Doing the plastic fantastic
Three innovative British companies at various stages of international fame
There are many different types of plastic, and not all of them are created equal. The varieties currently in the news, causing huge problems in ecosystems worldwide – polyethylene, polypropylene and PET – are at the bottom of the pile in terms of quality.
Further up the rungs of the ladder are engineering and high-performance plastics, which are manufactured on a much more limited scale than common plastics, have highly advantageous performance properties and, consequently, can cost as much as £300 per kilo.
Polyether-ether-ketone (or PEEK), a colourless thermoplastic polymer, is at the very top of the plastics pyramid. The name might not sound familiar, but it’s everywhere, from household devices such as earphones and refrigerator compressors, to airplanes, which can contain as much as a tonne of it.
Two models of the successful commercialisation of proprietary technology
PEEK was invented by Victrex, a British company which held the patent till the 2000s, and which was spun out of Imperial Chemical Industries – or ICI – itself the product of a merger of four leading British chemical companies in 1926.
Originally Victrex was solely a supplier of basic PEEK resins, but as its patent expired it moved into the manufacturing of compound PEEK materials. Victrex’s PEEK film, which is used as a backing material for micro-speakers, can withstand stresses several times higher than standard speaker diaphragms.
More than 200 million drivers rely on Victrex’s PEEK products, in the form of the anti-lock braking and electronic stability control systems of their cars. Certain gears are also made of it, thanks to the polymer’s outstanding resistance to wear.
Not only has PEEK played a seminal role in replacing metal in the automotive, aerospace and energy sectors but, being biocompatible and biologically inert, it has also become a viable alternative to titanium and steel medical implants.
In 1999, Victrex launched PEEK-Optima Natural as the world’s first implantable PEEK polymer, founding a new subdivision, Invibio, to produce and distribute the new material. The polymer and its reinforced compounds can be found in more than nine million spine, knee, trauma and dental implants around the world.
Invibio recently reached an exclusive agreement to supply its PEEK-Optima ultra- reinforced carbon fibre technology to In2Bones USA, a leading global manufacturer of arm and leg implants. With a subsidiary in Hong Kong, an innovation centre in Shanghai and a recent announcement to form a joint venture with Yingkou Xingfu Chemical Company, Invibio has been building a strong presence on the Asian market too.
Vitrex’s 18 years of corporate history demonstrates how innovative technologies wedded with business acumen can translate patents into enterprises, profit and eventually a leading position on the global market. Meanwhile, the example of Mura Technology, a Teesside-based plastic-neutral recycler, shows how far impact investment can go in transferring and upscaling a world-class patent.
One of the key partners in this success story of international co-operation is Armstrong Capital, a London-based investment firm managing green energy assets for high-net-worth individuals and family offices. Its chairman, Steve Mahon, is an investment professional with a strong track record in renewable energy and waste and a background in geophysics.
But it all started with Licella, the Australian developer of the catalytic hydrothermal reactor (Cat-HTR), a hydrothermal upgrading platform that can turn biomass or non-recyclable plastic into biofuels and chemicals.
Hydrothermal upgrading, a type of advanced recycling alongside with pyrolysis – another highly promising nascent technology – uses supercritical (high temperature and pressure) water to break down polymer chains and convert plastics, including non-recyclable ones, into what they were originally made of.
Mura, the successor of a joint venture between Licella’s and Armstrong Capital Management’s subsidiaries, was issued the royalty-free exclusive global licence for Licella’s existing and future patents outside Australia and New Zealand in 2019, with Steve Mahon as CEO.
The first company to take out Mura’s license and build the world’s first Cat-HTR has been its subsidiary, ReNew ELP. The plant is scheduled to start operation in 2022 and reach one million tonnes recycling capacity by 2025. There is also a plan to follow the launch of the first Teesside plant with quick rollouts of the technology in the US, Germany and Asia.
