In this second part of a two-part feature published by international magazine Manufacturing Digital, RVA Group’s MD Richard Vann continues highlighting the most effective end-of-life asset management options.
In this second part of a two-part feature published by international magazine Manufacturing Digital, RVA Group’s MD Richard Vann continues highlighting the most effective end-of-life asset management options.
A recent article in The Telegraph interestingly highlighted many of the issues affecting the manufacturing sector that the RVA Group witnesses on a daily basis through our decommissioning work worldwide.
Whilst confidence does seem to be growing there are still manufacturers facing incredibly tough decisions as to what to do with idling and redundant plant and we urge them to take a very close look at all the options available – innovative end-of-life asset management can bring many positives.
We are all aware that unprecedented pressures have been placed on chemical, petrochemical, pharmaceutical and manufacturing companies across the globe, and that unfortunately very few have proven recession-resistant. Some have consolidated their activities in a bid to work smarter from a smaller number of locations, whilst others have mothballed, rationalised or permanently closed down their sites.
The challenge for plant owners, managers and engineers is how to proceed with the safe and cost-effective management of their redundant assets, whilst minimising any environmental impact.
Operators often assume that there are limited options when closing a facility and many simply ask a local contractor for a ‘demolition’ price, before deciding whether to proceed with the exercise or not. Naturally plant owners wish to avoid abortive or non-essential spend yet delaying projects that are deemed unaffordable is not always the most appropriate solution. They will inevitably have to be tackled at a later date and in most cases at an overall increased cost due to continuing liabilities such as hazardous material containment, security provisions, regulatory compliance feed, care and maintenance costs, plus the burden of unavoidable overheads such as local authority building rates.
Other companies may initially try to sell their plant in-situ in an attempt to pursue a relatively ‘pain free’ site exit and where possible protect employees’ jobs. But in truth this course of action may not result in the highest possible commercial outcome, and if a buyer is not found processing firms may struggle to know what to do next.
Difficulties lie in making well-founded decisions about the future, especially at a time when pressures are mounting or there are knowledge gaps. Specialist tools such as feasibility studies therefore play a crucial role in the development of safe yet commercially sound redundant asset management plans.
The concept of the feasibility study is not new. For decades it has been regarded as a useful investigative exercise that generates reliable site and plant-specific data from which informed decisions can be made. But its widespread application is rapidly increasing, predominantly due to its ability to present previously unexplored solutions for even the most complex of plant closure projects.
By assessing every risk and exploring every opportunity these strategic management tools remove an element of the unknown and provide an insightful starting point from which value-adding business decisions can be made.
Leaders in cast iron technology Saint-Gobain PAM UK for example had initially thought that the cost to deplant and demolish its former Central Melting Plant and adjacent Hallam plant in Ilkeston would be excessive and prohibitive. Yet having ceased production in 2006 the mothballed heavy industrial posed a number of ongoing security and safety issues, therefore a series of feasibility studies was carried out investigate and cost the different solutions available to Saint-Gobain.
A number of opportunities were identified and it became apparent that the safest and most financially gainful solution was complete clearance of the site, which would generate sufficient funds from scrap materials to cover project costs and actually be cash generative.
Of course every project is different, however the goal should always be to maximise the return on assets where possible and safe to do so. It all comes back to the same thing – knowledge is power. Therefore informed and considered project strategies that involve the right people with the right engineering skill-set and experience, will help to ensure a safe, fully-integrated and professional approach, not to mention legislative compliance.
RVA Group MD Richard Vann recently had the pleasure of being interviewed by BBC Radio Suffolk journalist Lesley Dolphin.
The interview focused on how RVA Group has developed over the past 20 years, the range of services it provides and the success Richard and his team are having ‘flying the flag’ overseas.
If you’d like to hear Richard chatting with Lesley, click play button below.
[audio:https://www.rvagroup.org/wp-content/uploads/RV-interview-radio-suffolk.mp3]
RVA Group’s MD Richard Vann discusses the most effective end-of-life asset management options with international magazine Manufacturing Digital in this the first of a two part feature article.
RVA Group is delighted to announce that it has opened a branch in Singapore. Whilst the specialist engineering consultancy has previously worked on the Asian continent, this is its first operational foothold in the region.
