BY DAVID BOTT

One of the questions we often get asked is ‘how did you assemble such a large project so quickly?’ The short answer is ‘we didn’t, it took years!’, but the story is important

In the last blog we discussed the scale of the use of petrochemicals to make things society doesn't know are made of fossil carbon, and the drive to change this – this time we will look at how we built the team.

On page 17 of the Chemistry Council Strategy published in 2019, you will find the phrase ‘Sustainable Materials for Consumer Products’. This is (we think) the first time the phrase was used in this context,. and so was effectively the beginning of the story.

Technically, there is prehistory. The UK government had tried twice before to understand and support the “chemistry-using” industries but had failed to capture the breadth and scale of their impact on the economy in their engagement. They had included the pharmaceutical companies alongside the more traditional “chemicals” companies, but not the extensive downstream activities that used chemicals to deliver a product or process. In 2018 they had spread their net a bit wider and included the consumer companies who use chemistry to make a large number of products for a whole range of markets. These companies were seemingly more aware of the way consumers were looking at the discussion on climate change and who were wondering why the products they could not live without had to be made from fossil carbon and contribute to climate change. So, these companies started making commitments to be fossil carbon free by 2030 or not long after. The scale of their production (often millions of tonnes) meant that the necessary changes to their supply chains had to be at a similar scale and they quickly found that their suppliers (and their suppliers) could not easily accommodate the changes they wanted to see in their chosen timeframe. What was required was a more radical rebuilding of their supply chains.

The Society of the Chemical Industry (SCI), who were responsible for the Innovation Committee of the Chemistry Council, decided to build a community who could do something about this challenge.

The first workshop in the area was held at SCI on 22 February 2020. It included participants from retailers (Marks & Spencer, Sainsbury’s, Walgreens Boots Alliance and Enkos), consumer products manufacturers (Unilever, GSK, Reckitt Benckiser and Proctor & Gamble) a number and variety of chemical manufacturers (Croda, Innospec, Johnson Matthey, Thomas Swan, BASF, INEOS, Lubrizol and Synthomer), universities/RTOs (CPI, University of Bath and University of York) and several companies engaged in the recycling of materials (Biffa, Symphony Environmental).

The discussion was outcome-oriented, and we finished the day with a draft list of things to work on in the second workshop. But within a few weeks COVID happened and we went into lockdown! As they learned to cope with Zoom and Teams, the core team met online and developed the ideas from the workshop. First, the tasks were sorted into three main buckets – engagement, new chemistries and measurement.

Talking to people

Under the engagement banner, we recognised the importance of explaining what we understood were the challenges and how best to address them. Audiences would include chemistry-based companies in the supply chain, regulators and policy makers in government, and consumers. Initial attempts at engagement rapidly taught us that before we could explain what we were doing, we often had to make the audience aware of the ubiquity of carbon-based chemistry in everyday life and the relationship to climate change. One example was when I found myself being interviewed by Rachel Johnson on LBC about the impact of laundry on climate change and her not believing that the cleaning products themselves were made from fossil carbon resources!

The idea of starting with awareness raising, moving on to (gentle) discussion of the science and technology before even mentioning the “ask” became our approach!

Changing the way we do things

The new chemistries banner was an area where we were all more comfortable. If we were to avoid using fossil carbon as a feedstock, we needed another source of carbon, or we needed to find the functionality the businesses needed using another element. The second option looked very difficult – and therefore expensive. The options for the first were well known – “biomass” (ill-defined but very popular as a choice), recycled (second generation?) plastics and oils (logistics is the current issue) and carbon dioxide (lots of it about, but more energy needed to get it to a useable state).

Then we agreed (being mostly from business) that we needed a specific target at focus on.

If we could start with a non-fossil source of carbon and turn it into a useful molecule, we would have demonstrated that there was a completely different way of making things. In the process we could learn what was possible, what impact this alternative would have on the environment, whether it was commercially viable and what social impact it might have.

Since there are so many things made of fossil carbon – packaging, paints, adhesives, textiles, carpets, upholstery, tyres, drugs, fertilisers, insulation and cleaning products – selection was difficult, but the team knew a lot about cleaning products, so we started there. After a lot of swapping of anonymised data, we alighted on non-ionic surfactants. They are extensively used in consumer cleaning products (about 1,000,000 tonnes a year) and they are relatively simple molecules. These are made up of a hydrophobic end (usually a 12-14 carbon atom chain) and a hydrophilic end (usually made up of 5-7 ethylene oxide units).

Alongside the search for a way to make this sort of chemical without using fossil carbon, we realised that cleaning products were almost invariably flushed down the drain – and that often that meant straight into streams and rivers. We knew from other studies that they would degrade into other chemicals, and eventually into carbon dioxide – but we could not find any studies that mapped the complexity of that degradation pathway – was it a biological process, or was it photolytic, or a mixture of both? We talked to BBSRC. We talked to NERC. To date we have not been able to interest any UK funding agency in researching this aspect of what happens to these carbon based molecules in the environment, although there is lots or research into the effect of the chemicals on the environment!

Measuring what was going on

The third area we pondered over was how to measure what was going on – both currently and as a result of anything we might do. We looked at various life cycle analysis studies and quickly realised there were real differences between academic studies – and even consultancy or in-house techniques. Given that we knew we would be building a wholly new supply chain, how were we going to measure the impact of our actions?

Getting on with it

We knew better what we had to do. The next problem was to find a way of funding the work. It took almost a year of talking to the KTN and Innovate UK before we became aware of the Transforming Foundation Industries competition. In the late Summer of 2021, we decided to develop a proposal to turn carbon dioxide from flue gases into our target surfactant.

The specification of the competition meant that we had to work with other foundation industries. Given that we wanted a source of carbon dioxide, and they mostly produce it, this gave us options. We built links to paper companies such as Holmen and UPM. They often use biomass boilers as heat and energy sources. These are currently classed as zero emissions under the emissions trading scheme, but the rules are tightening and are looking for the next technology to remain viable. We also talked to Tata Steel, who use coke both as a fuel and reducing agent in their blast furnaces. We tried to talk to cement manufacturers but were unsuccessful.

Next, we needed a means to capture the carbon dioxide in their flue gases. There are basically 3 ways to capture carbon dioxide, solvent adsorption, solid phase adsorption and membranes. We contacted Carbon Clean (who use solvents) and were already talking to the University of Sheffield (who were developing a solid phase process). Both were interested and so joined the consortium.

Turning carbon dioxide into the C12 fatty alcohol (to make the hydrophobic end of the surfactant) and the ethylene oxide (to make the hydrophilic end of the surfactant) was the next goal. The BASF, University of Sheffield and Johnson Matthey all had expertise in thermo-chemical processes which could achieve this and all were interested. We knew there would be biochemical processes that could achieve the same goal but no companies in the UK, so we turned to the Centre for Process Innovation (part of the High Value Manufacturing Catapult) and found they were working in the area so added them to the consortium.

Croda were already the supplier of choice to react these two components together to make the final surfactant.

We then had the consumer product companies, Unilever, Proctor & Gamble and Reckitt, who would evaluate the surfactant and “prove” that getting the carbon from a different source did not change the properties.

