjach. Zesz. Nauk. Politech. Częstochowskiej. Zarządzanie 2016, 22, 210–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. UN. Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, 70/1. Available online: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_70_1_E.pdf (accessed on 15 June 2022).
  24. Sztorc, M. The Implementation of the European Green Deal Strategy as a Challenge for Energy Management in the Face of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Energies 2022, 15, 2662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Swisher, J.N. Cleaner Energy, Greener Profits: Fuel Cells as Cost-Effective Distributed Energy Resources; Rocky Mountain Institute: Basalt, CO, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  26. Javied, T.; Rackow, T.; Franke, J. Implementing energy management system to increase energy efficiency in manufacturing companies. Procedia CIRP 2015, 26, 156–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Nepal, R.; Jamasb, T.; Tisdell, C.A. Market-related reforms and increased energy efficiency in transition countries: Empirical evidence. Appl. Econ. 2014, 46, 4125–4136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Lukic, R. The impact of energy efficiency on performance in service sector. Econ. Environ. Stud. 2019, 16, 169–190. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/178911 (accessed on 18 September 2022).
  29. Esseghir, A.; Khouni, L.H. Economic growth, energy consumption and sustainable development: The case of the Union for the Mediterranean countries. Energy 2014, 71, 218–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Zalewski, W. Wpływ czynników atmosferycznych na zmienność zużycia energii (The influence of weather conditions on the variability of electricity consumption). Ekon. i Zarządzanie 2011, 3, 195–202. Available online: http://bazekon.icm.edu.pl/bazekon/element/bwmeta1.element.ekon-element-000171324573 (accessed on 15 September 2022).
  31. Lisowski, R.; Woźniak, M.; Jastrzębski, M.; Karafolas, S.; Matejun, M. Determinants of Investments in Energy Sector in Poland. Energies 2021, 14, 4526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. PN-ISO 50001—Systemy Zarządzania Energią. Available online: https://www.udt.gov.pl/certyfikacja-systemow-zarzadzania/pn-en-iso-50001-system-zarzadzania-energia (accessed on 5 November 2022).
  33. PN-EN ISO 9001—Systemy Zarządzania Jakością. Available online: https://www.udt.gov.pl/certyfikacja-systemow-zarzadzania/pn-en-iso-9001-2009-system-zarzadzania-jakoscia (accessed on 5 November 2022).
  34. Eco-Management and Audit Scheme. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/emas_for_you_en.htm (accessed on 5 November 2022).
  35. The World Bank, GDP Growth (Annual %). 2022. Available online: https://data.worldbank.org/topic/economy-and-growth?view=chart (accessed on 10 October 2022).
  36. GUS Statistics Poland. Poland Macroeconomic Indicators. 2022. Available online: https://stat.gov.pl/en/poland-macroeconomic-indicators/ (accessed on 6 October 2022).
  37. GUS Statistics Poland. Statistical Bulletin. 2022. 2, p. 123. Available online: https://stat.gov.pl/en/topics/other-studies/informations-on-socio-economic-situation/statistical-bulletin-no-22022,4,136.html (accessed on 12 October 2022).
  38. FAO. Food Outlook, Biannual Report On Global Food Markets. June 2022, Rome. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/a-i7343e.pdf (accessed on 10 October 2022).
  39. International Monetary Fund. World Economic Outlook. Countering the Cost-of-Living Crisis, Report October 2022, p. 14. Available online: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/Issues/2022/10/11/world-economic-outlook-october-2022 (accessed on 12 October 2022).
  40. Statistics Poland. Statistical Bulletin. 2022. 8, p. 123. Available online: https://stat.gov.pl/en/topics/other-studies/informations-on-socio-economic-situation/statistical-bulletin-no-82022,4,142.html (accessed on 12 October 2022).
  41. European Union Emissions Trading Scheme. Available online: https://emissions-euets.com/ (accessed on 10 October 2022).
  42. Investing.com. Kontrakty Terminowe Na Emisję CO2—Grudzień 2022 (CFI2Z2). Available online: https://pl.investing.com/commodities/carbon-emissions-historical-data (accessed on 10 October 2022).
