The legal repercussions of the meltdown have cost Tepco $48bn in compensation damages alone
“My health may be harmed some day,” said one of the workers to Japanese broadcaster NHK. “I believe there are many people who can’t speak out about this kind of problem.” The individuals allege the company skimped on payments to bolster corporate profits, yet employees were asked to carry out tasks on a highly radioactive site.
The individuals concealed their faces on entering the court and have asked to remain anonymous, for fear of their employment prospects being compromised. “I may get fired or may be given no further work. But I hope people will take this as an opportunity to speak up and get paid,” said one worker. Approximately 6,000 individuals work at the plant, but most are employed by contractors and subcontractors, who also risk being implicated in the scandal.
In March 2011, an earthquake and tsunami disabled the plant’s cooling systems and sent it into meltdown. The resulting radioactive leak left the surrounding area uninhabitable and forced approximately 160,000 residents to evacuate their homes, with many leaving their possessions behind. The legal repercussions of the meltdown have cost Tepco $48bn in compensation damages alone, not to mention billions dedicated to the cleanup operation, which in 2012 pushed the company close to bankruptcy.
The lawsuit comes at a difficult time for the now state-owned company, after it was made to pay compensation relating to the suicide of a woman who was forced to vacate her home following the 2011 Fukushima disaster.
President Obama underlined his commitment to push a minimum wage hike through Congress before a packed Milwaukee crowd on Labour Day. He said the US was “better off than when I took office”. With November mid-term elections fast approaching, Obama outlined a list of priorities ahead of the State of the Union address and reiterated his support for the $10.10 minimum wage.
“America deserves a raise,” he said, before reflecting on what he previously stated would be a “year of action” for the motion. Obama hopes to push a minimum wage hike through Congress, should the Democratic Party control a majority share come November. Although the President issued an executive order earlier this year, which required that federal contractors raise their minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10 as of 2015, the plan to institute a federal minimum has been blocked numerous times by a majority Republican Congress.
[T]he plan to institute a federal minimum has been blocked numerous times by a majority Republican Congress
The President highlighted recent figures that show national GDP has rebounded by an impressive 4.2 percent in the second quarter, after a 2.1 percent contraction in the first, whereas the August jobless rate, at 6.2 percent, was down one percent on last year. “America is stronger because of decisions we made to rescue our economy and rebuild it on a new foundation asking the simple question: is this good for ordinary Americans?” he said.
In contrast to claims made by Republicans, Obama insisted businesses that had opted to raise their minimum wages had actually seen better job growth than they could have expected otherwise. “Until we’ve got a Congress that cares about raising working folks’ wages, it’s up to the rest of us to make it happen,” he said.
‘Snapchat at $10bn not absurd,’ tweeted Twitter’s CEO Dick Costolo on hearing of the news. ‘Crazy growth, clear monetisation path, and one of the best social product thinkers out there.’
Snapchat’s intentions to roll out new forms of advertising will likely send the app’s profits skyward
The investment follows another injection of capital earlier this year from Russian firm DST Global, who valued the company at $7bn. However, Snapchat’s intentions to roll out new forms of advertising will likely send the app’s profits skyward.
The app allows users to share photos and messages with friends for a limited time before they disappear, a premise that has resonated particularly with young consumers since it emerged in 2011. Snapchat’s advertising service would allow publishers to distribute content in much the same way, albeit with a lofty price tag attached.
The app, which ‘has always been about sharing your point of view’, according to the company’s blog, has been fending off suitors, including Facebook, who last November offered $3bn for the service. However, with ambitions to go it alone and one day rival the likes of Twitter and Facebook as a social media platform, the company rejected Zuckerberg’s offer.
Snapchat’s Chief Executive Evan Spiegel has previously stated that the service’s core audience sits somewhere in the 18 to 25 bracket – a demographic advertisers are eyeing closely in the social media space. The app also boasts upwards of 100 million unique users each month, with approximately two thirds of them using the service daily. As of May this year, users were viewing one billion stories and sharing 700 million photos per day, representing a twofold increase on October 2013.
Cruise shipping is the fastest-growing segment of the travel industry. Last year, more than 20 million people took their holiday on a cruise ship. It’s a fantastic way to see several destinations in a single trip; but is it possible to enjoy a cruise holiday without leaving a large carbon footprint? Carnival Corporation, the largest cruise line in the world, says: yes you can. We went to speak to representatives Jim Van Langen and Elaine Heldewier to find about the company’s environmentally friendly solutions.