We also folded in our concerns about measuring the impact of what we had done by including the UKRI Interdisciplinary Centre for Circular Chemical Economy to evaluate the life cycle and technico-economic aspects of the various processes we were evaluating so that we could put together a justified case for a new supply chain at the end of project.

The Confederation of Paper Industries also joined to be able to understand what we had done and recommend it to other paper companies.

And the SCI joined to help with exploitation and dissemination as the project progressed.

Are we there yet?

We submitted our Expression of Interest to Innovate UK just before Christmas 2021 and (mostly) didn't worry about it until the New Year. On 10 January, we learned that our application was successful, so buckled down to writing the full application.

The consortium submitted its proposal on 6 April 2022

As we understand it there were eight proposals submitted but only money for four, but we were still disappointed that the initial funding announcement did not include us! However, somehow Innovate UK found some more money and the remaining projects were judged to be fundable so on 14 July we learned that we had the money!

For those who haven’t applied for Innovate UK funding before, the detailed process is simple but rigorous. One really, really important step is for every company to sign a “Collaboration Agreement”. This sets out the goals of the project, how it will be managed, and how the intellectual property that arises during the project will be allocated. It is often a source of contention, and the amount and intensity of the contention seems to scale geometrically with the number of partners in the consortium. Given that many of the partners were more used to competing than collaborating and they all had lawyers, it seemed at times to scale exponentially! However, because the scientific leads in all the companies had worked together (some, at this point, for over 3 years) and there was real commitment to get started, (after a small hiccup) we all signed the agreement just before Christmas 2022. It was then that we discovered we all had to sign the Grant Offer Letter as well, but we managed that too.

Then the work started…(see Part 3)

The exam question

So, how did we assemble the consortium?

1. It took time, and lots of interaction. The core of the consortium – Unilever, P&G, Reckitt, Croda, BASF, Johnson Matthey and the SCI – had all been sharing ideas, challenges, opportunities and frustrations for over 3 years. Individually some had also worked with the others we invited to join, so there were always personal recommendations and shared experiences.
2. It took transparency and honesty. The relationships we have built over those years are strong. We have disagreed (a fair amount) on the way, but we have always shared – and even strengthened through our interaction – a commitment to move from fossil carbon feedstocks to a sustainable chemistry based industry.
3. It required shared commitment, an understanding of how the different organisations fitted into what will be a wholly new supply chain, and tireless advocacy both within our own organisations – and to anyone who will listen outside them!
4. It needed the patience of a saint!

Written by David Bott, Director of Innovation at SCI and originally published on Linkedin

BY DAVID BOTT

A collaboration of 15 organisations is part way through an Innovate UK funded project to turn the carbon dioxide in flue gases into non-ionic surfactants for cleaning products. Many have asked: why we are doing it? how did we build the team? and how things are going? This is the first part of that story.

No one really thinks about the role of chemistry in society. Although everything around us is chemistry – life itself, the natural world, and the material world we have created to add to the natural world – we mostly talk about “chemicals” in a derogatory way. Does society understand how much it relies on carbon-based chemicals? Does chemistry need a PR agency?

Why we need carbon

It is difficult to say exactly when the “synthetic” world started, but the huge expansion came with the use of fractions of the oil and gas we were extracting from the ground as a fuel as material feedstocks about 120 years ago. The petrochemicals supply chain now accounts for about 2.6 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent a year (about 5.7% of the carbon extracted) and is growing at about 8% a year – therefore roughly doubling every 10 years. And the products at the end of the many supply chains that start with these fossil feedstocks range from things we cannot do without (such as disinfectants, soaps, textiles for clothes and so on) to things we “like” to have but would probably fight to keep (such as cosmetics and flying)!

The focus is often on single-use plastic packaging, which makes up about 30% of that 2.6 billion tonnes. But there are many other products that depend on the same source – products for use in the home (carpets, upholstery, paint and adhesives) at about 16%, textiles (mostly for clothes) at about 15%, pharmaceuticals, agrochemicals and fertilisers at about 11%, cleaning products and cosmetics at about 10%, the interiors of cars and their tyres at about 7% and the use in electrical and electronic products (both insulation and cases) at about 4%. Such is society’s use of these products, that we cannot simply stop using them, or make them from something other than carbon. We will need a source of carbon at the same scale.

At this point in the narrative, it is worth pointing out that although many uses of fossil carbon as a fuel can be replaced by alternative technologies, aviation fuel is different. Although there are prototype electric planes for short haul flights, and visions of hydrogen powered planes at some point, the options for long haul air travel look distinctly limited – with really only Sustainable Aviation Fuel as a runner. The aviation industry would need about 1.3 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent a year to keep going at their current rate, so about half that needed to supply our material needs. It faces the same challenge as the carbon based materials – if they do not use fossil carbon, where would it come from?

Where we can get carbon from

The source that gets talked about a lot is “biomass”. At the global level, it is estimated that about 100 million tonnes of biomass is produced each year, roughly half on the land and half in the sea. This equates to roughly 200 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent. Most reviews discount the marine biomass as difficult to harvest and then calculate that of the land based only about 8 million tonnes (so, 16 million of carbon dioxide equivalent) a year can be harvested “sustainably”.

Another factor often quoted is the logistical cost of harvesting, since for some crops the energy required to harvest compromises the efficiency of the process. The factor that doesn’t get talked about much is the difference between the biological building blocks and the petrochemical ones we are used to – which would require us to build a different set of supply chains and result in products with different properties.

The second source is the materials made of fossil carbon we have already extracted. There are various estimates of how much plastic is in landfills, but the average seems to be about 5 billion tonnes of plastic – about 15 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent. This would need to be chemically recycled back to feedstocks equivalent to those that underpin the current supply chains.

The third source is the carbon dioxide we have been “storing” in the atmosphere. Since the start of the industrial revolution when our emission of carbon dioxide started in earnest, we have emitted close to 2.2 trillion tonnes of carbon dioxide – half of which is in the atmosphere and the rest has partitioned into the oceans. The problem is that it is very dilute, so you would have to capture a lot of “air” to get meaningful amounts of carbon dioxide – but people are trying!

However, since we are still burning a lot of fossil fuels (and biomass) at the moment, we have flues and chimneys where the carbon dioxide concentration is many times higher. Why not start there and increase the process efficiency with experience?

However, there is a challenge with using carbon dioxide as a source for carbon-based materials. Carbon dioxide is where carbon tends to end up in an oxygen-rich environment – particularly where there is light. It is basically at the bottom of a thermodynamic well and it needs a lot of energy – and green hydrogen – to get it back to those feedstocks we need to go on making things that we want in a way that keep the cost down.

What next?

So, we have a very large problem, some options – each of which has advantages and “issues”, and it will take a long time to change our supply chains, so we need to act fairly quickly before our filling the atmosphere with carbon dioxide does irreparable damage to our environment. We need a plan…

Written by David Bott, Director of Innovation at SCI and originally published on Linkedin

Batteries are a critical enabler for reaching net zero. As their importance increases, so does the need to better understand how they operate.