Mura’s advanced recycling technology, which enables a wide range of plastics – including multilayer and flexible varieties – to be recycled indefinitely, is supported by several environmentalists, such as marine biologist Sylvia Earle and Jo Ruxton, co-founder of Plastic Ocean Foundation. Before the pandemic hit, the Cat-HTR technology also earned kudos from the United Nations’ General Assembly, as an innovative technology that can help solve the world’s plastic pollution and contribute to a plastic circular economy.
In 2020 we saw how Covid-19 slowed down efforts to turn the tide on plastic pollution, and even put additional burden on the environment by making single-use the norm. Tens of thousands of masks, just to bring one example, were discarded by Royal Cornwall Hospital hospital in a single day. But Welsh brand Sterimelt has stepped up to the plate to address one important aspect of the single-use plastics crisis that the pandemic has exacerbated.
The Sterimelt unit of recycling machinery manufacturer Thermal Compaction Group (TCG) enables users to melt their single-use polypropylene plastics waste into a commodity on-site. As the process removes any contamination from the waste, the resulting blocks can be sold to plastics manufacturers and turned into kidney bowls, 3D filament, plaster cast replacements and many other things, thus creating additional revenue streams.
The Sterimelt device was originally designed to recycle surgical tray wraps and drapes in hospitals but has since been adapted to melting surgical masks, as well as other PPI. Sterimelt’s signature rectangular plastic blocks then can be converted into pellets and used as feedstock. Mask recycling using Sterimelt machines was piloted in three areas at the Royal Cornwall Hospitals in December 2020, and in March 2021 it was announced that TCG had entered into a joint venture with Dutch sustainability specialist Greencycl, with a view to showcasing Sterimelt technology to hospital decision-makers across the Netherlands and Europe.
Although all three players operate on a different scale and have adopted different models of commercialising innovative technologies within the plastic value chain, they all demonstrate how the association with plastic can earn a business commercial success, a reputation as an ecologically responsible innovator, and entry to markets outside the UK.
Zita Goldman
The UK needs a rebrand – an expert explains how
As the UK prepares for economic recovery from Covid and makes the best of Brexit, it is striking that there has been no talk of investing in the national brand. A post-Brexit “global Britain” will need more than rhetoric – and something more sophisticated than the nine-year-old GREAT Britain promotional campaign – to sell its products and services, develop new strategic alliances, retain its soft power, and make the nation an attractive destination.
UK governments have tended not to engage in serious branding activities. They have preferred to focus on slogans and logo-heavy campaigns that draw heavily on marketing tools such as advertising (the regular VisitBritain tourism campaigns), PR (Tony Blair’s so-called “Cool Britannia” party in the 1990s), and exhibitions (Food is GREAT at China’s 2020 International Import Expo).
At such a key moment for the country, to not attempt to build an all-encompassing national brand would be a major missed opportunity. Ending free movement of labour with the EU means having to work much harder to attract talent and investment. The extra costs and bureaucracy around exports means having to work harder to make British products competitive. Projecting a positive brand image both inside the UK and to the world will make these things easier.
Why branding matters
Research shows that when a nation has a positive brand it leads to economic power, wealth, national confidence and success. Perceptions of national characteristics or skills become associated with important industries: for example, Japan with consumer electronics, Germany with automotive engineering, and Switzerland with precision watchmaking. “Made in Japan”, “Made in Germany” and “Made in Switzerland” bring to mind high-quality and innovative products, and create a powerful country-of‐origin effect.
Brand image also contributes to, and is determined by, a country’s soft power – the ability to achieve what it wants through influence, reputation and attraction. The UK has normally wielded substantial soft power through institutions such as the BBC World Service and the British Council, as well as the international standing of UK academics and charities. The most recent Global Soft Power Index showed the UK holding its third-placed ranking, despite making a very poor job of handling coronavirus and suffering a drop in its overall score.
