Unlike biofuels, biopolymers are currently subject to prices more truly representative of their overall production costs.
Meanwhile, in Europe, the policy debates around issues such as GMOs – genetically modified organisms – have created a precedent and reinforced resistance against similar developments such as shale gas fracking, and current discussions on the application of nanotechnologies are another example of this trend.
These were just a few of the observations made by Pierre Wiertz, general manager of EDANA – the European Disposables and Nonwovens Association – interviewed recently by Sustainable Nonwovens editor Adrian Wilson.

Do you think the will to produce goods more sustainably has receded over the past few years as a result of the recession?

Not at all. If you think of the three pillars of sustainability – financial, social and environmental – it only makes sense that a company’s approach to production ensures their continued existence into the future. We have seen many companies evaluate their resource use, manufacturing processes and handling, to ensure that every bit of efficiency is taken advantage of. As a result, not only are the industry’s natural and reusable resources being more thoroughly made use of, but companies have seen the potential to improve profitability and secure a future for their employees.

There have been some exciting announcements in respect of biopolymers in recent months – most notably in respect of bio-SAP. How do you see these impacting on the nonwovens sector?

In the context of the high costs of raw materials, the development of new materials is encouraging news. Paradoxically, new materials face many obstacles before they are present in meaningful volumes in our industry. So far, biopolymers have had a limited impact.

So what are the obstacles to be overcome?

The prerequisites for the mainstream introduction of any new raw material or ingredient are performance, price and availability. In this respect we may find ourselves in a situation where the material is – at least initially – offered at a significantly higher price. This usually creates a ‘chicken-and-egg’ situation where potential customers argue they are not willing to pay more for the material and producers cannot benefit from economies of scale and offer the material at a competitive price unless customers commit to buying significant volume. Another major obstacle is that beyond a few niche products, consumers are unwilling to spend more, regardless of the value added of the product. Given the usual margin on nonwovens and related products, this in turn means that converters, retailers and B2B customers further down the value chain are unlikely to agree to purchase a material at a substantially higher price. Indeed, unlike biofuels – whose markets have sometimes been distorted by somewhat irrational subsidies in some countries – biopolymers are currently subject to prices more truly representative of their overall production costs.

And performance is another key aspect?

The question here is whether the use of biopolymers impacts the overall performance of the product and how they interact with other materials during production, i.e: does it require major product or process re-design? If a biopolymer can be used with little or no adjustments to the process, that will significantly increase the chance of its use.
In addition to these economic and quality conditions, marketing considerations will also come into play. The question is then whether bio-based materials add real or perceived value to the products.

So do you think converters will be able to make a convincing business case to retailers on the use of biopolymers in the product?

The sustainable arguments in favour of using these materials make sense only if its life-cycle is consistent with the biodegradable and/or renewable characteristics of the entire product.

In what respect?

There is little sense in having a diaper of which a fraction of the materials are biodegradable, especially if the product is typically landfilled or incinerated, which is the case for respectively 38% and 19% of municipal solid waste in the EU. It is possible to overcome this obstacle if the biopolymer shows a positive impact on the overall life-cycle of the product.

It has been suggested that the controversial practice of shale gas fracking – prohibited so far, in most of Europe, of course – will make space for more biochemical developments, in preference to biofuels. What is your view on this?

In Europe, the policy debates around issues such as GMOs – genetically modified organisms – have created a precedent and reinforced resistance against similar developments such as shale gas fracking. Current discussions on the application of nanotechnologies are another example of this trend. This means that it is unlikely that technologies related to fracking or perceived as such will see a major breakthrough in Europe, unless they have been proven safe beforehand in other parts of the world.

And the same applies to biofuels?

Yes – again partly due to the defiance against GMOs, as well as the negative perception of using food crops for fuel and well-founded doubts as to their real total life-cycle benefits. In this context, while energy or fuel-related applications of biochemistry are meeting stiff resistance, applications in materials and products are more likely to develop – in spite of the fact that public spending is paradoxically still heavily biased in favour of energy and fuel applications of biochemistry.

EDANA’s 2013 events to date have been in South Korea, Russia and Singapore, what are the overall impressions of the current state of the industry you’ve taken away from them?

We have had instant support at both the Outlook Asia event in Singapore in March and at the Filtrex Asia event in Korea in May earlier this year. The response was so positive, in fact, that at both events – with the support of major local companies, our members and the EDANA leadership team – we immediately announced the following edition of both events. This means that we’ll be returning to Singapore for Outlook Asia in November 2014, and to Hong Kong for Filtrex Asia in April 2015.
During the conferences, I was pleased to speak with representatives from companies across the Asia Pacific who told me that while there are certainly challenges coming from the pressures to manufacture under ever-shrinking margins, there are also huge opportunities, as new consumers and new applications are found for nonwoven products.
Across the Asia Pacific, like in emerging countries in general, women from the growing middle-class are usually the first enthusiastic users and ‘prescribers’ of personal care products
As far as filter media are concerned, growing awareness of the priority need to improve air pollution control and indoor air quality – two of the main themes of Filtrex Asia – appear to be the main drivers for change in Asian markets.

Why is support for globalised trade and a separate trade definition so important to the industry?

Today, a large number of our member companies operate either globally or across national borders – or they will in the near future. Creating a level playing field on tariffs will benefit them greatly as they, and the nonwovens industry, expands.
For the good of the industry and as a principle that goes to the very heart of our support to companies across the globe, EDANA believes in free and fair trade.
In supporting free and fair global trade, we support the elimination of tariff and non-tariff trade barriers. Even if this is not necessarily a pre-requisite, a harmonised definition and better understanding of nonwovens could definitely help reach this objective. From discussions with companies, and from my long industry experience, I have been made aware of the measures taken in order to protect local traditional textiles industries against the low cost competition from Asian textile and clothing products. Nonwovens, which are currently still classified as textile products, are very often impacted by this in a way that was never intended.
A separate classification of nonwovens as an industry in its own right, outside the textiles definition, and the recognition of nonwovens as high-tech engineered fabrics, would be likely to stop them from being caught up with other products under rules which were never meant to apply to them.
This is why, responding to the rapidly expanding international nature of the nonwovens industry, EDANA and INDA, our sister association in North America, work together to aggressively advocate policy changes that will enhance nonwoven trade between countries. We recognise that this will be a long road, but are committed to ensuring that our members’ products are properly defined and fairly treated.