Mel Loveridge, Associate Professor (Reader) at Warwick University, gives an overview of the complexities of battery science and how she is working to bring increased understanding to a wider audience.

As the role of batteries has an increasing presence in everyday life, there is now a focus on battery forensic science and advanced characterisation methods – a critical part of understanding the life of a battery, its safety aspects and its cycle life or lifespan.

This forensic analysis and advanced characterisation is the core part the work carried out by Associate Professor (Reader) Mel Loveridge at Warwick University, who says: ‘The aim is to firstly understand and identify early-stage signatures of battery degradation, and ultimately to unearth the root causes and propagation of failure in lithium-ion battery (LIB) components.’

Since LIBs were commercialised in 1991, the electronic devices that use LIBs have diverged considerably, with much larger format batteries now required to electrify transport. This is a critical enabler that is needed if the world is to reach net zero.

‘Much research is focused on developing materials with higher energy and power density to effectively do this, and this is why battery safety considerations are more paramount now than ever,’ says Loveridge.

‘It is only by understanding how materials (electrodes and electrolyte) degrade using sophisticated forensic techniques, that we can feedback into the design of better, safer, more robust and stable components that will last longer,’ she adds.

This is key for the continued range and power improvements in electric vehicles, where ultimately everyday users will benefit from advances in battery materials and manufacturing processes.

Developing characterisation capabilities

This understanding requires effective characterisation capabilities to look at the chemical and structural dynamics that occur inside the battery as it ages. This can be accomplished destructively by autopsy when the battery has reached the end of its life (ex-situ) or done in real time whilst the battery is going through charge-discharge cycling (operando).

Because of the small size of the lithium atom, specialised X-ray based microscopy and other techniques are required to detect and map it. Fully understanding the complex journey of the lithium ions during battery operation is still challenging for the battery community.

Pictured above: A cathode particle. Copyright WMG

To facilitate this greater understanding, WMG was recently awarded an equipment grant to build the UK’s first multi-modal microscope platform with a plasma focused ion beam sectioning device (deliberately designed with batteries in mind, unlike other systems in existence). This includes a time-of-flight mass spectrometer to enable 3D detection and mapping of lithium. The integrated analytical platform will allow us to understand micro to meso scale structure and chemical dynamics over broad length and time scales.

The recent EU 2030 roadmap (Battery 2030+) stated “The accelerated discovery of stabilised battery materials requires special attention to the complex reactions taking place at the many interfaces within them.” Also awarded was a Lord Bhattacharyya PhD project to work on the commissioning and further development of this characterisation platform.

Breaking down the complexity for government and media

The work is highly challenging and riddled with complexities, but it has attracted significant media and government interest in the last decade and Loveridge has been one of the voices providing accessible, expert insight on a range of media platforms.

‘I have been fortunate to be interviewed for BBC2, Channel 4 and BBC Radio 4, describing how batteries work. I have also participated in energy-related panel discussions with the House of Lord’s Science & Technology Committee and the House of Commons Shadow Cabinet. Prior to this, an article I published on the temperature implications of wireless charging for a mobile phone battery was summarised in a feature in The Telegraph.’

The important work being carried out in battery forensic analysis is set to shape the future of battery technology.

Accelerating the transition to a sustainable global energy system

Welcome to the first in this series from the SCI Energy Group – we’ll be blogging regularly on topics of broad interest across the energy spectrum.

Andy Walker, Chair of the SCI Energy Group.

I’m Andy Walker, and I have the privilege of chairing the Energy Group, which comprises members drawn from industry, research institutes, universities, energy policy bodies, R&D organisations and scientific publishers. We meet regularly to discuss and organise events around the changing energy landscape, exploring challenges and opportunities associated with the clean energy transition.

We inform and influence climate change dialogue and policy in the UK and further afield, by taking a fact-based approach to the challenges and potential solutions, with the ultimate aim of making the global energy system sustainable. We do this by bringing together experts, influencers and other interested parties from across the technology, social science and policy landscape within industry, academia and government. In this way, the SCI Energy Group offers thought leadership, insight and debate around the clean energy transition.

Recently, the Energy Group Committee visited Imperial College London and were given a fascinating tour of the carbon capture and storage pilot plant, which Committee member Alex Bowles had very kindly organised. This was a really interesting visit, hosted by Dr Colin Hale and several enthusiastic and knowledgeable chemical engineering students, focused on the critical role that the capture and long-term storage (and utilisation) of CO₂ will play within the clean energy transition. We learned that carbon capture utilisation and storage (CCUS) can play four critical roles in the transition to net zero:

1. Tackling emissions from existing energy assets, for example by retrofitting existing fossil fuel-based power and industrial plants, by capturing the CO₂ emissions emitted during these processes.
2. As a solution for sectors where emissions are hard to abate, such as the in-process emissions during cement manufacture (one of the largest industrial sources of CO₂ today).
3. As a platform for clean hydrogen production – almost all of the 90 million tonnes of hydrogen generated today is via methane steam reforming, which emits around 10 tonnes of CO₂ for every tonne of hydrogen produced.
4. Removing CO₂ from the atmosphere to balance emissions that cannot be directly abated or avoided (so-called direct air capture, DAC).

The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that the amount of CO₂ captured and stored annually in their Sustainable Development Scenario rises to around 9.5 Gt per year by 2070, with another 0.9 Gt CO₂ captured and used to make, for example, fuels and chemicals. (Note that a Gigatonne (Gt) is one billion metric tonnes).

IEA, Growth in world CO₂ capture by source and period in the Sustainable Development Scenario, 2020-2070, IEA, Paris. Licence: CC BY 4.0

The Energy Group plans to visit several other sites of interest in the coming months, including Drax and the Energy Innovation Centre in Birmingham, so look out for updates from these future visits.

Our next blog will relate to a recent workshop on Energy Storage, which we organised with strong support from Innovate UK/Knowledge Transfer Network. We brought in representatives from industry, academia, government and the finance sector to discuss this broad topic and to identify the key challenges, as well as outline some key policy questions for the government.

We chose this topic because energy storage is a critical part of the clean energy transition, as the world moves towards an increasing dependency on renewable sources of energy, which are inherently intermittent, yet it doesn’t receive enough attention and support from governments around the world. We’re sure you’ll find the outputs from this workshop very interesting!

Creating a paper pulp bottle that holds different liquids was a challenge that led BASF to join forces with Pulpex. Using sustainable chemistry the partners came up with an award-winning formula.

• Vikki Callaghan, Packaging Project Manager, BASF plc

• Tony Heslop, Senior Sustainability Manager, BASF plc

• Scott Winston, CEO Pulpex Ltd

Could you start by explaining how the collaboration and the idea for the product came about?

Vikki: We had an existing relationship with Diageo. BASF and The Innovation Team at Diageo had worked on other projects addressing packaging needs. When the team had this idea for an innovative packaging solution they came to us. The challenge put to us was ‘Do you have the chemistry that will hold many different liquids in a paper pulp bottle?’ I love a challenge and was excited to get talking.