The New Economy: Jim, let’s start with you: what has Carnival Corporation done to reduce its emissions?
Jim Van Langen: The reduction in the rate of carbon emissions is actually related to the actual quantity of fuel that gets consumed, and the rate at which we consume fuel. And that clearly has an economic impact, as well as an environmental impact.
The way in which we reduce our fuel consumption is by making our ships more efficient.
60 percent of the fuel consumption goes into the movement of the ship through the water. That’s where the energy goes. If you do it slower, you can save fuel, and therefore save money.
The second largest load is the air conditioning. By not running air conditioning systems when they’re not actually required… there are a very wide range of technologies that are being employed on a ship. If we can make those more efficient, then we’re able to reduce our energy footprint, and thereby reduce our carbon emissions footprint.
It’s a win for the environment, and it’s also a win for the company, because we have a more cost-effective solution than burning more expensive, low-sulphur fuel
The New Economy: Tell me about your exhaust gas cleaning technology: what is it, and what does it do?
Jim Van Langen: The exhaust gas cleaning technology that we are applying on our ships uses a proprietary technology to remove the oxides of sulphur that come from combustion of fuel that has sulphur in it.
It’s a win for the environment, and it’s also a win for the company, because we have a more cost-effective solution than burning more expensive, low-sulphur fuel.
It is pioneering the use of this technology on cruise ships, and also on ships in general. Because a lot of companies have been reluctant to enter this particular market, and we’ve made the decision to be a pioneer, and to make this investment, and to actually work on developing the technology.
Some of it is new technology, some of it is shore-based technology which has been adapted for shipboard use. We’re doing both, and we set the pace for doing what needed to be done in this industry.
The New Economy: Elaine, what challenges do you face installing this technology in your existing fleet?
Elaine Heldewier: Well it has several challenges, because what most people don’t understand, or perhaps don’t realise, is that you can’t just take a piece of technology or equipment that works very well on a land-based operation, and just put it on a ship and expect it to work.
We wish it was like that; unfortunately it’s not!
You have to marinise it, so to speak. And that means that you have to adjust it, you have to tweak it, you have to do more research and development.
What we’re working on, there’s no magic bullet, there’s not one single solution that fits for a fleet of more than 100 ships.
Let’s say you’re moving into a new house, okay? And you have your furniture. So the previous house, everything, you moved it in fine, no problem. Now your new house, you have this very narrow stairwell. So how are you going to bring your bedroom furniture into that stairwell? So you have to be creative. How am I going to do it?
But that’s how you learn. If you don’t do that, you just won’t learn, and you won’t advance technology as well. But it’s not that easy.
The New Economy: Jim, what is driving Carnival Corporation’s commitment to sustainability?
Jim Van Langen: This whole approach is values-based. We are committed to protecting the environment, particularly the marine environment where are vessels sail every day, and conserving the earth’s resources.
That is clearly articulated in our HESSS policy – the HESSS policy addresses health, environment, safety and security, as well as sustainability. And what it does is, it articulates the basic values that we believe in, and then it goes on to say how we’re actually going to do that.
But it’s a values-based approach. Protecting the environment, protecting the health and safety or our guests and crew members. It’s as important to deal with these non-financial aspects of the business as it is to take care of the financial aspects.
Elaine Heldewier: What I would add to that perhaps is that our communities are extremely important. We go over more than 700 ports annually – that’s a lot of places!
We work with our communities, we work with our ports, and we want to make sure that it’s a win-win for both, for them and for us. And the way that we do that is that we communicate clearly what’s going on with the ship, how we do things. And that’s important.
The New Economy: Are you getting calls from your shareholders, your other stakeholders, your passengers, to improve your sustainability record?
Jim Van Langen: It’s important to our guests – who come first and foremost in our business – but it’s also important to us to recognise it not simply as a matter of policy, or a procedure, or a standard. It’s actually the right thing to do, as our chairman has told us in the past. It’s the right thing to do, which is why we’re doing this.
All of these activities that we’ve talked about, and all of these initiatives, and the technologies that we are applying, or are going to be applying, are all driven towards fulfilling those values that we talked about earlier.
