"Today the planet is green only because of plastics"

Ramu Ramanathan (RR): Uflex has been one of the early movers in wide-web flexo for flexible packaging. What is Uflex’s flexo-printing and converting capacity today? 
Ashok Chaturvedi (AC): In terms of percentages the share of flexo printing for the converting operations at Uflex would be around 15% while that of rotogravure printing around 85%. 

RR: Uflex manufactures both rotogravure and flexographic presses. At Drupa 2016 Uflex shook hands with Italy’s Comiflex for manufacturing CI flexo presses at your plant in Noida…
AC: Comiflex may not be a very big firm in terms of size, but the technological command and know-how that the owner Gianfranco Nespoli has in the industry is commendable. Considering that we are talking about capital equipment, quality always supersedes quantity. In fact we launched an in-house manufactured gearless central impression flexo printing machine Uflexo Elisa and have already installed it at our converting operation. This CI flexo press can handle a web width of 1350 mm with an attainable speed of up to 400 metres per minute depending upon the type and quality of materials to be printed, inks, plates, ink coverage with colour overlay among others. The anilox sleeves for this machine are ceramic coated having a diameter of 172 mm. The press can work with both water and solvent based inks for printing a variety of substrates like low-density polyethylene (LDPE) and high-density polyethylene (HDPE) (14-100 microns), polypropylene (10-50 microns), polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (10-50 microns) and paper (40-80 gsm) among others.

RR: As an industry where do we stand on the debate of flexo versus gravure?
AC: Flexographic and rotogravure printing have their own sets of advantages for specific converting applications, so it’s not a question of debate between the two technologies. Both are efficient technologies in their own right. CI flexo printing is desirable when the substrate is thin. For example, flexographic printing on polyethylene or stretchable film is getting increasingly popular. For shorter runs, CI flexo printing machines are certainly recommended. The cost of procuring plates for CI flexo printing is less than the cost of procuring gravure cylinders therefore when the operational costs have to be optimised a customer usually prefers CI flexo. The use of flexo printing technology is on a rise as single polymer flexible packaging is becoming popular with each passing day from the point of view of recyclability. With increasing varieties of SKUs and products, the job runs are becoming shorter, once again, building up a case for flexo printing machines.

RR: Where does this leave rotogravure?
AC: The benefits of flexo do not make rotogravure printing any less popular or important. Rotogravure technology renders exceptionally high-quality results rapidly. It is more suitable for longer print runs. Inherently, rotogravure as a process can print both solids and process tones within the same image carrier.

RR: What do the global players prefer?
AC: Flexographic printing is quite popular in most of America while rotogravure technology is also picking up of late. In Europe, the trend and predilection are again tilted towards flexographic printing although rotogravure printing is not far behind. In the entire Asia Pacific rotogravure technology still rules the roost.

RR: The developments in digital printing have been promising over the last few years. What are your views on digital printing for flexible packaging? Huhtamaki PPL has invested in India’s first HP Indigo 20000 press. When can we see Uflex making the digital leap?
AC: There are certain challenges with digital printing. This technology is suitable for short runs because of the high cost. The square meter cost of printing is nearly six to eight times to that of gravure. No amount of shorter runs can actually tend to justify this difference. Uflex has innovated and developed an alternate method of printing short run jobs. This process is cost-effective and more user-friendly than digital printing. By reducing the width and subsequently increasing the length, we reduce the set-up waste which is the main cause of overall wastage in short run jobs.

RR: According to you, are there no advantages of digital printing?
AC: Digital printing is undoubtedly getting increasingly popular for the myriad benefits it offers towards short-run jobs and as a flexible packaging company, we find this technology very efficient for the contemporary industrial landscape. There are certain advantages of digital printing like variable data printing (VDP) which allows the variable artwork to be printed in a very cost-effective manner. This concept is very popular for converters of labels as they can offer it as a value added feature more than just a cost effective method of printing. Some converters supplying labels and shrink sleeves to aerated beverages/drinks are using variable data printing (VDP).

RR: Digital printing is certainly low on wastage…
AC: Yes, but the savings that accrue on account of less wastage do not really match up with the high running costs considering consumables like inks. The business model for digital presses is on a per click basis which makes the operational costs prohibitively expensive, so digital printing does not make a viable proposition for most converters of flexible packaging.

RR: So VDP remains the only plus of digital printing? 
AC: Again, the market for VDP in India is not so significant. Even the Western countries do not pose a meaty demand for VDP and therefore digital printing will still take time to come up to the levels of viability globally.

RR: What are your findings based on?
AC: Uflex was the first company to conduct a full-fledged study back in 2011 on the viability of digital printing in flexible packaging. We are not averse to this brilliant technology but will only consider investing in the same when it makes a compelling commercial case.