Scott: Having worked with BASF before, they were our natural choice to explore this conundrum. Diageo had the idea and an early proof-of-concept of a paper bottle, but it wasn’t utilising sustainable chemistry. The intellectual property was in place but the transformation of scientific proof-of-principle to scaled commercialised technology wasn’t something that could be done alone. The partnership with BASF naturally continued into Pulpex as it formed and continued to grow, remarkably, throughout the Covid-19 lockdown. BASF’s corporate purpose to create chemistry for a sustainable future was intrinsically aligned to meet our need to deliver a commercialisable product that could be produced at scale.

Tony: Following that first call in November 2019, we got together a couple of weeks later and enjoyed an intense deep dive workshop. This was going to take some time but if successful we knew this could be an impactful innovation. We set to work!

Testing out their bottle in the lab. Image courtesy of Pulpex Ltd.

What hurdles did you overcome in the development of the material?

Tony: The obvious hurdle was the pandemic. There were two years between our first and second face-to-face meeting. My initial thought was how do you drive an innovation process when you can’t get together. Surely constructive and productive collaboration isn’t possible? In fact, the inability to travel meant that we could talk more frequently despite our different geographical locations. Once we’d set up weekly online meetings, which evolved into smaller specialist break out groups, the process actually had many positives and the relationships, as well as the innovation, flourished.

Vikki: Of course, as with any innovation, we experienced technical challenges, too. There was no overall solution because we were looking at very diverse requirements and specifications. Different brand owners with different liquids meant there were many considerations and customised solutions required.

Sustainable packaging is a growing market with new products being launched. Can you explain where your product fits in and how is it different from similar materials?

Scott: Pulpex recognises the need to balance three critical aspects. Firstly, new packaging must continue to deliver established brand equity and meet consumer expectations on quality; secondly, any new packaging must technically deliver on performance through the supply chain starting with filling infrastructure compatibility and through distribution and critically, at end-of-life the packaging must be recyclable in existing infrastructure from collection to enable circularity, or where it does unfortunately escape to the environment, it must degrade and not leave an unintended legacy.

Vikki: The resulting fibre bottle is lightweight and offers brand owners a sustainable, environmentally-friendly alternative to plastic and glass bottles.

The final product. Image courtesy of Pulpex Ltd.

What are the main markets for the packaging? Are you able to comment on customers already using your product?

Tony: The innovation will be aimed at brand owners who want to have an alternative sustainable type of packaging, a product that is suitable for ‘on the go’ and that is easily recyclable through existing waste streams. The technology will hold a range of liquids from alcohol and detergent to shower gel, ketchup and engine oil.

Scott: Trials of the finished product have already started to take place with the most recent being at a corporate five-a-side football tournament at Wrexham AFC in May, where several hundred bottles were put to the test working with Severn Dee Water. Branded especially for the event and designed as a keepsake, the feedback from the public was resoundingly positive and it was great to see our bottles in action supporting those on the pitch.

What are the next steps for the BASF/Pulpex collaboration?

Scott: Having developed such a sustainable alternative packaging, our continuing sprint is scaling up! The technology has been developed and we are expecting to have bottles on shelves soon.

Vikki: We will have our ongoing quest of looking to hold a vast range of liquids and for different brand owners. We will have customised solutions, in different sizes, different shapes… the innovation and collaboration continues.

BASF and Pulpex won the SCI Innovation Enabled by Partnership Award 2023. Image credit: Andrew Lunn Photography

Links to previously published articles and videos (BASF/Pulpex/SCI)

• BASF May 2023 – SCI Award
• BASF August 2021 – Collaboration with Pulpex
• SCI News May 2023 – SCI Award
• Pulpex May 2023 – SCI Award
• Pulpex video

CCU International will supply its carbon capture and refinement system to Flue2Chem – a project led by SCI and Unilever which aims to convert industrial waste gases to create more sustainable consumer products. We caught up with CCU International CEO, Beena Sharma, to talk about her career path, motivations and challenges.

Tell us about your career path to date

I joined the Oil & Gas industry after university and began my career as a behavioural safety specialist, specifically for the construction phase of oil and gas projects. Soon after I joined the industry, I was assigned to an LNG plant in Nigeria for training and experience and eventually ended up at a gas plant in Norway before I returned to the UK. With both a psychology and training background I found myself working within a health, safety and environmental remit for various industries including healthcare, construction, manufacturing, and even the tobacco industry.

Beena and colleague at a gas plant in Norway, 2004. Image credit: Beena Sharma

What made you want to work in science and the environmental technology sector in particular?

When I moved to Scotland six years ago it gave me the opportunity to explore the ‘E’ in Health, Safety and Environment further, which was an area that I was always interested in but rarely got the attention it deserved in the industries I worked in. I volunteered on a Scottish climate change project, and this led me to think more deeply about the scientific and technological advances that were needed to achieve net zero by 2045 in Scotland. I knew this was a huge challenge with education, and changes in habit alone could not solve it.

I began to research solutions for hard-to-abate industries and areas that were a challenge to decarbonise, and set up my first business focused on a novel approach to insulating legacy buildings. I then worked on setting up a group of companies that included a solar PV installation company as well as a cleantech business that utilised an electrolysis technology to ozonate tap water for disinfection.

I was invited by my now business partner to help launch a biotechnical business that could create a circular food economy, taking food waste and creating microalgae for use in industries such as cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and animal feed. This business incorporated 4 technologies, one of which was carbon capture. After some discussion with potential investors, it became clear that there was a huge interest and demand for carbon capture solutions. This led the team to decide to spin out CCU International as a separate entity and speed up the commercialisation of the technology which had been in development at the University of Sheffield under the lead of Peter Styring, Professor of Chemical Engineering and Chemistry.

Which aspects of your work motivate you the most?

The aspects of what I do that motivates me the most is the educational role that I play as the CEO of the business. I am regularly invited to speak on panels, podcasts, webinars and at conferences to share my knowledge with an industry that is transitioning and eager to learn, grow and incorporate new ways of thinking and doing things. It is extremely rewarding to see that people have come away from listening to me with a new perspective and being inspired to go away, take that learning, incorporate it in their ways of working and become innovators themselves.

According to the UN, carbon capture will be a key technology in achieving net zero. It is extremely rewarding to know that the CCU International technology will be a major contributor to this goal and that we can enable decarbonisation with the technology usage across multiple industries, both large and small, which otherwise would not have been possible.

What have been the biggest challenges for you as an entrepreneur?

As an entrepreneur my biggest challenge has been establishing myself in an industry and environment that is not well represented by women, and in particular women of colour. Often, it comes as a surprise to many that I would be heading up such a business and unfortunately many biases still exist within all genders and backgrounds. It makes it that extra bit harder and there can be a requirement to prove oneself as credible through knowledge or capability before the respect is given.

Image credit: Beena Sharma

The other big challenge has been around the education we provide for all our stakeholders. Innovation is not always welcome, especially in an industry or area where it may seem innovation is not needed. As the saying goes, ‘if it’s not broke, don’t fix it’, so stakeholders tend not to realise there is a problem until we educate them on the solution! And not many can accept there may be a better way of doing things than what they themselves have been doing for years!

What would be your top piece of advice for anyone thinking of starting up their own SME?