[I]f the sea is clean, and the air above the sea is clean, then we have a clean environment in which we live and work
We literally live and work in the sea and on the sea. So if the sea is clean, and the air above the sea is clean, then we have a clean environment in which we live and work. It preserves it, not just for the generation that’s out there right now, but also preserves it for the future.
Elaine Heldewier: Also we connect people to the sea. Not only our employees, our crew members; but also all of our guests. When you are on board one of our ships, you do get closer to the marine environment, and what that represents. And so on another level, we actually make them feel connected to it, and want to make sure that they want to preserve it as well.
Jim Van Langen: What we must do – and I think that I would encourage anyone in the industry to do – is to avoid complacency. In essence, never be satisfied.
Elaine Heldewier: Yeah.
Jim Van Langen: But also say that we can continuously work on improving what we’re doing, setting new goals, setting new targets, setting new objectives. Moving forward, and when you achieve those goals and targets, then you look at it again, and you set some more.
So as we continually improve our activities and our focus on that, we’ll continue to get better as a company, and continue to protect the environment, and live sustainably.
Eight months after stepping down as CEO, Steve Ballmer has resigned from Microsoft’s board, bringing an end to his 34-year term spent with the software giant. The decision comes a matter of months after Bill Gates’ departure as chairman in February, and underlines what is the beginning of a new era for the world’s largest software maker.
‘I see a combination of the Clippers, civic contribution, teaching and study taking a lot of time,’ wrote Ballmer in a letter to Chief Executive Satya Nadella. ‘I have confidence in our approach of mobile-first, cloud-first, and in our primary innovation emphasis on platforms and productivity and the building of capability in devices and services as core business drivers.’
Ballmer suggested in his letter that his input would not end altogether
The decision to step down follows Ballmer’s $2bn acquisition of the Los Angeles Clippers basketball franchise; an endeavour that he says is too sizeable a retirement project to manage while serving on the board. However, Ballmer suggested in his letter that his input would not end altogether, and with 3.99 percent of the company’s shares in the bank, Microsoft’s largest individual shareholder will be looking to protect his investment. ‘I bleed Microsoft – have for 34 years and I always will,’ he wrote. ‘Count on me to keep ideas and inputs flowing.’
Ballmer’s successor has already taken to the task of reshaping Microsoft’s business, beginning with job cuts of up to 18,000 in the coming year – 14 percent of the company’s total workforce. Crucially, Nadella’s focus for Microsoft moving forwards has fallen on cloud-computing, as the age old company looks to reposition itself to compete in a mobile-first, cloud-first world.
Some analysts have taken to speculating about unwritten reasons for Ballmer’s departure, and have noted that some of Nadella’s cuts promise to place a lesser priority on departments that have long been favoured by his predecessor – the Windows division being one.
People’s desire for individual mobility is cross-cultural and intercontinental. The world market for automobiles will grow by four percent to just under 76m units in 2014, the US and China are on a growth track, and figures in Western Europe are beginning to climb again. The long-term prospects look good too. Experts estimate that by the year 2020 the world market for automobiles will total 90m vehicles.
What drives this desire for mobility? Mobility is evidently not just a basic human need; it can also be understood as a basic right. A look at the volume of traffic in, and gross domestic product of, Germany since the 1970s shows that, beyond all doubt, there is a close correlation between the mileage driven and economic output. Cars can thus be seen as a sign of prosperity, and a growth factor as well. This connection can be observed in other countries too; in Europe, Asia, and North and South America.
In recent years, the German automotive industry has consistently expanded its global position. It will be building 5.65m new cars in Germany in 2014 – an increase of four percent on 2013. Production in plants located outside Germany is rising too – by five percent to 9.15m cars. Consequently, some 14.8m new cars will be rolling off the assembly lines of our manufacturers worldwide. To put it another way, around every fifth car sold worldwide bears a German group badge.
Cars can thus be seen as a sign of prosperity
The export strength of Germany’s automotive industry is particularly pronounced. A good three out of four cars built in the country go to international customers. And every second car that we export from Germany is registered as a new vehicle in another EU country. Exports to Asia are continuing to rise too. It is this ‘two-pillar strategy’ that makes us so successful worldwide – strong exports from car-building sites in Germany coupled with expansion of international production in the growth markets.
Market shares are the ‘hard currency’ of this success. The German group brands have a 72 percent share of the car market in Germany, a 50 percent share in Western Europe, and a 46 percent share in the new EU Member States. On the large Chinese market, our share is 23 percent, and we account for around one fifth of the market in the Mercosur region, Mexico and Russia.