But there is usually a lag effect in the rankings when it comes to reputation. While the UK’s successful vaccination programmes may well benefit its reputation for competence, issues such as the reduction of foreign aid, hesitation around delivering climate change promises, and highly visible controversies around immigration and institutional racism may be storing up image problems for the future.
An action plan
The government should first establish an independent brand unit or task force to manage the UK brand permanently. A clear commitment from the top is needed to ensure everyone buys into the strategy and to prevent sub-brands, say from industry sectors, cities or devolved nations, overshadowing the UK master brand.
For instance, Switzerland takes its national brand so seriously that it is enshrined in legislation and managed by the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. In the past year, it has risen three places to fifth in the Global Soft Power Index. Meanwhile South Korea, another country with rising soft power, has taken a similarly all-encompassing approach through its Presidential Brand Council.
Once the UK has set up such a unit for managing the brand, it will need to involve all sectors in developing a long-term strategy that has a clear vision, common values and differentiates the nation from rivals.
One example of a well-managed national brand is 100% Pure New Zealand, which is reinforced by policies and actions and aimed at promoting everything from tourism to exports. New Zealand even banned companies from producing and selling genetically engineered and modified foods, knowing that they would have compromised the brand.
Closer to home, the Blair government showed what is possible with Innovation UK, a branding strategy aimed at reversing the perception that the UK was not innovative. Importantly, this branding was not based on just telling the world that the UK was innovative: it focused on the emotional message that the UK had “a passion to share our ideas and breakthroughs with others in order to enrich the quality of life for all citizens of the world”. This was authenticated by many examples of UK innovations that had helped change the world in a positive way.
Everyone from government ministers to companies, universities and other research bodies worked within this branding to show that the UK was open, outward-facing, and taking a leadership role in the world. The strategy achieved tremendous gains in business relationships and international collaborations. A similar strategy today might focus on the climate emergency and Britain leading the world in a green recovery.
But more broadly, what should the British brand be based on? While the UK is well known around the world, many of the associations are rooted in the past: is it still the country of Downton Abbey, afternoon tea, bad food, colonialism and empire? The Brexit vote and subsequent negotiations have reinforced an image of the UK as insular and exceptionalist. These perceptions may be partly true, but they are not the whole story. A branding programme would manage the negative perceptions while reinforcing the positives.
These positives would include areas where the UK is strong, such as science and technology, education, culture and financial services. The strategy would emphasise the UK’s underlying values: how it wants to be thought of and talked about around the world. Decency, fairness, creativity and inclusion might be in the mix.
Fundamentally, the nation brand is one of the most important assets of any state. Managing it is challenging, but the huge benefits outweigh the difficulties. At this moment of inflection, it is time to do something about it.
Paul Temporal, Associate Fellow, Saïd Business School, University of Oxford
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Businesses say they want to tackle inequalities but they need more data to take action
Covid-19 has brought challenges like no other for businesses. In the UK, where firms have also had to deal with the challenges of Brexit, the resilience and adaptability amid such adversity has been remarkable. But there has also been recognition of opportunities for change in the longer term. One area of which is the role of businesses in tackling social inequalities.
With a lot of attention given to the shape and make-up of company boards, both over a lack of gender and ethnic diversity, there has been much debate about diversity measures in business. In February it was reported that the number of black people at the top of Britain’s biggest listed companies had fallen to zero, despite public commitments to increase diversity in leadership. The Investors Association also said they will issue warnings to firms if they do not disclose the ethnic diversity of their boards or have a credible action plan to address the issue.
While such actions are incredibly important, structural inequalities span wider than diversity initiatives and action is needed beyond merely the upper echelons of business.
In a recent survey of 200 companies across London that we conducted with the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), we found a clear desire among business leaders of all sizes and sectors to engage with this issue of inequalities – more than 80% said that the capital’s business community can do more.
Despite the current challenging business environment, 75% of respondents said tackling inequalities in society over the next six to 12 months is important to their business. And one in five reported this to be an “extremely important” business priority. As a collective, the business community appears to clearly recognise the need for action to ensure an equitable and inclusive recovery from Covid-19.
