• “The smart factory will be energy efficient when energy stops being just a data point and becomes a criterion,” says Jesús Martínez, founder of Kurago and professor of Digitalization and Organizational Transformation at the University of Deusto.

  • Having data is not the same as having a strategy. Energy management means integrating energy into industrial decision-making, setting objectives, assigning responsibilities, and linking energy consumption to production indicators.

  • The smart factory can undoubtedly be an ally of decarbonization, but only to the extent that it manages energy with the same level of maturity with which it manages quality or logistics.

  • Energy should not be a collateral benefit of the smart factory, but one of the core pillars of its design.

February 20, 2026

There are questions whose answers seem so obvious that asking them almost feels unnecessary. Does it make sense to wonder whether a smart factory manages energy better than a conventional factory? Logic tells us there is no doubt: with sensors in every corner, real-time data flows, and algorithms optimizing processes, success seems guaranteed. But is the relationship really that direct, or are we assuming a synergy that has yet to be fully realized?

Jesús Martínez, founder of Kurago and professor of Digitalization and Organizational Transformation at the University of Deusto, puts it bluntly based on his experience developing software for industrial ecosystems: “In recent years, the idea has taken hold that industrial digitalization naturally leads to efficient energy management. It is an attractive narrative, but an incomplete one.”

This warning aligns perfectly with the central thesis of the study Energy management and Industry 4.0: Analysis of the enabling effects of digitalization on the implementation of energy management practices, conducted by researchers from the universities of Milan, Linköping, and Sydney: the smart factory can contribute to better energy management, yes, but that claim has limits, and a significant part of that potential still belongs to the realm of future possibilities.

The New Vocabulary of Industry

Before delving into the heart of the issue, it is worth pausing to consider the language. The energy transition has brought with it a wave of terms, acronyms, and concepts that circulate increasingly naturally in industry forums but deserve clear explanation.

When we talk about I4.0 (Industry 4.0), we are referring to the fourth industrial revolution: the integration of digital technologies into manufacturing processes. In practice, this includes IIoT (Industrial Internet of Things), which connects machines, sensors, and systems so they can “talk” to one another; AI (Artificial Intelligence) and BDA (Big Data Analytics), which process massive amounts of information to anticipate failures or optimize consumption; and visualization tools such as VR (Virtual Reality) or the digital twin, which allow processes to be simulated before being executed.

All of this together shapes the SF, or Smart Factory. Smart Manufacturing (SM) is the production model that underpins it.

However, the fact that a factory is technologically “smart” does not automatically mean it manages energy well. For that, there are EnMPs (Energy Management Practices): the set of procedures, decisions, and measures—from energy audits to conscious production scheduling and staff training—that a company implements to reduce consumption and improve efficiency.

Measuring Is Not Managing

Digitalization has enabled something that would have been unthinkable just a decade ago: real-time insight into a plant’s energy behavior. Today it is possible to identify consumption peaks, detect deviations, and associate energy use with each stage of the production process. This visibility is undoubtedly a significant step forward.

However, having data is not the same as having a strategy. Energy management requires integrating energy into industrial decision-making, setting targets, assigning responsibilities, and linking energy consumption to production indicators. Without this framework, digitalization may remain an advanced monitoring tool rather than a true instrument of transformation.

The study highlights precisely this gap. Academic literature has made substantial progress in areas such as energy-use prediction, real-time monitoring, and technological innovation models that integrate Industry 4.0 technologies. However, a significant gap remains in understanding how these technologies intersect with comprehensive energy management practices in the real-world context of the smart factory. In other words, we understand the technical means quite well, but much less about how they translate into routines, decisions, and ways of managing energy in day-to-day operations.

Martínez’s diagnosis points in the same direction: the real limit is not technological, but conceptual. In most factories, MES, ERP, or planning systems continue to optimize around delivery deadlines, asset utilization, and production efficiency. “Energy is rarely part of the real-time decision-making core,” he notes. “Industry 4.0 has digitalized production, but it has not yet redesigned operational logic to fully incorporate energy cost as a structural variable.”

Efficiency, Decarbonization, and Other Misunderstandings

At this point, another common confusion emerges: the idea that energy efficiency, energy management, and the smart factory form a natural continuum. For Martínez, confusing digitalization with efficiency is one of the sector’s most widespread mistakes: “Real energy efficiency requires something deeper: redesigning processes, sequences, operational inertia, and planning decisions. Digitalization is an enabler. It is not the result.”

The study agrees: many digitalization initiatives are born with the aim of improving productivity, flexibility, or quality, while energy is considered a collateral benefit rather than a design axis. In other cases, rising energy costs or regulatory pressure strengthen energy management, which in turn accelerates certain digital investments. In both scenarios, the key question is whether the full potential of Industry 4.0 is being leveraged to redesign energy management—or whether we are remaining at a superficial layer of advanced monitoring without transforming how decisions are made.

From this perspective, the smart factory can indeed be an ally of decarbonization, but only if it manages energy with the same maturity as it manages quality or logistics. That leap requires integrating energy management practices into the very architecture of the Smart Factory, rather than treating them as a complement.

Means or Ends? Reframing the Narrative

This debate forces us to reorganize the narrative. If decarbonization, energy management, and digitalization are tools in service of efficiency and genuinely sustainable management, then the questions change. It is no longer just about how much CO₂ the smart factory can save, but about what kind of energy governance model we want within that factory—who decides, with what information, under what incentives, and with what long-term vision.

Martínez is specific about what is already technically possible today, even if not always implemented: incorporating energy cost as a direct variable in planning algorithms, adapting production to lower-price energy windows, optimizing startups and shutdowns, or correlating asset degradation with increased consumption. “The current barriers are not technical, but organizational and rooted in mindset,” he warns. “In many cases, the problem is not a lack of data, but a lack of willingness to change how decisions are made.”

The truly energy-intelligent factory—still some distance away—will be capable of optimizing production based on the dynamic state of the energy system, actively interacting with the power grid, and making decisions that minimize total energy cost, not just local production cost. Achieving this requires integrating industrial physics, operational logic, and digital systems in a way that is not yet common.

From the “Data-Filled” Factory to the Factory That Decides

From the Industry and Energy Forum, we aim precisely to open this debate. Our objective is not to close the issue with definitive answers, but to raise key questions: does the smart factory truly know how to manage energy? Are we using digitalization as a means to transform energy management, or simply to modernize practices that barely change? What improvements are already technically feasible, and which require, first and foremost, a profound reassessment of how we understand efficiency and sustainability in industry?

The real debate, therefore, is not technological, but strategic. It is not about whether industry should digitalize, but whether it is prepared to govern energy in the era of the smart factory. That is where much of its capacity to compete in the energy transition is at stake.

Or, as Jesús Martínez sums it up: “The smart factory will be energy efficient when energy stops being just data and becomes a criterion.”