Behind this impressive presence on the world markets lies a strict innovations course, which our companies have been steering consistently for many years. The German automotive industry is a strong research performer. In the past year, German manufacturers and suppliers throughout the world spent €27.5bn on research and development, including €18bn in Germany. Our industry thus contributed a third to overall R&D spending in Germany. A major portion of this is channelled into developing alternative drive systems.
Cutting carbon
The success stories of the automotive industry to date, including the reduction of CO2 emissions, have been achieved with classic drive systems – in other words clean diesel and petrol/gasoline engines. In order to master the challenges of the future, however, alternative drive systems will be indispensable.
The number of megacities is growing faster than the world population. While in the middle of the last century a good 70 percent of mankind still lived in rural areas, by the year 2000 the urban-rural ratio was already evenly balanced. According to UNO forecasts, by the year 2050 the ‘urban component’ will climb to 70 percent.
One answer to this change is electric mobility. Not only does it make us less dependent on mineral oil, it also creates mobility free of local emissions, so that, in a few years time, policymakers might be stipulating its use in major cities. Those who fail to keep up will only be able to watch the ‘tail lights’ of competitors disappearing ahead.
No other automobile topic has dominated public discussion as strongly as electric mobility in recent months. We have reached a new milestone. Electric mobility is fit for the market. This young market is still small, but it is fast picking up speed, as is reflected by the growth rates in key countries. In the course of the year to date, sales of electrified vehicles in Germany have grown by over 90 percent. We anticipate this development will continue. In all probability, the number of new electrically powered vehicles registered in Germany will exceed 10,000 for the first time in 2014.
Germany in the international context
International assessments show that, among the supplier nations, the German automotive industry is at the pole position for electrified vehicles. In no other country in the world do customers have a greater choice of new electrically powered models. By the end of 2014, German car builders alone will have 16 series production models with electric drive on the market. In 2015, they will be joined by a further 13 models. We have not only highly innovative manufacturers, but also a strong supply industry, including Bosch, Continental and ZF Friedrichshafen. The many medium-sized companies, often family-managed, also provide us with a substantial competitive edge.
We are convinced that electric mobility will prevail. Electric drives have enormous potential – especially in regions where short distances are travelled – and they can make a major contribution to environmental protection and emissions reduction.
As a new field of technology, electric mobility is particularly hotly contested internationally. Germany is well placed to head the field in electric mobility. However, this does not yet mean Germany is a lead user market in an international comparison; the matching frameworks have yet to be created. That is why it is a good thing that the Minister of Transport wants to introduce the first electric mobility law, which will ensure clear marking of electrified vehicles and launch special rights for electrically powered vehicles (for example, opening up bus lanes or preferential parking spaces). This is a first step; more need to follow. The grid of charging points must also become tighter. Now that e-cars are on the road, we need easily accessible and easy-to-use charging stations. A uniform plug for filling up with power has already been developed
Get connected
The second driver of innovation is networking. Cars and smartphones are already two sides of the same coin as the car becomes a mobile communications platform. This will make a crucial contribution to greater road safety, because the networked car ‘sees’ and ‘hears’ further than the driver ever could: with the help of web-based services, car drivers will be warned of traffic hindrances beyond the next hill. We are thus approaching the vision of accident-free driving, step by step.
There is a strong case for networking where comfort aspects are involved too. With the continuous expansion of already existing assistance systems, we are on the path towards partially or highly automated driving. This means that, on motorways or in stop-and-go traffic, drivers can delegate driving tasks to the vehicle. This relieves them of fatiguing work. When traffic speeds up they can take over the wheel again.
The road to automated driving is not a revolution, but instead an evolutionary process that improves road safety and supports drivers even more than today. It is not only our car builders and suppliers who are cooperating closely in the field of networked driving: the IT industry is integrated too. Electric mobility and networking will make driving more efficient, climate-friendlier and safer. But one thing will remain – the ‘pure fascination of cars’, the joy that is indivisibly linked with driving them.
The lack of treatment available to sufferers of the Ebola virus ravaging West African countries, which has killed over 1,000 victims since it hit in March and was declared a global health emergency by the WHO, has raised question marks over the ethics underlying the pharmaceuticals industry.
Is the pharma industry washing its hands of Ebola?
