Tuesday, September 25, 2018

Revenues per Chemical Worker Data


The following table shows for 34 countries the number of chemical workers, the countries’ recent revenues from chemical products, and the revenues per chemical worker:


country
chemical worker numbers
 recent chemical product revenues
 chemical revenue per chemical worker
United States
745,000
 $     447,400,000,000
 $    600,537
Netherlands
57,000
 $       33,000,000,000
 $    578,947
Austria
17,100
 $         9,500,000,000
 $    555,556
Belgium
43,900
 $       24,100,000,000
 $    548,975
Norway
13,000
 $         5,300,000,000
 $    407,692
France
142,000
 $       57,500,000,000
 $    404,930
European Union
1,200,000
 $     476,500,000,000
 $    397,083
Ireland
6,000
 $         2,200,000,000
 $    366,667
Germany
325,000
 $     115,000,000,000
 $    353,846
Italy
108,000
 $       37,300,000,000
 $    345,370
Japan
400,000
 $     131,600,000,000
 $    329,000
Finland
13,100
 $         4,200,000,000
 $    320,611
Spain
85,100
 $       27,000,000,000
 $    317,274
Switzerland
30,800
 $         9,500,000,000
 $    308,442
Sweden
21,000
 $         6,300,000,000
 $    300,000
India
250,000
 $       74,400,000,000
 $    297,600
Denmark
11,000
 $         3,200,000,000
 $    290,909
Portugal
12,000
 $         3,200,000,000
 $    266,667
Lithuania
5,000
 $         1,200,000,000
 $    240,000
United Kingdom
140,000
 $       32,300,000,000
 $    230,714
Hungary
13,100
 $         3,000,000,000
 $    229,008
Slovenia
6,500
 $         1,100,000,000
 $    169,231
Slovakia
9,000
 $         1,500,000,000
 $    166,667
Czech Republic
29,400
 $         4,700,000,000
 $    159,864
Turkey
56,800
 $         8,500,000,000
 $    149,648
Greece
13,000
 $         1,850,000,000
 $    142,308
Poland
75,400
 $         9,500,000,000
 $    125,995
Saudi Arabia
103,000
 $       12,200,000,000
 $    118,447
Croatia
6,000
 $             708,000,000
 $    118,000
Estonia
3,000
 $             280,000,000
 $      93,333
Romania
23,000
 $         1,800,000,000
 $      78,261
Brazil
800,000
 $       55,460,000,000
 $      69,325
Latvia
2,600
 $             146,000,000
 $      56,154
Bulgaria
14,000
 $             770,000,000
 $      55,000
total
4,779,800
 $ 1,602,214,000,000
 $    278,788
                                                                                 (median)


Chemical worker numbers are from country statistics websites (e.g., click here) or chemical trade associations (e.g., click here).   Chemical worker numbers are for those workers in the chemical sectors represented by the NAICS code 325 (e.g., click here).  The recent chemical product revenue amounts were found from searching the Internet and are mostly found on trade association websites such as the CEFIC site (e.g., click here).  The revenues are generally for the same chemical sectors represented by the workers.

The revenues per chemical worker amounts could be interesting and useful in benchmarking.  For example, the median of the amounts shown is $278,788 revenues per chemical worker.  Country amounts above this amount might suggest more efficient/effective chemical worker productivity than amounts below the median.




Thursday, September 13, 2018

US Shipping Data from the Census Bureau


The US Census Bureau’s Manufacturing and International Trade Report provides the value of chemical products produced and shipped by all producers.  (Click here to find the 2016 report.  Products are listed by their NAICS codes with most of the chemical products covered by codes 324, 325, and 326.)

Shipping value data on chemical products in the report was used to produce my following table:

product category 
2016 shipping value (billion US dollars)
companies with likely influential pricing power
Adhesives
24
Arkema; Avery Dennison; H. B. Fuller; Henkel; Huntsman
Artificial and synthetic fibers and filaments
8
Asahi Kasei; Eastman; Indorama Ventures; Teijin; Toray
Asphalt paving mixtures and blocks
24
CRH; Lafargeholcim; Owens Corning
Building and construction fabricated plastics products
11
Asahi Kasei; BASF; DowDupont; Evonik
Chemical catalytic preparations
6
Clariant; Johnson Matthey; WR Grace
Creams and lotions
8
Estee Lauder; KAO; Proctor & Gamble; Shiseido; Unilever
Cyclic (coal tar) intermediates
7
Koppers
Cyclic and acyclic chemicals and chemical products
18
Arkema; BASF; DowDupont
Ethyl and other organic alcohols
34
GreenPlains; Pacific Ethanol; Valero
Hair preparations (e.g., shampoos)
7
Estee Lauder; Proctor & Gamble; Unilever
Industrial gases
9
Air Liquide; Air Products & Chemicals; Linde; Praxair
Industrial Rubber products
7
Bridgestone; Lanxass; Yokohama
Inorganic chemicals
30
BASF; DowDupont
Jet fuel
30
Chevron; Exxon Mobile; Shell
Liquefied refinery gases
41
BP; Chevron; China Petroleum & Chemicals; ExxonMobil; Total
Lubricating oils and greases
5
Fuchs Lubricants; Idemisu Kosan; Valvoline
Organic chemicals
86
Givaudan; Sensient; Symrise
Paints and coatings
42
AkzoNobel; PPG; Sherwin Williams
Pesticides and other agricultural chemicals
18
BASF; Bayer; DowDupont
Phosphatic fertilizers
6
Nutrien; Mosaic
Plastics packaging  (includes bags and bottles)
56
AMCOR; Aptar; Bemis; DS Smith; Sealed Air; Silgan; Sunoco;
Plastics pipe
8
Shin-Etsu; Mexichem
Polishes
8
Cabot Microelectronics
Soaps and detergents, cleaning products (household, commercial, industrial, and institutional)
41
Colgate Palmolive; Proctor Gamble; Unilever
Surface active agents (surfactants)
10
Clariant; DowDupont
Synthetic dyes and pigments
7
BASF; Clariant; DIC; Huntsman
Synthetic rubber
20
Lanxess
Thermosetting resins and plastics materials
9
Eastman; Evonik; LyondellBasell; Solvay
Tires
7
Bridgestone; Goodyear; Michelin


For each NAISC “broad” chemical category, for example those shown in the table, I believe the category represents a distinct product category that businesses would choose to specialize in.  Only general categories, where the 2016 shipment value exceeded $5 billion, are shown.  In other words, these are chemical product areas that companies would look to specialize in and gain market share; and could be characterized by that specialization.  For each category, I have provided in the table companies that likely have influential pricing power.  Companies were selected based on the amount of their 2017 revenues and on having at least a reportable segment (or at least a major part of a reportable segment) producing the product category.

The table might be useful if one is interested in identifying a company in a product category that has influential pricing power.   Influential pricing power can be considered as a company positive, likely indicating successful operations and finances.