Starting up in business is a step that many think about doing but very few actually do. Most would be led to believe that you would need to work for months, maybe years on market research, business planning, strategy etc. before starting a business. My one piece of advice would be to start. Most of what you learn will come from doing. It is essential for entrepreneurs to fail, make the mistakes and learn what not to do next time so you have a better chance of success going forward. Many successful businesses emerge from failure.

What is it about the Flue2Chem project that is unique, what made you want to get involved, and what is the potential difference this project could make?

The Flue2Chem project is aimed at converting industrial waste gases into sustainable materials for use in consumer products. What is unique about the Flue2Chem project is that organisations that would normally be competitors have come together to find a solution for a problem that affects us all – as people, as businesses and as a planet. It is rare to see such cross-industry collaboration on this level and this allows both cross-learning and inspires others to come together, collaborate and innovate to solve problems that affect us all, much like the Flue2Chem project. It is a privilege to be part of the project by contributing our technology to the capture component.

CCU International, carbon capture technology. Image credit: Beena Sharma

The project will play a key role in supporting the UK’s 2050 net zero ambitions by providing a more sustainable feedstock for products such as household cleaning materials. The project could demonstrate how the UK could cut 15-20 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emission each year. The UK imports large quantities of carbon containing feedstocks that we use in the consumer goods industry. The project will demonstrate how we can secure an alternative domestic source of carbon for these goods and also demonstrate how industry can contribute towards achieving net zero.

Why do you think collaboration of this scale is so important?

Industry coming together to solve climate change issues is essential if we are ever to achieve net zero. Collaboration of this scale sends a strong message and emphasises that change in approach is needed and that innovation is key. This inspires others to do the same. Solutions are needed now and by bringing expertise and experience together we learn and adapt quicker. Solutions are needed now – not in years to come.

The impact this project will have has the potential to be huge, across multiple industries and certainly with how we look at not only capturing carbon emissions but also what we can do with the captured carbon dioxide, promoting a circular carbon economy where in time we learn to value carbon dioxide in a way that has never been done before.

Certainly, for the carbon capture storage community, this project will show that there is a use for captured carbon dioxide other than treating it as a waste and sequestering in underground oil reservoirs. Utilising captured carbon dioxide can create revenue streams for any business or process that emits carbon dioxide.

The collaboration demonstrates the commitment from industries to support decarbonisation, of those industries that are hard to abate whilst at the same time building a new UK value chain.

Rarely have science and government been as clearly linked as the initial response to the Covid-19 pandemic, when politicians could be heard claiming they were being ‘led by the science’ as often as they could be seen doing that pointing-with-a-thumb-and-fist thing.

This Thursday, the UK’s Chief Scientific Adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, will receive the Lister Medal for his leadership during the Covid-19 pandemic, and you can stream it live here, exclusively on SCI’s YouTube channel!

In readiness for Sir Patrick’s lecture, Eoin Redahan looks back at three ways science helped to mitigate the spread of Covid-19.

People will never look at vaccine development the same way. For good or ill, we have realised just how quickly they can now be developed. Similarly, we have realised what can be achieved when the brightest brains come together. These are two of the positive legacies from Covid.

But there are others. Some of the innovations conceived to tackle Covid will now tackle other pathogens. Here are just three of the innovations that emerged…

1. Wastewater warning

As Oscar Wilde once said: ‘We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking up at the genetic material in stool samples.’

Not many people would find inspiration in wastewater treatment plants when thinking about early warning systems for infectious diseases.

Nevertheless, during the Covid-19 pandemic, researchers at TU Darmstadt in Germany came up with a system that detected Covid infection rates in the general population by analysing their waste – a system so accurate they could detect the presence of Covid among those without recognisable symptoms.

To do this, they examined the genetic material in samples from Frankfurt’s wastewater plants and tested them using the PCR test. They claim that their measurement was so sensitive it could detect fewer than 10 confirmed Covid-19 cases per 100,000 people.

It is inevitable that Covid-19 variants will rise again, but this system could alert us to the need for tighter protective measures as soon as the virus appears in our wastewater.

2. UV air treatment

UV light can reportedly reduce indoor airborne microbes by 98%.

Warning systems are important, as are ways to stop the spread of pathogens. To do this, a team from the UK and US shed light on the problem – well, they used ultraviolet light to remove the pathogens.

Using funding from the UK Health Security Agency, Columbia University researchers discovered that far-UVC light from lights installed in the ceiling almost eliminate the indoor transmission of airborne diseases such as Covid-19 and influenza.

The researchers claim it took less than five minutes for their germicidal UV light to reduce indoor airborne microbe levels by more than 98% – and it does the job as long as the light remains switched on.

‘Far-UVC rapidly reduces the amount of active microbes in the indoor air to almost zero, making indoor air essentially as safe as outdoor air,’ said study co-author David Brenner, director of the Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons. ‘Using this technology in locations where people gather together indoors could prevent the next potential pandemic.’

3. Biological masks?

‘Physical mask, meet biological mask.’

Many moons ago, it was strange to see a person wearing a mask, even in cities with dubious air quality. Now, they are ubiquitous, and it would appear that mask innovations are everywhere too.

During Covid, researchers from the University of Granada in Spain were aware that wearing masks for a long time could be bad for our health. They devised a near field communication tag for inside our FFP2 masks to monitor CO₂ rebreathing. This batteryless, opto-chemical sensor communicates with the wearer’s phone, telling them when CO₂ levels are too high.

In the same spirit, researchers in Helsinki, Finland, developed a ‘biological mask’ to counteract Covid-19. The University of Helsinki researchers developed a nasal spray with molecule (TRiSb92) that deactivates the coronavirus spike protein and provides short-term protection against the virus – a sort of biological mask, albeit without those annoying elastics digging into our ears.

‘In animal models, nasally administered TriSb92 offered protection against infection in an exposure situation where all unprotected mice were infected,’ said Anna Mäkelä, postdoctoral researcher and study co-author.

‘Targeting this inhibitory effect of the TriSb92 molecule to a site of the coronavirus spike protein common to all variants of the virus makes it possible to effectively inhibit the ability of all known variants.’

The idea is for this nasal spray to complement vaccines, though during peak Covid paranoia, it might be tricky persuading everyone on the bus that you’re wearing a biological mask.

Covid disrupted scientific progress for many, but as we know, invention shines through in troublesome times. Plenty of innovations such as the ones above will make us better equipped to tackle air borne diseases – alongside the stewardship of leaders like Sir Patrick Vallance.

Watch Sir Patrick Vallance’s talk – Government, Science and Industry: from Covid to Climate – at 18:25 on 24 November

What does clean smell like? What if the fragrance you want to create is that of a sweet-smelling, yet poisonous, flower? In his Scientific Artistry of Fragrances SCITalk, Dr Ellwood led us by the nose.

When Dr Simon Ellwood spoke about creating a fragrance, it sounded like a musical composition or a painting. The flavourist, sitting before a palette of 1,500 fragrance ingredients. Each occupies a different note on the register: the top notes, the middle ones, and the bottom.

