The right decision depends on the application, duty cycle, infrastructure, energy use, investment cost and total cost of ownership. This is where a structured automation assessment helps avoid making expensive assumptions.

Reducing OPEX means lowering the recurring costs of operating machines, systems and production processes. In industrial automation, these costs can include energy use, compressed air supply, maintenance and servicing, downtime, spare parts, labour and the cost of inefficient processes.For automation engineers, OPEX reduction starts at the application level. It means asking where energy and operating costs are incurred, at the machine or machine module level. It also means checking whether a change in technology will generate measurable savings over the lifecycle, or whether a smaller optimisation will deliver better results.

This is important because pneumatic applications frequently have hidden opportunities for reducing operating expenses (OPEX). In many cases, the first step is not to replace the technology, but to understand where air consumption, pressure levels, cycle rates or process air use offer an interesting cost potential. Small pneumatic applications and short-stroke movements may still be economically viable and energy efficient, while larger drives or high-consumption applications often justify a closer analysis.

CAPEX is the investment cost required to buy or build a machine, system or component. OPEX is the cost of running it over time. A technology decision that looks attractive from a CAPEX perspective may lead to higher operating costs later. The opposite can also be true: a higher initial investment may be justified if it reduces energy consumption, downtime or maintenance effort over the full lifecycle.

This is why the total cost of ownership in automation is important. The best choice is not simply the solution with the lowest purchase price or the lowest energy consumption. It is the solution that fits the application, infrastructure and cost target over time.

For example, electrification can make economic sense when high energy use, precise control, frequent movement or reduced compressed air demand result in a possible payback. Efficient pneumatics can still be the better option where movements are simple, compact, fast and cost-effective throughout the lifecycle.

The biggest operating cost drivers in automation are rarely the same in every application. They depend on how the machine works, how often it operates, what load it moves and how the existing infrastructure performs.

Relevant OPEX hotspots can include large pneumatic drives, high-consumption applications, process air, vacuum applications and areas where compressed air is supplied at a higher pressure than the application really needs. This can increase both air consumption and operating costs. Process air deserves special attention because it often consumes more compressed air than pneumatic actuation in production environments.

The decision should be based on the application data. Important factors include actuator size, stroke length, cycle rate, load, pressure level, air consumption, leakage, process air demand, energy price, maintenance effort and downtime risk.

The key point is simple: reducing operating costs starts with identifying the real cost hotspots. It should not start with a blanket decision for or against a specific technology.

Automation technology can reduce OPEX when it targets the right cost driver. The most effective route may be electrification, more efficient pneumatics, better pressure control, reduced air consumption, improved maintenance planning or a clearer comparison of lifecycle costs.

An objective technology assessment helps separate assumptions from real savings potential. Instead of asking whether pneumatic or electric technology is generally better, the more pertinent question is: which technology reduces operating costs in this specific application without creating unnecessary complexity?

Downtime affects OPEX as machines stop unexpectedly or require avoidable service work, resulting in production losses. Predictive maintenance can help teams move from reactive repairs to planned intervention when the application and data support it.

For automation engineers, this means checking where condition monitoring, diagnostics or application data can back up maintenance decisions. The value depends on how critical the process is, what the impact of a failure is and which data is available. It should not be seen as a universal fix for every component.

Energy efficiency in automation can be achieved using different measures. In pneumatic systems, potential options include reducing pressure, having demand-based pressure control, creating different pressure zones, introducing air-saving circuits and Controlled Pneumatics. In other cases, electric automation may reduce energy consumption or improve controllability enough to justify the investment.

The most important factor is to be led by the application, not the technology label. A small pneumatic movement may not be the first place to search for savings. Instead, a large drive, high cycle rate or process air application may deserve a much closer look.

Productivity can be increased when automation reduces manual effort, improves repeatability or supports a more stable machine performance. This, in turn, has a positive impact on OPEX. However, any productivity gains would need to be clearly linked to the application. A technology change should match the required movement, process quality, cycle time and operating environment.

For many teams, the practical question is whether a new automation concept helps the machine run more efficiently over its lifecycle. That can include electric automation, an efficient pneumatic designs or a combination of both.

Maintenance and labour costs can rise when systems are complex, difficult to diagnose or not reviewed regularly. Operating costs can also increase when the compressed air infrastructure, pressure settings or process air consumption do not suit the actual application requirements.

Reducing these costs may require reviewing pressure levels, identifying leakages, improving diagnostics, using standardised components, creating clearer pressure zones or shifting to another technology when that benefits the application. The right answer depends on the full operating context, not on a single cost factor.

Choosing the right automation technology starts with the application. Before replacing an existing solution, engineers should understand the movement, load, duty cycle, energy demand, infrastructure and lifecycle costs.

A useful decision-making process includes five questions.

1. Where are the operating costs actually incurred?
Check energy use, compressed air consumption, process air, maintenance effort and downtime risk.

2. Is the application a real OPEX hotspot?
Large drives, high cycle rates, process air and inefficient compressed air use may offer more potential than small, simple pneumatic movements.

3. Would optimisation be enough?
Pressure reduction, pressure zones, air-saving circuits or controlled pneumatic solutions often create a good balance between effort and savings without completely changing the technology.

4. Would electrification pay for itself?
Electric automation can be the right route when energy savings, precision, controllability or reduced compressed air demand justify the investment.

5. What does the total cost of ownership show?
The final decision should consider the investment cost, the running costs, maintenance, energy, infrastructure and the expected lifecycle performance.

Festo offers both pneumatic and electric automation. This is relevant when the goal is to reduce operating costs, because the best solution may not belong to a single technology category.

For pneumatic applications, Festo can introduce measures such as reducing pressure, demand-based pressure control, creating pressure zones, air-saving circuits and Controlled Pneumatics. For applications where electrification makes economic sense, Festo can also support the move towards electric automation.

This technology-neutral view helps manufacturers identify whether OPEX is relevant in a specific application and which option is most suitable.

The aim is not to replace well-established solutions in general. The aim is to make operating costs transparent and choose the automation concept that fits the process, infrastructure and total cost of ownership.

Operational cost reduction in automation starts with a clear assessment of the application. Small pneumatic movements may not be the real cost driver. Large drives, process air, high-consumption applications, inefficient compressed air use or poorly controlled pressure zones may offer a much stronger OPEX potential.

The right route can be efficient pneumatics, electrification or another suitable automation concept. What matters is having the right match between technology, cost target and operating reality.

Use the next step to assess your application, identify the real cost hotspots and evaluate the total cost of ownership with Festo.