  43. Pingali, P. Westernization of Asian diets and the transformation of food systems: Implications for research and policy. Food Policy 2007, 32, 281–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Gambrel, P.A.; Cianci, R. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: Does It Apply In A Collectivist Culture. J. Appl. Manag. Entrep. 2003, 8, 143–161. [Google Scholar]
  45. Kaus, W. Beyond Engel’s law—A cross-country analysis. J. Socio-Econ. 2013, 47, 118–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Świetlik, K. Wydatki polskich gospodarstw domowych na żywność. Determinanty pewnego paradoksu. Zarządzanie. Teor. i Prakt. 2019, 29, 3–41. [Google Scholar]
  47. Mroczek, R.; Drożdż, J. Analiza wsparcia inwestycji w przetwórstwie spożywczym służących poprawie konkurencyjności, jakości i zrównoważonemu rozwojowi sektora. In Wsparcie Inwestycji W Gospodarstwach Rolnych I Przetwórstwie Spożywczym—Wybrane Zagadnienia; Mroczek, R., Zieliński, M., Eds.; Studia i Monografie, 186; IERiGŻ PIB: Warszawa, Poland, 2021; pp. 34–92. [Google Scholar]
  48. GUS Statistics Poland. Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Poland. 2005. Available online: https://stat.gov.pl/download/gfx/portalinformacyjny/en/defaultaktualnosci/3328/2/11/1/sy_2005.pdf (accessed on 20 September 2022).
  49. GUS Statistics Poland. Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Poland. 2021. Available online: https://stat.gov.pl/en/topics/statistical-yearbooks/statistical-yearbooks/statistical-yearbook-of-the-republic-of-poland-2021,2,23.html (accessed on 20 September 2022).
  50. Szczepaniak, I.; Firlej, K. Przemysł Spożywczy—Makrootoczenie, Inwestycje, Ekspansja Zagraniczna; Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Krakowie, IERiGŻ PIB: Kraków–Warszawa, Poland, 2015; Available online: http://www.ierigz.waw.pl/publikacje/poza-seria/18789,12,3,0,przemysl-spozywczy-makrootoczenie-inwestycje-ekspansja-zagraniczna.html (accessed on 1 September 2022).
  51. Urban, R.; Szczepaniak, I.; Mroczek, R. The Polish Food Sector in the First Years of Membership (Synthesis); Multi-annual Programme Reports 2005–2009, 177.1; IAFE NRI: Warsaw, Poland, 2010; Available online: http://ierigz.waw.pl/publikacje/raporty-programu-wieloletniego-2005-2009/875,3,3,0,1314193842.html (accessed on 1 September 2022).
  52. Mroczek, R.; Drożdż, J. Rozwój przemysłu spożywczego w Polsce. In Ewolucja Międzynarodowej Sytuacji Rynkowej i jej Wpływ NA Konkurencyjność Krajowego Sektora Żywnościowego; Szajner, P., Szczepaniak, I., Eds.; Monografie Programu Wieloletniego 2015–2019, 100; IERiGŻ PIB: Warszawa, Poland, 2019; pp. 93–134. Available online: http://ierigz.waw.pl/publikacje/publikacje-programu-wieloletniego-2015-2019/23677,13,3,0,nr-100-ewolucja-miedzynarodowej-sytuacji-rynkowej-i-jej-wplyw-na-konkurencyjnosc-krajowego-sektora-zywnosciowego.html (accessed on 15 September 2022).
  53. Rosiak, E.; Łopaciuk, W.; Krzemiński, M. Produkcja Biopaliw i jej Wpływ na Światowy Rynek Zbóż oraz Roślin Oleistych i Tłuszczów Roślinnych; Program Wieloletni 2011–2014, 29; IERiGŻ PIB: Warszawa, Poland, 2011; Available online: http://ierigz.waw.pl/publikacje/raporty-programu-wieloletniego-2011-2014/1326303199 (accessed on 18 September 2022).
  54. Szczepaniak, I. Wskaźnikowa ocena międzynarodowej konkurencyjności przemysłu spożywczego. In Monitoring i Ocena Konkurencyjności Polskich Producentów żywności (2); Szczepaniak, I., Ed.; Program Wieloletni 2011–2014, 40; IERiGŻ PIB: Warszawa, Poland, 2012; pp. 38–50. Available online: http://www.ierigz.waw.pl/publikacje/raporty-programu-wieloletniego-2011-2014/1365582129 (accessed on 1 September 2022).
  55. Bułkowska, M. Polski handel produktami rolno-spożywczymi w obliczu wygasającej pandemii, rosnącej inflacji oraz wojny w Ukrainie (Polish Trade in Agri-Food Products in The Face of An Ending Pandemic, Rising Inflation and The War in Ukraine). Przemysł Spożywczy/Food Ind. 2022, 76, 2–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Firlej, K. Przemysł Spożywczy w Polsce. Nowa ścieżka Rozwoju; Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN: Warszawa, Poland, 2017; Available online: https://depot.ceon.pl/bitstream/handle/123456789/17349/Przemys%c5%82%20spo%c5%bcywczy%20w%20Polsce.%20Nowa%20%c5%9bciezka%20rozwoju.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed on 20 September 2022).