Drug ZMapp, developed by California-based company Mapp Biopharmaceutical, was given to two American aid workers and a Spanish priest struck by the disease. While the American missionaries are reported as recovering, the drug, which has not been tested on humans, failed to save the life of Spanish priest Miguel Pajares.
While westerners had received the treatment, US health authorities said it was so limited in availability that African countries would not have access to it for months. Among the critics of the industry’s reluctance to research and distribute safe cures is Dr John Ashton, President of the UK Faculty of Public Health, who believes lack of monetary motivation is to blame.
He told The New Economy that profits shouldn’t be put before curing life-threatening diseases and that contracts between governments, or even the EU, and pharmaceutical companies are essential if progress is to be made. “I think we need a fresh look at the arrangements that the pharmaceutical industry has with national health services, and with the international agencies like the World Health Organisation”, he said. “So that they are producing a balanced output, rather than focusing solely on the things that are going to line the pockets of their shareholders”.
On Tuesday the WHO approved the use of experimental treatments in West Africa, with Liberia set to be the first to have access to ZMapp. TKM-Ebola, developed by Canadian company Tekmira, is the only Ebola-fighting drug to have been tested on humans so far, but the trials were suspended due to safety issues. Lack of profitability and time continues to prevent large-scale production, research and distribution of the experimental drugs, however.
The pharmaceutical industry gets a bad reputation, as the nature of its business and investment choices can mean the difference between life and death for many people. Especially of late, it’s made headlines following a reluctance to research cures for Ebola – the highly infectious virus ravaging parts of Africa, and killing hundreds of people – as the profits are simply not there. But is it fair to expect a private enterprise to fund costly research. The New Economy speaks to Dr John Ashton, President of the UK Faculty of Public Health, to find out.
The New Economy: John, in brief, financially speaking, what goes into bringing a drug to market?
John Ashton: Well, there’s huge investment, obviously, and very strong partnerships with universities. But there are fabulous profits that have been made by the pharmaceutical industry since the Second World War, and their business model is one of generating huge returns for shareholders.
We’ve got ourselves in a position where the money for that basically comes from the public sector, in countries that have health services. It is public money. And I think we need a different financial model that regards the pharmaceutical industry more like we regard the utilities: as an essential service. And where the returns on capital should be more in keeping with that, of less than 10 percent.
Pharmaceutical industry’s response to Ebola concerns experts
The New Economy: It does seem to me that people tend to forget that the pharmaceutical industry is a business, not a charity. So how much do you think ethics should sway their business model?
John Ashton: Well I would come at this slightly differently, you know. I would say, what we need is capitalism that serves the purpose of the population as a whole, and not just the shareholders of the company.
We need a framework now for capitalism which recognises its social obligations. And that includes these diseases – orphan conditions, they’re called – where the numbers aren’t huge, or they’re not populations that have got big budgets to spend on treatments.
The New Economy: I have read that you talk about the ‘moral bankruptcy’ of the pharmaceutical industry to invest in research; but surely if a company only gets profits from researching more common and developed diseases, then – without meaning to sound cold-hearted – what’s the incentive to research cures for things such as Ebola, which largely affects the poorer developing world. Surely this is more the government’s responsibility to fund?
John Ashton: Well I think there’s a discussion there to be had about the partnerships that may be needed between governments and the pharmaceutical industry for some of these areas of work.
The European Union does have a competence for supporting the area of rare conditions. And in theory, the European Union could come to some kind of strategic partnership with one or more pharmaceutical companies over this. I don’t know whether there’s anything gone on in that area.
But you know, this also introduces a whole issue about values. And hear you’ve got a situation where it’s poor west Africans who’ve been dying, and it’s taken a couple of missionaries from America to get infected for the pharmaceutical industry to show interest.
The New Economy: Why focus on Ebola when we’re told that antibiotic resistance is a global health emergency? Surely pharmaceuticals need to be encouraged to preferentially invest in research and development where there can be a bigger societal benefit? And incidentally, potentially larger rewards?
John Ashton: We need viral research, we need vaccine research, and we need a big push on new antibiotics – because of the problems with antibiotic resistance.
But the big issue with antibiotic resistance, is their use in agriculture as growth promoters in animals: where farmers are feeding antibiotics by the bucketful to their animals!
The New Economy: Well David Cameron has floated the idea of ‘social impact bonds’ to raise money for R&D for things like dementia; do you think this could be the way forward?