The problems involved are also clear. The gender pay gap in hourly pay across the capital is still 17.5% and on the rise. For disability, there is a difference of 15% between disabled and non-disabled workers in London. And in our survey, only 9% of firms reported that they collect data on their disability pay gap – the lowest percentage of all answers given. A greater proportion of firms recorded employee education (19%) and the community engagement of employees (12%).
Similarly, while over a fifth of London business leaders stated their firms are tracking their ethnicity pay gap, this still lags significantly behind work on gender reporting.
Yet at an individual business level, analysis of findings from the survey shows that gender equality receives more attention than action on other protected characteristics, such as disability and ethnicity. This is causing a hierarchy of inequalities to persist within the labour market. While a significant majority of firms (both large and small) stated they had continued to report on their gender pay gap despite not being legally required to in 2020 because of the pandemic, reporting on other protected characteristics remains very low.
Greater data collection, conducted in discussion with employees and grounded in employee experiences, can guide actions to reduce inequalities and foster inclusion in employment. And businesses themselves recognise this.
When asked what the most effective and practical ways for business to measure improvements in diversity, inclusion and equality were, 43% of respondents stated greater data collection. Strikingly, this figure rose to 73% for respondents from larger firms. Yet despite this high level of support for greater collection, of the same respondents, only 43% recorded that they currently report ethnicity pay gaps.
Taking action
It is not enough, however, to focus on measuring inequalities alone, we also need to make sure these inequalities are meaningfully addressed. Avoiding creating (or, indeed, cementing) hierarchies of inequalities or prioritising action to tackle one area of inequity over another is critical.
Businesses should look across the board at the whole range of inequalities they need to tackle, not just focus action on gender or ethnicity for example. And they need to look at what inequalities exist in their own businesses as well as reaching out to understand how wider structural inequalities in society affects business. As an individual’s job is more than merely counting hours and collecting a salary, it affects every aspect of lives, from health to housing.
These findings show the need for businesses to undertake analysis of how these characteristics and data groups overlap – taking into account how people’s outcomes are simultaneously affected by multiple factors such as gender, disability and ethnicity.
Assessing and comparing data so that we avoid focus being placed on one area alone is urgently needed. Looking at social inequalities, at people’s lives as a whole, their many characteristics and the multiple, interlinked and stacked disadvantages they face, it is essential for firms to identify patterns of intersecting inequalities and build action to address different outcomes.
Despite the immense challenges businesses have faced over the past 18 months, the survey responses clearly demonstrate that the business community is up for the challenge. In short, it’s not just about getting things going again. It’s about capitalising on this opportunity to rethink and recognise the role of business in building a more equitable society.
Siobhan Morris, Head of Programmes, Grand Challenge of Justice and Equality, UCL and Olivia Stevenson, Deputy Director of Public Policy, UCL
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The UK's speedy Covid-19 vaccine rollout: surprise success or planned perfection?
The UK’s Covid-19 response has been criticised severely. Britain is among the countries with the highest number of recorded Covid-19 cases and deaths. But with its vaccination campaign, its fortunes seem to have turned.
The UK is one of the world’s front runners when it comes to vaccine coverage. On December 8 2020, it became the first country to start administering a fully trialled and tested Covid-19 vaccine to its citizens. Since then, more than 18 million people in the UK have received a first vaccine dose, with over 600,000 second doses also being administered.
The UK government has pledged that all adults will be offered a vaccine before the end of July. This would be a huge achievement less than eight months after vaccinations began. Initially, this deadline was late autumn, which demonstrates the success of Britain’s initiative to date. The speedier rollout of the vaccine raises hopes for a swifter end to restrictions. Unsurprisingly, rollout so far has been termed a “rare pandemic success”. Here’s how it’s been achieved.