Commenting on the company’s expansion, managing director Richard Vann said: “The Asian economy is vibrant and highly regulated, and therefore offers a number of significant opportunities for us in our core market sectors of chemical, petrochemical, pharmaceutical, manufacturing, energy, oil and gas decommissioning.
“Since our inception in 1992 we have been very carefully planning the expansion of the business and the recent acceleration of our international growth is a testament to the expertise of our exceedingly hard working team. Opening in Singapore reinforces our commitment to enhancing the effective business relationships we have already with leading multinational blue-chip organisations in the region, and we look forward to establishing many more new ones too.
“RVA is dedicated to building knowledge-based partnerships wherever we are working in the world. Our aim is to develop totally safe, environmentally secure, legislatively compliant, cost-effective decommissioning regimes and to achieve that we devise bespoke team structures utilising local knowledge and resources. This approach, coupled with on-site methodologies, is the most effective way of tackling even the most challenging projects.”
RVA is also currently managing a number of complex, high-hazard decommissioning, decontamination, dismantling and demolition projects in North America and Europe.
RVA Group’s industry leading stance on all things environmental caught the eye of recycling magazine LAWR (Local Authority Waste and Recycling). Here we share with you the resulting article outlining Matthew Waller, RVA Group EHS manager’s, opinion on the extent to which the demolition industry has embraced the much-debated ‘closed loop’ concept.
To the uninitiated, demolition may appear a somewhat rugged industry, but in truth it is a structured discipline and long-standing champion of the ‘reduce, reuse, recycle’ philosophy. Environmental commitment lies at the heart of the industry, and has done for quite some time. The majority of professional demolition projects achieve a 96-97% recycling rate as standard, with the bulk of materials being recovered and reprocessed. Metals and glass for example can be recycled with ease, but as technologies develop and environmental awareness continues to grow, an increasing number of reuse opportunities exist too. Hardcore concrete and brick materials for instance can be crushed to produce an engineered aggregate for re-use in the construction industry, and expensive plastic pipe work can be salvaged and sold for reinstallation.
The great thing about the demolition profession though is that responsible consultants and contractors do not stand still. A number of factors continue to influence and improve the waste management practices that are developed and adopted on site including legislative pressures, external costs such as landfill tax and technological developments. This is in addition to demands from clients who are quite rightly keen to protect their corporate reputation and uphold their own ‘green’ policies.
As a result, standards of environmental excellence continue to grow. Man made mineral fibres that have traditionally been sent to landfill are now being sorted, segregated and recycled, and wood is carefully assessed so that high end material is re-used whilst lower-specification wood is processed for the biomass industry.
Recovering materials and contributing to energy from waste projects goes some way to supporting the closed loop, but there is more to be done. In our role as an industry consultant we must assume at least partial responsibility for heightening the discipline’s understanding of the exciting closed loop concept.
The current problem is perhaps the fact that a discrepancy exists between what people perceive to be a closed loop economy and what the closed loop actually is.
Waste minimisation and recycling is thankfully on the radar of many industries, but to truly reap the resource efficiencies of the closed loop, waste must move much further up an organisation’s strategic hierarchy.
Over time demolition professionals, clients and other parties in the value chain must increasingly view ‘waste’ materials as resources that have a future use. The priority should be to redeploy these resources so that they never become ‘rubbish’.
Thankfully, progress is being seen in this respect. Gone are the days when only office furniture is removed from a site prior to demolition. Now entire processing plants that may be deemed ‘redundant’ by one organisation are being carefully dismantled for resale, relocation and re-erection elsewhere. If this is not wholly viable then, with the right skill-set, it is possible to identify and salvage individual elements of plants such as equipment vessels for installation in other processing facilities.
The crucial point about this whole process is that such considerations take place at the commencement of a demolition project when feasibility and option studies are being conducted and methodology statements prepared. In other words, resource efficiency is not an afterthought – it is a priority from the outset. Along with safety, it underpins the project design. Not only does this achieve environmental benefits but in the large part it is financially advantageous for the client too.
Even this extensively considered approach does not wholly satisfy the closed loop philosophy, because resource efficiency considerations that will come to fruition at the end of a plant or structure’s life, should ideally be factored in when such facilities are first constructed. Yet, this approach highlights just how committed the demolition discipline is to the country’s environmental agenda – something the industry’s professionals have known for some time.
Closed Loop resource efficiency should not be an afterthought – RVA Group explains to Local Authority Waste & Recycling magazine just how committed the demolition sector is to the environmental agenda.
We recently had the opportunity to comment in leading publication Health and Safety Matters on the importance of maintaining a robust stance on work at height and in particular the dangers that exist when erecting, operating or maintaining plant and equipment. A topic at the forefront of every project.
“Work at Height Regulations are widely communicated within the construction and demolition environment, given the potential dangers that exist when operating on fragile roofs or near unfenced edges for example.
Over time the concept has become more comprehensively understood. Industry managers and employees are increasingly, albeit slowly, acknowledging that working at height covers every scenario, at or below ground level, where they could fall and become injured. Yet still it remains a root cause of many major injuries and fatalities, which shows further work is needed.
One area where work at height considerations have taken somewhat longer to come to the fore is the maintenance of plant and machinery, with cranes or 360° excavators being a perfect example. When operatives are rigging cranes or excavators, connecting hoses or conducting routine maintenance operations such as refuelling for instance, they often have to climb up onto the equipment, which can be a significant distance above ground, therefore putting themselves in danger. Even cab access or egress presents potential risks.
Generally speaking, machinery manufacturers have worked hard to design and implement more safety features on their equipment, including railings, non-slip walkways and rigging winches. The European Union Machinery Directive 2006/42/EC was influential here, stating that: “Parts of the machinery where persons are liable to move about or stand must be designed and constructed in such a way as to prevent persons slipping, tripping or falling on these parts.” Considering slips and trips were identified as the most common cause of major injuries to employees in a 2011/12 HSE report, it is important that equipment manufacturers are taking note of this EU guidance.
But perhaps the actions of manufacturers should go beyond simply legislative compliance, which in truth ensures only the minimum acceptable standards. Manufacturers are perfectly placed to further heighten site safety, but health and safety professionals within the industry need to apply pressure on them to do this. A zero tolerance approach to inadequately equipped plant and machinery would magnify the somewhat obligatory position that manufacturers find themselves in to further drive standards.
Ultimately, no-one would purchase a car without a seat belt, so contractors should not have to even contemplate an investment in equipment that does not have equivalent safety features. The cost to retrofit handrails for example is very minimal, but it mitigates a very large risk. The industry needs to be less accepting of manufacturers’ dismissal of their obligations.
The fact that many pieces of plant were built before the introduction of Work at Height Regulations (2005) also presents problems, as does the delayed implementation of these safety and risk management principles amongst other manufacturers. A significant retrofit requirement perhaps consequently exists. Some contractors can only afford to purchase such older plant, but they still require protection.
We have to move away from the opinion that enhanced safety mechanisms can be optional extras. All companies are understandably trying to work smarter following an extended period of economic difficulty and squeezed margins, but this cannot be to the detriment of safety.
Of course some projects present extraordinary and uncharted working conditions, and in such instances a collaborative approach between the equipment manufacturer, contractor and project consultant or manager will encourage the development of a bespoke solution.
It is important to note that the finger should not simply be pointed at crane and excavator manufacturers and users; their inclusion here is purely for illustrative purposes. In truth there is work to be done to improve the mindset throughout the entire trades industry. A scaffolding contractor may provide an incredibly helpful, compliant and safe product for a building firm to utilise, but that same contractor may neglect to recognise his own work at height risk when climbing up on to his trailer to actually remove the poles before erection. The fringes of any job must be considered in addition to the most obvious project risks.
The salient point is that the most effective accident prevention mechanism is education. The greater the awareness of varied work at height dangers, the more our mindset is switched on to identify, plan for and mitigate risk. We all have a moral duty to protect ourselves and others from accident and injury and we need to maintain momentum in this important field.”
EHS lies at the core of everything that RVA does, which is why Richard Vann was an obvious choice to contribute to Health & Safety Matters’ Working at Height feature…
RVA Group considers the industrial cash in the attic exercise that can be carried out on redundant processing plants, in this exclusive contribution to specialist chemical magazine TCE.