John Ashton: It’s an interesting concept. But I think it can be a distraction away from the responsibilities of governments to be involved themselves.
I mean, I’d return to the point that the pharmaceutical industry’s money is mostly coming through national health services. And so the government has a legitimate say – or should have a legitimate say – on what the pharmaceutical industry is doing.
The New Economy: Well looking at patents now; how significant are these for the pharmaceutical industry?
John Ashton: Well they’re obviously important, but one of the things you have to bear in mind with the pharmaceutical industry is that it spends a lot of time producing what it calls ‘me too’ drugs – which are very similar to existing drugs – so that they can have them on patent again for the next 15 years, and charge a premium price for them!
So the research capacity of the pharmaceutical industry is diverted into playing games with producing new drugs that are very similar to old drugs, when they could be producing drugs for new conditions that we’ve been talking about: rarer conditions.
We need viral research, we need vaccine research, and we need a big push on new antibiotics
The New Economy: Well in my understanding, pharmaceutical companies invest a lot into the research of a drug that may never actually make it to market, and then if it does there is a small window when it’s under patent and can’t be copied. So from their perspective, it does seem like a gamble financially, and that the odds are almost stacked against them. So, what are pharmaceutical companies’ parameters for investing in different projects?
John Ashton: I would refer you back to the profit margins that the pharmaceutical industry has made since the war.
If you’d been investing relatively modest amounts of your monthly pay in pharmaceutical shares since the end of the Second World War, you’d probably be a millionaire plus by now. The returns to investors have been massive over a 50-, 60-year period.
The New Economy: So what do you think the solution is then, to what drugs should and shouldn’t be researched? Do you think maybe an independent regulatory body should choose what drugs are invested in?
John Ashton: No, I think we need a fresh look at the arrangements that the pharmaceutical industry has with national health services, and with the international agencies like the World Health Organisation, so that there can be a prioritisation and a social contract between governments and international agencies, and the pharmaceutical industry. So that they are producing a balanced output, rather than focusing solely on the things that are going to line the pockets of their shareholders.
The New Economy: Well finally there is also a call for greater transparency in drug trials, for example. But this industry really relies heavily on trade secrets. So could all this pressure on the pharmaceutical industry damage us in the long run? As with all this red tape, eventually perhaps they’ll no longer be able to operate, and there will be no new drugs?
John Ashton: Well I think that’s scaremongering. The problem with a lot of the trials is that the pharmaceutical industry doesn’t publish negative findings of side effects and suchlike. And the ethics of a lot of what the pharmaceutical industry is undertaking is very questionable. And we need a lot more transparency about what they’re doing in many ways: financial, as well as in research.
The Foundry, a global software company headquartered in London, is at the heart of innovation in the film industry, having developed radical special effects technology called Nuke. The New Economy takes a look at how Nuke is transforming the arts world.
The New Economy: These are the high-flying scenes we’ve come to expect in blockbuster movies; all created using Nuke Technology, built here at The Foundry, a global software company headquartered in London.
Simon Robinson: If you look at some of the recent blockbusters, the creation of any one of those shots is a massively complex undertaking, both in terms of the artistic contribution, the complexity of the computer requirements to do it, the size of the data that’s needed to make an image.
What makes Nuke special is, it’s able to handle all of that, and still keep artists being artistic at the same time.
The New Economy: The technology was applied in the film Gravity, celebrated as much for its special effects as its story. Scenes like this started out by using Nuke.
Courtney Pryce: The best comparison is to use Photoshop as an example: a compositing package where you take elements together, layer them, and you’ll get a final image. But the real power of Nuke is being able to take all of those elements together and bring them back into a final image, where we’re replicating what a real camera would do. Bringing in things like light wraps, atmospherics, blurs. The kind of collaboration of things that you would get inside of a camera.
The New Economy: Robinson says the special effects industry is being democratised, as more affordable technology such as Nuke breaks down borders: opening up the film and arts world to soaring new heights.
3D printing has excited professionals across the globe, especially in fields such as medicine – where the technology can have a profound impact on a patient’s quality of life. One company at the head of the 3D printing revolution is Oxford Performance Materials. The New Economy speaks to CEO Scott DeFelice to discuss the latest advances in the industry.
The New Economy: Now Scott, this new technology of course has evolved to the point where you can replace the human skull. Can you tell me how?