To the outsider, this seems impossibly vast and daunting. The Head of Health & Wellbeing Centre of Excellence – Fragrance and Active Beauty Division at Givaudan mentioned that Persil resolved to come up with ‘the smell of clean’ for its detergents in the late 1950s.

But what should clean smell like? Should it be the green, citrusy aromas of this laundry detergent, the smell of mint, or the antiseptic at the hospital?

To make choosing smells slightly less daunting for flavourists and perfumers, they are at least split into odour families such as citrus, floral, green, fruity, spicy, musky, and woody. Some of these ingredients are natural, some are inspired by nature, and others come from petrochemicals and synthetic materials.

The delicious-smelling musk deer.

Deer gland perfume

One of the smells you may have sprayed on your person – one sibling in this odour family – has peculiar origins. The pleasant, powdery smell known as musk was originally extracted from the caudal gland of the male musk deer and from the civet cat.

But as the Colognoisseur website notes, as many as 50 musk deer would have to be killed to obtain one kilogramme of these nodules. Now, killing a load of deer and cats for a few bottles of perfume may not have seemed unethical several centuries ago, but it also wasn’t sustainable or cost-effective. It became clear that a synthetic musk was needed.

When the synthetic musk discovery came in 1888, it was a chance discovery. Albert Bauer had been looking to make explosives when a distinctive smell came instead, along with the scent of opportunity.

>> Read about the science behind your cosmetics

Dior recreated the woodland notes of Lily of the valley.

Do you like the smell of jasmine?

Dr Ellwood’s talk laid bare not only the vastness of everything we smell, but also the ingenuity of those who recreate these odours. In terms of breadth of smell, neroli oil – which is taken from the blossom of a bitter orange – has floral, citrus, fresh, and sweet odours, with notes of mint and caraway. Similarly, and yet dissimilarly, jasmine’s odour families are broken down into sweet, floral, fresh, and fruity, and – jarringly – intensely fecal.

The ingenuity of flavourists is exemplified by lily of the valley. The woodland, bell-shaped flowers are known for their evocative smell, but all parts of the plant are poisonous. Despite this, French company Dior synthetically recreated the lily of the valley smell in its Diorissimo perfume in 1956 using hydroxycitronellal, which is described by the Good Scents Company as having ‘a sweet floral odour with citrus and melon undertones’.

Cyanide smells like almonds, but you might not want to eat it.

Of course, as Dr Ellwood noted, synthetic flavours can only ever get so close to the real thing – an imperfect facsimile. However, the mere fact that chemists have recreated deer musk, lily of the valley, and the prized ambergris from sperm whales to create the fragrances we love is almost as extraordinary as the smells themselves.

‘Fragrance,’ he said, ‘will always be the confluence of the artistry of the perfumer and the chemist.

Register for our free upcoming SCI Talk on the Chemistry behind Beauty & Personal Care Products.

Do you know how the Academy Awards came to be named the Oscars? What about the story behind the Nobel prize? Behind every award name there is a story, and the Julia Levy Award is no exception.

On the face of it, the Julia Levy Award is about innovation in biomedical applications, but it is the stories of the winners of this SCI Canada award, and Julia Levy herself, that really give it life.

But for a tweak of history, Julia Levy may not have ended up in Canada at all. Born Julia Coppens in Singapore in 1934, she moved to Indonesia in her early childhood. Her father uprooted the family during the Second World War and she left for Vancouver with her mother and sister – her father only joining them after release from a Japanese prisoner-of-war camp.

Julia and her family moved to Vancouver during the Second World War.

After studying bacteriology and immunology at the University of British Columbia (UBC), the young Julia received a PhD in experimental pathology from the University of London. She went on to become a professor at UBC and helped found biopharmaceutical company Quadra Logic Technologies in 1984.

More important than confining her achievements in cold prose, Julia Levy’s work made a profound difference to people’s lives. She developed a groundbreaking photodynamic therapy (PDT) that treated age-related macular degeneration – one of the leading causes of blindness in the elderly. She also created a bladder cancer drug called Photofrin in 1993 and, according to Neil and Susan Bressler, the Visudyne PDT treatment created by Julia and her colleagues was the only proven treatment for certain lesions.

Levy thrived in the business space too, serving as Chief Executive Officer and President of QLT from 1995 to 2001. She has since won a boatload of awards for her achievements, but sometimes the best testimonies come from those who have been inspired by her achievements.

Trailblazing drug discovery systems

For Helen Burt, winner of the 2022 Julia Levy Award and retired Angiotech Professor of Drug Delivery at the University of British Columbia (UBC), Julia has been an inspiration. Here was this UBC professor who jointly founded this big, exciting company – creating medication that improved people’s lives and showing her what was possible.

Helen, an English native, moved to Vancouver in 1976 for her PhD and loved it so much that she stayed. As a professor at UBC, Helen would become a trailblazer in drug delivery systems – a field pioneered earlier by Julia Levy.

‘I was a new assistant professor when she was building Quadra Logic and I would go to talks that she gave,’ Helen said. ‘Essentially, the early technology for QLT was a form of very sophisticated drug delivery [...] It was getting the drug they developed into the eye and irradiating it with light of a specific wavelength.

‘It was very, very targeted. And so, you didn’t get the drug going elsewhere in the body and causing unwanted side effects. So her technology was a form of very advanced drug delivery technology.’

‘For me to win an award that honours Julia Levy and her achievements – I think that's what makes it so special to me.’ – Professor Helen Burt, a former student of Julia Levy, is the Award's most recent recipient.

>> Learn more about SCI Canada.

These talks chimed with the young Helen. If a microbiologist could develop this kind of technology, what was stopping her from developing her own?

She, too, became a pioneer in her field, developing nanoparticle-based drug delivery systems (including those to treat cancer) and a novel drug-eluting coronary stent. According to Professor Laurel Schafer, who put Helen forward for the Julia Levy Award: ‘[Helen] was a trailblazer in new approaches for drug delivery and in research leadership on our campus.’

Importance to Canadian chemistry

Professor Schafer is a hugely accomplished chemist in her own right; and the University of British Columbia chemistry professor’s achievements in catalysis discovery were recognised with the LeSueur Memorial Award at the 2020 Canada Awards.

Julia Levy provided an inspiration to Laurel too, in her case as an exemplar for what Canadian chemists could achieve. ‘The achievements of Julia Levy show that it really can be done right here in Canada, and even right here in British Columbia,’ she said. ‘I grew up in a Canada where I believed that better was elsewhere and our job was to attract better here – a very colonial attitude.

Julia studied at and later became a Professor at the University of British Columbia – the campus is pictured above.

‘I now believe and know that better is right here. Professor Levy’s work showed that world-leading contributions come from UBC and from the laboratories led by women.’

She noted that the Julia Levy Award acknowledges Canadian innovation in health science, whereas Canadian chemistry has historically focused on process chemistry in areas such as mining and petrochemicals.

But Julia Levy’s influence permeates beyond science. ‘Julia is one of those people who has been willing throughout her whole career – even now, well into her eighties – to give back to the community,’ Professor Burt says. ‘She mentors, she coaches, she sits on the boards of startup companies, and she advises.’

‘She’s just got this incredible amount of knowledge… She was the Chief Executive Officer [at QLT], so she learnt all of the aspects: the complex and sophisticated regulations, knowing how to find the right people to conduct clinical trials, and how to do the scale-up. She really is a legend in terms of giving back to the community. And this is not just in British Columbia – it’s Pan-Canadian.’

Pictured above: Julia Levy

For young chemists, the Julia Levy in the Julia Levy Award may just be a name for now, but for those in the Canadian chemical industry and patients all over the world, her influence and her work resonate.

As Professor Helen Burt said: ‘For me to win an award that honours Julia Levy and her achievements – I think that's what makes it so special to me.’

>> For more information on the Canada Awards, go to: https://bit.ly/3VMwNKa

From government grants to analysing your own carbon footprint, energy-efficient measures could reduce the environmental impact of your SME and save you money. Retail Merchant Services explained some of the changes you could make.

1. Look at the sustainability of the products you are creating. Can you use renewable materials? Or, if you get materials from another supplier, can you check their eco-credentials, and swap if they’re not doing what they can to go greener? Can you streamline the process so that you reduce waste wherever possible?
2. Create a recycling policy. If you can’t reduce the amount of waste that you’re generating, you should aim to make sure that it can be disposed of sustainably. You could look at your shipping supply chain. If your business sends out physical items, make sure to check the packaging you’re using – can it be recycled? Are you using too much?
3. Can you switch to a renewable energy supplier, or generate your own renewable energy? While it’s not right for everyone, it can also be worth considering if there are any employees in your business who can work from home on some days. This removes the carbon footprint of their journey to work.

The Smart Export Guarantee Scheme pays some SMEs for producing their own renewable heat and power. Not only will this allow you to generate your own electricity, which can be useful in the current climate of fluctuating costs, but you can earn money from this too.

The Clean Heat Grant is a government-backed grant that rewards companies who use green heating technologies like heat pumps, and the Green Gas Support Scheme is intended to increase the amount of green gas in the National Grid.

The amount that SMEs can benefit from these schemes may depend on the amount of money that they have available to buy renewable technology, or the space to put items like heat pumps. If this is likely to be a barrier, then they may find smaller local schemes more useful.

Do you have any tips for companies calculating their carbon footprints? What are the potential benefits of this?

Take your time – understanding your carbon footprint isn’t an overnight process. You may find it beneficial to use an online carbon footprint calculator, or contact a sustainability expert to help.

You’ll need to consider three types of emissions:

1. Direct emissions – the emissions that your company is directly responsible for, such as fuel for company cars.
2. Energy indirect emissions – emissions from utilities that you don’t directly control, such as electricity and gas
3. Other indirect emissions – everything else that is connected to your business activities, such as employee travel, shipping, and the whole supply chain.

Understanding your carbon footprint is important to help you know where you can improve and cut down on your emissions. Not only does this help the planet, but it’s also a tangible demonstration that you care about the environment, which can be attractive to sustainably-minded customers.

The initial outlay for heat pumps and other technologies are steep, but this investment may pay off in the longer term.

What are the benefits of aggressively pursuing net zero and what are the drawbacks?

Of course, the primary benefit of pursuing net zero is that it helps the planet. Business waste has a huge impact on the environment and, as a result, any changes that can be made in this sector will have a big impact too. However, going net zero can also potentially make your business more profitable too.

Your profits may go up for several reasons. First, it’s more appealing to customers. As part of going net zero, you’re likely to adjust your products to be more eco-friendly. And with reports showing that 63% of millennials are willing to pay more for sustainable products, this could make your business more appealing.

Second, it could save you money. You may find that examining your processes and policies to make them greener will allow you to benefit from specific tax cuts, or simply improve the efficiency of your company. In time, this could save you from wasting money as well as energy.

Third, it could boost your competitiveness. Small companies often find they just can’t match big businesses for price, so it’s important to find a selling point that allows you to remain competitive. As mentioned before, customers are increasingly looking for more ethical products, so being able to say that you’re net zero could help you beat the competition.

Finally, it could prepare you for new policies. Governments around the world are under pressure to go greener, and so they’ll likely transfer this pressure to businesses. Going green now means you’ll be ahead of the curve and able to make these changes at your own pace, rather than having to rush and pay to make them all at once.

While these are all amazing benefits, one of the biggest challenges that SMEs face is the cost of going net zero. It’s not cheap in the current economic climate, especially if you’ve got big changes to make. According to research, 40% of SMEs said that high cost and lack of budget were the biggest net zero blockers.

Electric vehicles require less maintenance – and you don’t have to pay road tax.

What are the benefits of moving your vehicles to electric right now, and what are the drawbacks?

There’s no denying that electric vehicles are significantly better for the environment than conventional cars. For companies looking for a relatively straightforward way to go greener, electric cars can be a great choice.

As well as swerving rising fuel prices, EV owners don’t currently pay vehicle tax in the UK. Additionally, they have fewer moving parts, and so require less maintenance. All of these factors mean that while EVs can be an expensive initial investment, they generally cost less to run in the long term.

With the UK government banning new petrol and diesel vehicles from 2030, investing in electric vehicles now means that SMEs can get ahead of the rush that is likely to come as we get close to the deadline. There is already a year’s wait time for some vehicles, so ordering your fleet now could mean that you avoid an even longer queue further down the line.

Of course, many SMEs feel unable to commit to electric vehicles right now due to the cost of living – they’re an expensive purchase. If this is the case, you could consider changing one vehicle at a time, and looking to see if you’re eligible for any local grants that can support you with the cost of this. 

How much have inflated energy costs undermined the push for net zero?

Unfortunately, rising energy costs have meant that small businesses are feeling the pinch, and might struggle to make new eco-friendly changes, as they are often costly. For many, their focus is simply remaining profitable.

However, what is also clear is that for those that can afford it, examining your business for changes that will allow you to move towards net zero can also be a way of saving money in the long run.

If you’re able to produce your own renewable energy (for example, getting solar panels on the offices), you may be able to mitigate some of the effects of rising energy costs, as you won’t be reliant on the National Grid.

Finally, apart from energy efficiency schemes, how could the government help reduce the carbon footprint of SMEs?

As well as energy schemes, the government can help by providing information and resources on sustainable practices. By sharing best practices widely with businesses, and offering them a place to go to get support, the government can help them develop more environmentally friendly operations.

Additionally, they can help by creating incentives for businesses to go green. By offering tax breaks or other financial incentives, the government can encourage businesses to adopt sustainable practices.

Written by Retail Merchant Services. The SME Environmental Impact Guide can be read in full.

Edited by Eoin Redahan.

Little machines that blend makeup tailored for your skin alone… Technology that details the tiny creatures walking on your face… The cosmetic revolution is coming, and Dr Barbara Brockway told us all about it.

Max Huber burnt his face. The lab experiment left him scarred, and he couldn’t find a way to heal it. So, he turned to the sea. Inspired by the regenerative powers of seaweed, he conducted experiment after experiment – 6,000 in all – until he created his miracle broth in 1965. You might know this moisturiser as Crème de la Mer.

A rocket scientist in the world of cosmetics seems strange, but when you interrogate it, it isn’t strange at all. As Dr Barbara Brockway, a scientific advisor in cosmetics and personal care, explained in our latest SCItalk, cosmetics hang from the many branches of science.

Engineering, computer science, maths, biology, chemistry, statistics, artificial intelligence, and bioinformatics are among the disciplines that create the creams you knead into your face, the sprays that stun your hair in place. They say it takes a village to raise a child, and it takes an army of scientists to formulate all the creams, gels, lotions, body milks, and sprays in your cupboard.

Some say sea kelp can be used to treat everything from diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer, to repairing your nails and skin.

There is a reason why the chemistry behind these products is so advanced. If you sell bread, it is made to last a week. If you make a moisturising cream, it is formulated to last three years. To make sure it does that, chemists test it at elevated temperatures to speed up the time frame. They conduct vibration tests and freeze-thaw tests to measure its stability.

Dr Brockway likened the process of bringing a product to market to a game of snakes and ladders. If you climb enough ladders, you could take your own miracle brew to market within 10 months.

But expectations are high, and the product must delight the user. Think of the teenager who empties a half a can of Lynx Africa into his armpit, or the perfume that is a dream inhaled. Each smell she likened to a musical composition.

But these formulators are not struggling artists. Perfumers and cosmetic chemists – these bottlers of love and longing and loss – can earn a fortune. Dr Brockway’s quick calculation provided a glimpse of the lucre.

Take 15kg of the bulk cream you mixed on your kitchen table. That same cream could be turned into 1,000 15ml bottles, each sold for £78. So, just 15kg of product could fetch £78,000. So, it’s easy to see why the global beauty market is worth $483 billion (£427 billion), with the UK market alone worth £7.8 billion – more than the furniture industry.

Smart mirror, mirror, on the wall… 

It’s unsurprising that an industry of such value and scientific breadth embraces the latest technologies, from those found in our phones to advances in genetics and the omics revolution.

Already, the digital world has left the makeup tester behind. Smart mirrors overlay virtual makeup, recommend products for your complexion, and even detect skin conditions. Small machines that look like coffee-makes blend bespoke makeup. Indeed, Dr Brockway noted that Yves Saint Laurent has created a blender that produces up to 15,000 different shades.

Even blockchain has elbowed into the act. It is being used to make sure that a product’s ingredients aren’t changed in between batches. By showing customers every time-stamped link of the supply chain, companies can prove that their products are organic or ethically sourced. The reason why blockchain is significant here is that, once recorded, the data stored cannot be amended.

At first glance, proving the provenance of materials to customers might seem like a marketing ploy, but this is also being done in response to the increasing fussiness of the consumer.

Collagen is the main component of connective tissue.

Dr Brockway said all brands are now under pressure to incorporate sustainability into their business practices. The younger age group is also looking for more organic, vegan-friendly ingredients, and businesses have had to respond.

For example, microbial fermentation is being used instead of roosters’ coxcombs to create hyaluronic acid. Similarly, Geltor claims to have created the first ever biodesigned vegan human collagen for skincare (HumaColl21®). Such collagen is usually provided by our friends the fish.

These advances are significant, certainly to the life expectancies of roosters and fish, but of such ingredients revolutions are not made. Other forces will shake the industry.

Meditating on omics

Back in the 1970s, scientists thought the microbes that live on our skin were simple, but next-generation DNA technology reveals that thousands of species of bacteria live on our skin (a pleasant thought). Dr Brockway says these microbes tell us about our lifestyles – to the point that they even know if you own a pet.

So, what is the significance of this? Developments in DNA technology and omics (various disciplines in biology including genomics, proteomics, metagenomics, and metabolomics) mean we can now get not just a snapshot, but an entire picture of what’s going on on your face.

‘Thanks to omics we really know what’s now going on with our skin and see what our products are doing,’ Dr Brockway said. ‘We know the target better. We know which collagens, out of the 263, we need to encourage.’

We are learning more and more about how our skin behaves. And those time-honoured potions and lotions espoused by our grandparents – it will make sense soon, not just why they work, but why they work for some and not for others. In cosmetics, we are leaving the era of checkers and entering the age of chess.

This is the first of three cosmetic SCItalks between now and Christmas. Register now for the Scientific artistry of fragrances.

Eye-catching infographics, punchy messaging, and clear language are just three ways to grab people’s attention. Laura West, Senior Scientific Excellence Coordinator of R&D Biopharm Discovery at GSK, explains how to make your scientific research more visually attractive.

When it comes to displaying your scientific work, the experiments and data could be your best, but getting the visibility your work deserves and engaging your target audience require careful thought. It is, therefore, vital to be to think about how you communicate, not just what you communicate.

Every day, we are inundated with information. It’s more important now than ever to grab the attention of your audience, while improving the way you communicate. This helps people retain information about the data and key messages you deliver.

Ask yourself: what is the key message I want people to take away from this piece of work? You can then start to build around that.

When it comes to the overall layout of your work, you need to think about visual hierarchy, which is the arrangement of the elements on the page. This tells readers what to focus on depending on its importance.

It’s also worth thinking about how people best consume their media. Infographics, data visualisation graphs, images, and short videos are all great ways to attract and hold people’s attention.

Here are five ways to boost engagement in your work today.

1. Start with a bold, catchy message

Image from Naja Bertolt Jensen, Data: Plastic Pollution - Our World in Data. Graphic from Laura West

A clear, simple message that is big, bright, bold and catchy will grab people’s attention. Take a look at the infographic below. Notice how your eyes are immediately drawn to ‘Plastic Pollution’, which is short, punchy, and immediately noticeable.

2. Pick relevant images

65% of people recall information for up to three days when it is paired with a relevant image. So, pick relatable images to make your work more memorable.

3. Keep it simple

Covid 19 Infographic Datapack from Information is Beautiful.

Aim to keep your sentences short and use simplified language. This approach will make your work more accessible and easier to understand, and it will help your audience retain information.

Second, if you have a large amount of data, consider how to display it so that people can immediately follow what you’re showing them.

Take a look at the ‘Coronavirus Riskiest Activities’ infographic below. You can immediately see that ‘nightclub’ is the riskiest activity from the huge amount of information on the page. Note the use of negative space (or empty space) on the page to intensify the size of each bubble.

4. Use colour and contrast

This infographic from Statista uses a simple colour scale to clearly demonstrate the data. 

Colour choice matters. Our eyes pick up the contrast between certain colours and using this to your advantage will help accentuate the importance of certain items on the page. Think about the contrast between the colours you are displaying to make the text or imagery striking. This helps readers associate patterns or trends quickly.

In the image above, for example, it is easy to identify the teal colours against the white background and grey world map and immediately identify the countries.

5. Think about how people read

Readers use a 'Z' pattern to visually skim content.

Studies show that when we ingest digital information, we first scan the page in a ‘Z’ or ‘F’ pattern to determine whether it is worth reading.

If the information is predominantly text heavy, we read by scanning the left side of the page as this contains left aligned headings and bullet points. When reading information that is not in text-heavy paragraphs, we tend to read in the more ‘Z’ aligned format (left to right and top to bottom).

When thinking about the type of work you are displaying, consider where you want your most important information on the page.