  57. Ambroziak, Ł.; Szczepaniak, I. Monitoring i Ocena Konkurencyjności Polskich Producentów Żywności (4). Pozycja Konkurencyjna; Program Wieloletni 2011–2014, 74; IERiGŻ PIB: Warszawa, Poland, 2013; Available online: http://ierigz.waw.pl/download/14927-r-74_szczepaniak_net.pdf (accessed on 1 September 2022).
  58. GUS Statistics Poland. Statistical Yearbook of Industry—Poland, 2005–2021. Available online: https://stat.gov.pl/en/topics/statistical-yearbooks/statistical-yearbooks/statistical-yearbook-of-industry-poland-2021,5,15.html (accessed on 15 September 2022).
  59. Kosior, K. Przemysł 4.0—Budowanie przewag konkurencyjnych w epoce cyfrowego przełomu. In Konkurencyjność Polskich Producentów Żywności i jej Determinanty (4); Szczepaniak, I., Ed.; Monografie Programu Wieloletniego 2015–2019, 86; IERiGŻ PIB: Warszawa, Poland, 2018; pp. 102–133. Available online: http://ierigz.waw.pl/publikacje/publikacje-programu-wieloletniego-2015-2019/23103,129,3,0,nr-86-konkurencyjnosc-polskich-producentow-zywnosci-i-jej-determinanty-(4).html (accessed on 18 September 2022).
  60. Sarpong, G.; Gnaneswar Gude, V. Codigestion and combined heat and power systems energize wastewater treatment plants—Analysis and case studies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 144, 110937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the Promotion of the Use of Energy from Renewable Sources and Amending and Subsequently Repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC, L 140/16, Official Journal of the European Union 5 July 2009. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:140:0016:0062:en:PDF (accessed on 5 April 2022).
  62. Kott, J.; Kott, M.; Szalbierz, Z. Wskaźniki energochłonności w przemyśle. Zarządzanie i Finanse 2012, 10, 585–593. Available online: http://jmf.wzr.pl/pim/2012_1_2_49.pdf (accessed on 15 September 2022).
  63. Plich, M.; Skrzypek, J. Trendy energochłonności polskiej gospodarki. Wiadomości Stat. 2016, 7, 16–38. Available online: https://stat.gov.pl/czasopisma/wiadomosci-statystyczne/archiwum/wiadomosci-statystyczne-nr-72016-662,7,17.html (accessed on 15 September 2022).
  64. Debreu, G. The Coefficient of Recourse Utilisation. Econometrica 1951, 19, 273–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Farrell, M.J. The Measurement of Productive Efficiency. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. A 1957, 120, 253–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Patterson, G.M. What is Energy efficiency?: Concepts, indicators and methodological issues. Energy Policy 1996, 24, 37–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Kaleta, A.; Wojdalski, J. Przetwórstwo Rolno-Spożywcze: Wybrane Zagadnienia inżynieryjno-Produkcyjne i Energetyczne; Wydawnictwo SGGW: Warszawa, Poland, 2008. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. World gas prices and domestic electricity prices. Source: own study, data from the World Bank [12], Polish Power Exchange [13].
Figure 1. World gas prices and domestic electricity prices. Source: own study, data from the World Bank [12], Polish Power Exchange [13].
Energies 15 09090 g001
Figure 2. Balance in foreign trade of Poland. Source: own study, unpublished data of Statistics Poland, WITS-Comtrade.
Figure 2. Balance in foreign trade of Poland. Source: own study, unpublished data of Statistics Poland, WITS-Comtrade.
Energies 15 09090 g002
Figure 3. Structure of fuel combustion and CO2 emissions in the food industry in Poland. Source: own study, the National Center for Emissions Management data [11].
Figure 3. Structure of fuel combustion and CO2 emissions in the food industry in Poland. Source: own study, the National Center for Emissions Management data [11].
Energies 15 09090 g003
Figure 4. Costs of raw materials, other materials and energy in the food industry. Source: own study, unpublished Statistics Poland data. Note: agricultural raw materials–purchase value of domestic agricultural raw materials, excluding imported agricultural raw materials.
Figure 4. Costs of raw materials, other materials and energy in the food industry. Source: own study, unpublished Statistics Poland data. Note: agricultural raw materials–purchase value of domestic agricultural raw materials, excluding imported agricultural raw materials.
Energies 15 09090 g004
Table 1. Basic production and financial results of the food industry in Poland in 2004 and 2020.