Keeping up supply
The UK government’s end-of-July vaccination target looks achievable, and by maintaining an average speed of 2.9 million vaccinations per week – which is what has been achieved so far – the entire UK adult population could receive both doses by late September. Reaching and maintaining this pace requires consistent vaccine supplies, and the key to this lies in the supply chain.
Supply shortages have plagued vaccine rollouts around the world. A prominent example has been the dispute between the EU and AstraZeneca. The manufacturer drastically cut deliveries of its vaccine, citing production issues.
While the UK and the EU signed broadly similar contracts with AstraZeneca, British negotiators demonstrated a better understanding of the supply chain. The UK contract contains a commitment by AstraZeneca that the British supply chain “will be appropriate and sufficient” for the supply of the doses the country purchased. If its supply chain were to be insufficient at any point, AstraZeneca would need to cover any shortfall from elsewhere in its global network. The EU contract does not contain an equivalent clause.
Committing early to contracts with suppliers has been another positive in the UK’s vaccine procurement, as has the willingness to invest. The UK has spent £11.7 billion on purchasing, manufacturing and deploying Covid-19 vaccines as well as on vaccine research. Kate Bingham, the former chair of the UK Covid-19 vaccine task force, has highlighted that her purchasing strategy focused on which vaccines were being developed quickly rather than cost.
The UK now finds itself in the position of having secured access to seven vaccine candidates and potentially many more doses than it needs. It has already ordered enough doses of the vaccines currently authorised to cover its population. As additional vaccines are approved, its supplies will grow further still.
Manufacturing capacity has been the subject of long-term investment from the British government too. As a result, manufacturing infrastructure was already in place at the beginning of the pandemic and could be scaled up quickly, which resulted in three vaccines being made in the UK, giving ready access to supplies. Quickly kickstarting manufacturing also gave Britain the chance to iron out any production glitches early on; the EU has instead had to resolve these more recently, denting its supplies.
Long-term research investment has also helped. The UK, unsurprisingly, was at the front of the queue for the vaccine developed by the University of Oxford with AstraZeneca, and has ordered more of this one than others. Oxford scientists had already been researching a vaccine that could be used against a disease like Covid-19. Ready access to large stocks of a working vaccine is somewhat down to research investment that stretches back years.
Planning the distribution
But early investment and clever procurement alone do not account for the success of the UK’s vaccine rollout. They are paired with an excellent distribution network. The centralised structure of the NHS has offered an ideal platform for planning and coordination; but a varied and localised system of delivery has ensured the rollout has been effective.
In England alone there are more than 1,500 vaccination sites. These consist of GP surgeries and community pharmacies at the smaller end through to hospital hubs and mass vaccination centres established in sports centres, race courses and showgrounds. While the larger vaccination hubs offer speedy inoculations for many, the smaller community-based services ensure that access is broad.
This diverse network of vaccination sites does make distribution more challenging. Supplies need to be split among the sites without any one location running out unexpectedly or doses going to waste. Effective planning and stock management is critical, and for this reason, experienced medicines distributors have been brought in to make sure that supplies can continually be delivered.
Indeed, this is part of a wider effort to bundle together the strengths of different organisations and individuals and using their existing capabilities to make the rollout as quick as possible. For instance, alongside industry experts, military logistics planners and personnel have been drafted in to help with distribution.
The Covid-19 vaccine rollout is an unprecedented logistical effort. The UK is currently handling this challenge better than many other countries, which could well learn from it. However, after the high burden of deaths, illness, repeated lockdowns and economic damage, the pressure on the UK to maintain the speed of its rollout is high. The country is still in lockdown, and hopes for an end to restrictions rest on its vaccination campaign’s success.
Sarah Schiffling, Senior Lecturer in Supply Chain Management, Liverpool John Moores University and Liz Breen, Director of the Digital Health Enterprise Zone (DHEZ), University of Bradford, Reader in Health Service Operations, University of Bradford
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.