Scott DeFelice: 3D printing technology has really been around for a while. What’s new is that we can now 3D print with materials that are mechanically appropriate and biocompatible, that can be implanted in the body.
For example, this is a typical cranium implant. How someone ends up with one of these is that they may have some form of a trauma, a car accident, and they are literally missing a piece of their skull. What we’ll do is we’ll start off with a CAT scan or MRI, and then we’ll be able to design and implant that, which specifically fits that individual. This is what we ultimately put into a box and ship to a hospital.
[W]e’ll be able to design and implant that, which specifically fits that individual
The New Economy: Now how safe is it really to have one of the 3D implants live in your body versus a titanium alternative?
Scott DeFelice: The materials themselves are very safe. Their product is called PEEK or Polyether Ketone Ketone, so it is a class of polymers that are known to be safe in the human body for quite a long time. What we do in the 3D printing process is we essentially grow the parts, one layer at a time, in a very pure environment. So it’s quite a safe and effective way to produce an implant.
The New Economy: Now your company has made some great advances in terms of spinal cord long-term implantation. Can you tell me a little bit about that whole process?
Scott DeFelice: A business that we have been in for a long time is called spinal fusion. So we’ll provide a device that sits in between the vertebrae and eliminates the pain. Now with the advent of 3D printing, we can take that same material that we have been using in spinal fusion, and 3D print the device.
What that means is we can make it patient specific; that individual patient is going to get the proper anatomical fit. That means that the implant is going to eliminate pain and be more comfortable for the patient in the long term. And it’s really essentially the best clinical outcome.
The New Economy: Now wearable technology seems to be all the rage. Can you tell me how is this technology being incorporated into the healthcare sector?
Scott DeFelice: A great example of where we are heading with wearable tech is in our cranial prosthesis. So what we can do now with those implants, is we can make them smart. So we can enable them to elute a drug directly into the brain.
Ultimately we can actually chip that implant in the future, and so it can provide neurostimulation. And we even actually see a future where we can create bandwidth without other devices, for people who want to control external devices directly from the brain, because of their limited mobility.
The materials themselves are very safe
The New Economy: Can you give me an example of a condition that could be improved with such technology?
Scott DeFelice: You are quadriplegic and you want to have mobility. Clearly now people can control external mobile devices directly from your brain, but there was a problem in terms on managing that bandwidth out. And these types of devices that can stay permanently, in close proximity to your brain, will enable that.
The New Economy: Now another key sector that has benefited from some of the technology you have developed, of course is the aerospace industry. Can you tell me about some of the areas where you have been able to enhance development.
Scott DeFelice: 3D printing, what is really allows for, is to make very lightweight elegant structures. I mean it sort of emulates nature’s way of growing things; that’s the power of 3D printing or additive manufacturing. And now we can take that basic capability of the technology, and we can use a really strong lightweight material, to make structures that are really elegant and lightweight.
This means if you are making things that fly, you know you want to make them as light and strong as possible. And ultimately what that does is takes weight off aircraft, and other things that fly, and it enables one to save energy; it is about sustainability. So this is a real tool that allows companies to develop systems, aeroplanes that are better and more efficient.
The New Economy: In being able to make the process more efficient, do you think that you are able to save the aerospace industry millions of dollars potentially?
Scott DeFelice: Absolutely. We can take hundreds or thousands of pounds off aeroplanes. And when you think of the 30 to 40 year life of an aircraft, what that actually means in fuel savings – on one single aircraft is in the millions of dollars – fleets of aircrafts it’s in the billions and billions of dollars.
The New Economy: Very interesting to see how your technology is being incorporated. Thank you so much Scott.
With one third of adults in the US estimated to be obese, the fight against the killer disease has never been so pressing. One surgery that has pioneered innovative methods to combat obesity is Blossom Bariatrics. The New Economy joins its founder Dr Thomas Umbach find out how practitioners there are helping patients with the physical and emotional transition to a healthier lifestyle.
The New Economy: Dr Umbach, what are the health problems that obesity can contribute to or exacerbate?
Dr Thomas Umbach: Well we are actually learning that all medical problems are worsened by obesity. Which is one of the rewarding things for me, because you get to help somebody to lose some of those medical problems.
So things that you’d expect such as diabetes, heart failure, breathing troubles, those that we expect from being obese. But there are also things we don’t expect like migraines, foot pains, and infertility: all these things can be helped by losing weight as well.