Table 1. Basic production and financial results of the food industry in Poland in 2004 and 2020.
Specification20042020Change 2020/2004
Share of the food industry in global production (%)6.66.2−0.4 percentage point
Share of the food industry in GDP (%)2.92.7−0.2 percentage point
Share of the food industry in the number of employees in the national economy (%)5.04.0−1.0 percentage point
Share of the food industry in the industrial processing sector’s production sold (%)20.220.3+0.1 percentage point
Number of enterprises 328742086−27.4%
Production sold 1, 3 at fixed prices, in PLN billion)130.0243.1+87.0%
Production sold 1, 3 per 1 enterprise (PLN million/company, fixed prices)45.2116.5+157.7%
Employment 3 (thousand people)321.2333.1+3.7%
Work productivity 1, 3 (thousand PLN/person, fixed prices)404.8729.8+80.3%
Net financial result 2, 3 (PLN billion, fixed prices)6.412.0+87.5%
Profitability of net revenues 3 (%)3.874.38+0.51 percentage point
Return on equity (ROE) 3 (%)13.9911.90−2.09 percentage point
1 For conversion into fixed prices from 2020, the growth rate of the prices of sold production of food products, beverages and tobacco products was used; 2 inflation index was used to convert into constant prices from 2020; 3 data from F-01 reports submitted by companies to Statistics Poland. Source: own study, unpublished and published data of Statistics Poland [48,49].
Table 2. Fuel consumption and CO2 emissions in the food industry in Poland in 2020.
Table 2. Fuel consumption and CO2 emissions in the food industry in Poland in 2020.
SpecificationConsumptionEmissions
TJ2004 = 100Average
Annual
Dynamics
Kt CO22004 = 100Average
Annual
Dynamics
Burning fuels60,768.993.3−0.44340.982.5−1.2
liquid2498.422.5−8.9175.521.5−9.2
solid22,749.560.8−3.12158.460.7−3.1
gas34,270.2212.04.81901.4212.84.8
biomass1250.8279.86.6105.6230.55.4
Source: own study, the National Center for Emissions Management data [11].
Table 3. Energy intensity of production and electricity consumption per employee in selected sectors of the food industry in Poland in 2020.
Table 3. Energy intensity of production and electricity consumption per employee in selected sectors of the food industry in Poland in 2020.
SpecificationEnergy Consumption
in Production
Electricity Consumption
Per Employee
KWh/100 PLN2004 = 100MWh2004 = 100
Processing and preserving potatoes10.7142.764.4314.1
Production of starches and starch products10.457.148.3120.8
Production of sugar8.572.698.2249.2
Production of ice cream8.365.439.1162.8
Production of pasta6.589.029.6266.7
Other fruit and vegetable processing6.456.132.3134.6
Production of bakery products5.491.514.5226.6
Production of grain mill products5.362.450.3123.9
Production of chocolate and confectionery5.1130.827.0272.7
Production of other food products4.7114.625.0174.8
Production of non-alcoholic beverages and waters4.374.137.8233.7
Production of fruit and vegetable juices4.083.332.5169.3
Food industry in general3.768.526.5157.7
Production of oils and fats3.786.079.4208.9
Production of durable confectionery products3.581.426.5157.7
Production of feed for livestock3.587.559.4144.9
Production of tobacco products3.4130.831.0226.3
Processing of milk and cheese making3.373.333.0195.3
Production of meat products3.175.620.3213.7
Production of beer3.173.834.3122.5
Processing of poultry meat3.066.726.2157.7
Processing of meat (no poultry)2.345.116.1132.0
Processing of tea and coffee2.080.018.5158.1
Processing and preserving of fish1.955.915.6197.5
Production of spices1.765.410.6182.8
Production of spirits1.477.814.8211.4
Source: own study, Statistics Poland data [58].
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Szczepaniak, I.; Szajner, P. Challenges of Energy Management in the Food Industry in Poland in the Context of the Objectives of the European Green Deal and the “Farm to Fork” Strategy. Energies 2022, 15, 9090. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/en15239090

AMA Style

Szczepaniak I, Szajner P. Challenges of Energy Management in the Food Industry in Poland in the Context of the Objectives of the European Green Deal and the “Farm to Fork” Strategy. Energies. 2022; 15(23):9090. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/en15239090

Chicago/Turabian Style

Szczepaniak, Iwona, and Piotr Szajner. 2022. "Challenges of Energy Management in the Food Industry in Poland in the Context of the Objectives of the European Green Deal and the “Farm to Fork” Strategy" Energies 15, no. 23: 9090. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/en15239090

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop