‘The EPA has backed off,’ proclaimed a machinery manufacturer. ‘We’ve ended up with a halfway house, which is not something we expected.’
By now, many of the larger solvent users in the wood finishing industry should have been operating at, or well on the way to, full compliance with strict emission regulations for wood coatings (PG633) set out in the Environmental Protection Act (EPA). However, there is evidence that some companies are finding a way around the regulations, turning them into a mockery in many people’s eyes.
‘The industry has got so far down the line with compliance but they have moved the goal-posts and the deadline is now 2007 for a lot of people,’ said the contact, who complained that his firm had spent millions over the past five years gearing up for a market in which the EPA was a reality. ‘I think it is the paint people who have turned round and said they are not prepared to pay the premium for environmentally-friendly materials. The EPA rules have not been as vigorously imposed as they were on the Continent, though there are some exceptions, like Scandinavia,’ he claimed.
However, there appears to be some misunderstanding in the market about the precise demands the EPA imposes. There have already been several deadlines for solvent-users, depending on whether they use more than five or 15 tonnes per year, according to the Furniture Industry Research Association (FIRA). The deadline for firms using quantities within these upper and lower limits was always intended to be 2007.
For firms using more than 15 tonnes, the deadline was last year. But local authorities have been empowered to ‘give grace’ to solvent users unable to meet the deadline, provided they can show they have genuinely been trying to achieve compliance.
‘You might get one or two people complaining but, in general, PG633 is being worked to,’ said a FIRA spokesperson. ‘However, if the local authority is happy that these companies are working towards compliance and will get there in the near future, they have given extensions to some. It is not straightforward. It depends on the authority, who, ultimately, have to ensure they reduce their VOC emissions, and on what sort of effort the company has been putting in.
‘The authorities work very closely with the companies. If they go in a couple of times and no progress has been made, they will prosecute. It is very important for firms to have a good relationship with their local officers.’
Due for review
PG633 was implemented in March 1997 and is due for review ‘any time now’, said FIRA. However, other guidance notes for the industry, such as PG62, which covers the manufacture of wood and wood based products that go into the furniture and timber industries, were due for review last year and have yet to be completed. Such delays can only add to some people’s growing suspicion that the government is not taking the Act and its deadlines seriously enough.
Another hindrance to the Act’s imposition, according to one contributor, is technology and materials, which are ‘not quite there yet’. ‘This is a main sticking point,’ he claimed. ‘You can buy water-borne materials now but they still won’t have quite the same properties as the solvent-borne equivalent.’
A compromise has apparently been reached, in which materials, processes and equipment are described not strictly as ‘compliant’ but as ‘more compliant’ – a situation that does not sit well with many people. ‘It depends which way you want to look at it,’ explained the contact. ‘It is certainly a relief for finish manufacturers, because they are not being forced into doing something they are not really ready for and which costs them money.’
However, equipment makers, who were told that by now virtually every material used in wood finishing processes would be environmentally-friendly, are the big losers. Put bluntly, the demand for this type of advanced equipment is simply not there yet. One contact, who said his firm had spent ‘huge sums’ readying itself for a properly-regulated market, said: ‘We’ve geared up all our equipment but it seems we are ready years before the rest of the industry.’
For many years, the UK was thought of as the ‘dirty man’ of Europe, responsible for exporting acid rain and other pollutants to neighbouring countries. A number of contacts agree that the failure to enforce the EPA on schedule represents a missed opportunity to dispel this unsavoury image.
Bending the rules
The extent to which the rules have been bent is evident in the spray-gun finishing sector. Early on in the EPA process, a list of equipment was drawn up by government officials, detailing what was required to ensure compliance in all finishing processes, including HVLP (high-volume, low-pressure), air-assisted airless and electrostatic delivery.
However, the document also included what some have described as a get-out clause, which effectively allows the use of any process that can be proven to be over 65% efficient. This has enabled some equipment manufacturers to pay to have their conventional guns independently tested in controlled, laboratory conditions and receive certificates indicating full compliance with the Act, if the gun is used with specific finishes.
‘The irony of it all is that you could make any spray gun compliant under the right conditions,’ said a concerned contact. ‘For one thing you could turn the air off and just pour the stuff out.’
|
“Many of the larger solvent users in the wood finishing industry should have been operating at, or well on the way to, full compliance with strict emission regulations for wood coatings set out in the EPA” |
Part of the problem appears to be ignorance among enforcing officials about the intricacies of what is, after all, a highly technical subject.
EPA worries aside, the market for wood finishing equipment has generally been quieter over the past couple of months – because of the forthcoming general election, according several industry insiders.
Pre-election slowdown
‘There is a slowdown but it seems to happen every time before an election,’ said one. ‘The money dries up until people know which way the election vote has gone.’
Another contact estimated that his machinery manufacturing firm had suffered upwards of a 10% drop in business in the first quarter, though he is convinced that it is nothing more than a temporary lull.
Despite the quiet market, there are examples of growth in some areas: demand has gradually been improving for systems incorporating UV lamp technology.
There are also ‘new’ ideas coming through. Powdercoating technology, a method used extensively in the sheet metal industry for many years, is expected by some people to make significant inroads into the wood finishing market too. Several coating manufacturers are said to be investigating the possibilities for these powders, which can be applied to wood and ‘melted’ on.
Some people are very excited about the prospects for the powder system and see it as one way of easing the transition to full EPA compliance – if and when it does become a hard and fast requirement.
‘Whether it will take off or not, remains to be seen,’ commented one sceptical spray equipment maker.
Consolidation
As in other UK market sectors, there has been more consolidation in the wood finish industry. In the most significant deal, major lacquer, stain and system manufacturer Granyte Surface Coatings Ltd has been swallowed by Becker Acroma Ltd.
On a lesser scale, many other firms are rationalising and disposing of none-core, or flagging parts of their business. ‘I keep ringing people up and hearing “oh, we’ve been forced to sell bits of the company off”. All of a sudden all the small firms are being snapped up,’ remarked one contributor.
Kent-based lacquer manufacturer and stain distributor Bollom is one firm that has restructured, in this case to concentrate more of its efforts on the wood finishing side. The company, which also makes machinery systems, now has a number of separate divisions dedicated to wood finishes.
Traditional finish
That most traditional of wood finishes, wax, is continuing to hold its own in the market, despite the proliferation of hi-tech modern alternatives. This is due in no small part to the efforts of equipment manufacturers, who have perfected the technology to enable the material to be sprayed onto wood – and who are now reaping the benefits. ‘It has been a consistently good business to be in over the last year or so,’ said a contributor. And I believe it will keep on growing.’