[T]here are also things we don’t expect like migraines, foot pains, and infertility: all these things can be helped by losing weight as well
The New Economy: One of the issues that is barely spoken about is the mental health issue, that can be caused by the social stigma around obesity.
Dr Thomas Umbach: Right. It is severe, it is pervasive and it even exists to the degree of our insurance companies. Because we now know that obesity is a disease and should be treated just like every other disease. But it’s not; the insurance companies discriminate against it on a daily basis.
The New Economy: So what are the patient’s emotional needs both before and after surgery?
Dr Thomas Umbach: Well one of the most amazing things that I find about these patients with these patients is that they do come in and see us, and you’ve got to understand these are patients that have been trying to lose weight for 30 years, or so and maybe failing for 30 years.
And then to come out that morning and wake up and say ‘OK I’m going to try again, I’m going to try something new Dr Umbach, and we’re going to try one more time, after 30 years,’ I find amazing and is a real testament to our patients. So we are very conscious of that and we like to support our patients in a positive way; both at their first appointment and in their follow up appointments.
The New Economy: So the surgical procedure itself is just a small part of a much larger programme of lifestyle change.
Dr Thomas Umbach: Right, the surgery provides a tool for patients to do the job, just like running shoes are a tool to go running with. We recognise it as a small part here at Blossom Bariatrics, and we support our patients in a wide variety of ways. That includes yearly annual visits with me after the first year. It includes being able to reach out to the nutritionist at any time via email. And it includes support groups led by a professional, someone who has had surgery and also specialises in eating disorders.
Also before they come in to see us, we send them information. We send them an excellent programme called an ME, that provides them detailed information about the surgeries before they even come in and talk to me. So even before they come to see us they are getting support, and they may not even know it.
The New Economy: And you’re embracing modern ways of delivering that support: online forums and now video advice?
Dr Thomas Umbach: Right. Just as all businesses are moving to an online environment, we have a nutritionist who is available just through email, so you can reach out to them at any time. We have an internet presence on our website that’s very broad, support there on the website including videos and so forth. And we also offer classes online and support group online so, absolutely.
We have an internet presence on our website that’s very broad, support there on the website including videos and so forth
The New Economy: And I’m sure having a reassuring surgeon such as yourself, must be very helpful.
Dr Thomas Umbach: Yes, unfortunately these patients have been though a lot of doctors and they’re often at times very harsh and discouraging. So we try very hard here to have people who are very positive and energetic and supportive, and understand what patients are going through. I think that’s very important to have a Centre like that.
The New Economy: So how much of your work would you describe as life-style coaching; helping people develop healthier, happier lifestyles?
Dr Thomas Umbach: Well I see our number one role in Blossom Bariatrics is to be positive and a good role model for our patients. We are very aware that these patients have been discriminated against, they are very depressed, they’re tired, they may be in pain, and so at every interaction we are always trying to be positive with them.
I try to take it upon myself at each visit with patients, to give them something positive that’s happening with them. So if they’re successful and losing weight we will celebrate that. Don’t think ‘I’ve got to lose 500Ib more,’ celebrate the fact that you have already lost 20. Tap yourself on the shoulder and take a break just to encourage yourself. We support them in the lifestyle changes, even before they have come to see us. We try as hard as we can to support these patients.
CEO Satya Nadella attributed the fall in profits to the company’s $7.2bn acquisition of Nokia in April; however analysts and board members have criticised him for not being disciplined enough in his strategy of rebuilding the company around a core of ‘productivity and platforms’.
The news comes at a tough time for Microsoft, as only recently it announced one of the biggest cuts to its 130,000-strong workforce. Around 18,000 jobs, mainly from the Nokia division, are expected to be axed in the coming months.
[A]nalysts and board members have criticised him for not being disciplined enough
Still, Nadella was keen to reassure investors about the company’s future, emphasising that it had recorded revenues of $23.38bn for the quarter ending June 30 2014. It seems that Microsoft’s cloud computing division – which doubled its revenue – has been its most successful venture. ‘I’m proud that our aggressive move to the cloud is paying off – our commercial cloud revenue doubled again this year to a $4.4 billion annual run rate,’ added Nadella in a press statement.
In June, The New Economy reported on the unveiling of Microsoft’s first affordable Nokia phone – the X2. Analyst Ben Wood from CCS insight spoke to the magazine and said “Microsoft is very well-positioned to plug the gaps that Android isn’t filling.”