RR: What does the Plastic Waste Management (Amendment) Rules 2018 entail for Uflex? 
AC: The new notification by Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India on 27 March 2018 encourages re-cyclabilty/ re-processability and energy recovery from waste multilayer flexible packaging into usable heat, electricity or fuel through a variety of processes including combustion, gasification, pyrolisation, anaerobic digestion and land fill gas recovery. I applaud the Government for the latest notification.

RR: Uflex seems to be well armed in the battle for environmental sustainability measures …
AC: Our packaging manufacturing facilities are equipped with reprocessing plants where multilayer laminates are converted into polymeric pellets that are further used for making various non-critical and non-food contact utility items. Our waste to energy plants (again an integral part of our manufacturing plants) further uphold our commitment towards environmental sustainability. We are also working towards installing a waste-to-fossil fuel conversion plant at our Noida precinct soon.

RR: Is recycling something that has been at the core of Uflex right from the onset? To be at this advanced stage of recycling it ought to be long standing…
AC: I am pleased to share that back in 1995 at Recycle ’95 -Davos Global Forum, Uflex (then Flex Industries Limited) was conferred with the Best Paper Award as a testament to unrelenting work towards carbon footprint neutralisation and sustainability much before these became global concerns. The award was given for the subject of ‘recycling of mixed plastic waste comprising of laminated films of metallised PET/ LDPE/BOPP and printed with inks.

RR: How much is your carbon footprint at Uflex? How much was it a decade or five-years ago and what is the situation now? Are they different from others? If yes, why?
AC: If we talk about our packaging business, the carbon footprint assessed in 2007 was 2.92 MT per MT of flexible packaging manufactured. In 2010 it was assessed at 2.05 MT. In 2017 it was pegged at 1.92 MT per MT of flexible packaging manufactured. While our footprint may be higher than the company (in the flexible packaging sector) that has the lowest carbon footprint but we are certainly less than the global industrial average. We are continually working towards further reducing our carbon-dioxide emissions through focused and systematic interventions towards using renewable resources. 

RR: Could you tell us about the specific interventions for environmental sustainability taken up by your chemicals business?
AC: It has taken a plethora of initiatives and adopted scientifically proven methods for significantly reducing water consumption at its manufacturing sites without hampering the production efficiency in any manner whatsoever. Going beyond the call of compliance it has on several occasions conducted voluntary audits that have further shown the path towards reducing energy and water consumption. Renowned subject matter experts are regularly invited to hold training and demonstration sessions at the manufacturing facilities living up to the highest standards of Environment, Health and Safety (EHS). Chemicals Business much like other business verticals of Uflex regularly organises tree plantation drives in an endeavour to contribute towards a greener and cleaner planet. 

RR: Has your chemicals business developed any products that will cause little or no harm to the environment? 
AC: The volatile organic compounds (VOC) free adhesives made indigenously by the team are eco-friendly and can be used for direct/ indirect food contact in flexible packaging applications.  Besides being compliant with European commission regulation (EU) no- 10/2011, these adhesives do not have any ozone depleting constituents. Uflex Chemicals has also developed non-toluene, non-ketone based polyurethane resin that is non-carcinogenic and free from odour. The team has also developed energy curable ink which does not have any volatile organic compounds.

RR: The current ban on plastics in Maharashtra doesn’t seem to be a well-thought decision. What are your views? 
AC: On Earth Day, I was invited by the Business Today to write an editorial opinion on this whole plastic vilification issue. Banning is an absolute no solution. Petrol and diesel vehicles are known to be a potential source of air pollution. Have the petrol and diesel pumps been shut down across the globe? Similarly banning of plastics or packaging is nothing short of a knee-jerk reaction. Please understand that the packaging does not walk on its two legs and gets immersed in our water bodies. It is the people across the globe that litter and contaminates rivers and oceans by littering all over. Who is to be blamed for this apathy? I would reiterate that banning plastic or packaging is absolutely not a solution.

RR: Why so? Can you share your perspective that makes you believe that banning plastic is not a solution?
AC: To all those who frown at flexible packaging just because it comes from the family of plastics/ polymers, I would like to remind that a lot of elegant clothes that we wear and flaunt are also made of polyester fibre and yarn which again comes from plastic. It is quite surprising that nobody complains about it. Had plastic not been invented, many regular, essential and luxury items that you see around yourself and use in your daily lives would have been made from plants either directly or indirectly. If that were to happen, our earth would have been bereft of its entire green cover. In layman’s language that would have left our planet bald and tonsured because no plants and trees would have been spared by mankind. Today if you see your planet green, it’s only because of plastics. In fact one must be grateful to plastics.

RR: A lot of work has been done by the companies towards downgauging of polymeric films and lightweighting of overall flexible packaging structures…
AC: In fact, there's a limit to how much one can down-gauge in flexible packaging and the industry has by and large plateaued. Now that this low hanging fruit has been plucked, much more institutionalised efforts have to go towards hybrid bio-based materials, greener chemistry replacements, sustainable sourcing and composting (home and industrial) among other efforts to give a much-needed impetus to the concepts of Circular Economy and Sustainable Materials Management. A lot of commendable work is happening across the globe.

RR: And from the government’s side? What are your suggestions to the government contemplating ban on plastics?
AC: At the cost of repetition, I would like to say that the biggest problem in our country related to packaging and plastic waste is its collection. A plausible step by Government could be to impose some amount of tax on all plastics used in whichever or whatever form. This tax could be termed Plastic Waste Management Tax. It should be levied on all producers and brand owners at let's say two to three rupees per kg. This money should be strictly used for the purposes of plastic waste collection and further processing. If this is implemented in letter and spirit, I am of the firm view that India will become the first country that will be free from waste plastic setting examples for others globally.

RR: Is 100% recyclable flexible packaging possible?
AC: I have been reiterating time and again that flexible packaging and plastics have a definitive – Alternate End of Life  Use – hence it is 100% sustainable. At the end of life the post-consumer- recyclate can be easily converted into alternate non-critical and non-food contact materials of utility like chairs, boom barriers, roads, road dividers and several more. Additionally energy can be recovered from waste multilayer flexible packaging and plastics in the form of usable heat, electricity or fuel through a variety of processes including combustion, gasification, pyrolisation, anaerobic digestion and land fill gas recovery.

RR: Is there a market for post-consumer recycled (PCR) materials in flexible packaging? Why or why not?
AC: There is a huge market for post-consumer recycled materials in flexible packaging. In fact, some of the most viable – Alternate End of Life Use – for plastics and flexible packaging are road construction and pyrolysis. This is because of the very high energy value of plastics and polymers. Further, highly variable molecular chains in plastics and polymers again aid in various types of end of life use.

RR: In earlier days, innovation in flexible packaging was focused on co-extrusions. Now, it seems like most activity is in laminations. What's your take on this and why?
AC: That’s a good question. Yes, I agree that a lot of research and development is happening in the field of laminated flexible packaging structures. There are reasons for as to why laminated structures score an edge above co-extruded flexible packaging structures. Some of these reasons are – the requirement of ultra-high barrier is not met by co-extrusion, particularly when we consider aluminium foil as barrier; in case of the laminated flexible packaging structure, the converter can go for reverse printing that tremendously enhances the aesthetics; and lastly to run the packaging material on high speed lines there are many variables like Coefficient of Friction (CoF), mechanical properties and lower Seal Initiation Temperatures (SITs) that are important to be considered. It is quite difficult to simultaneously achieve all these three parameters optimally in a mono-layered co-extruded film.

RR: How about coating technology for flexible packaging?
AC: As an end-to-end flexible packaging materials and solution company with innovation to create value added differentiation being the guiding vector, Uflex pays special attention towards formulation of coatings aimed for (a) improving the barrier properties of films, (b) improving the ink and metal adhesion characteristics (c) improving the heat sealing characteristics (d) Improving the anti-counterfeiting characteristics and (e) improving conductivity characteristics of substrates among several others. This is an ongoing process and we have had several breakthroughs in terms of proprietary coatings for flexible packaging.

RR: Can barrier films be an answer to food wastage in India and enable broader food distribution?
AC: Yes. Most certainly! Let’s discuss this at length! In India, there are three important aspects that shape the overall packaging strategy for food items. First – varied weather / climatic conditions. We have a coastal climate in Kerala whereas arid and dry conditions in Udaipur. Then we also have cold areas and the plains. Second – with too much urbanisation, the place of production of food is usually quite far from the place of consumption and third – bottleneck in supply chain and logistic conditions across the length and breadth of the country. 

RR: The above three factors make a recipe for food spoilage and wastage…
AC: Think about apples growing in Kashmir that has to be consumed down south. The time that would be required to transport these apples to let’s say Kerala will run into weeks. Proper storage and transportation would, therefore, need to be provided. Optimised packaging would become more important than ever to protect the apples from being spoilt. Same is the case with other food products that are grown in one part of the country and consumed in a cardinally opposite part altogether. Fish can be packed with dry ice and transported from Goa to Delhi. Coconut water properly packed in aseptic packs can be transported from Cochin to the retail shelves all across the country.

RR: It means that India is the perfect testing ground for food packaging?
AC: India is one country where all the three factors comprising the perfect recipe for food spoilage co-exist at all times, therefore there cannot be a better testing ground for various types of food packaging than India. To understand this better let’s take the example of flexible packaging for potato wafers. In India considering all the three points that I mentioned earlier, the wafers have to be protected by the way of nitrogen flushing so the pack would be absolutely inflated with the gas. Packing the same potato wafers in non-tropical (cold) countries would not require such meticulous packaging. While cooked food would be spoiled in around 12-14 hours in India, the same will easily sustain over 36-48 hours at the very least in the United States. This calls for very different treatment in terms of designing appropriate packaging structures catering to specific needs, geographically.

RR: Basically, appropriate barrier packaging will go a long way in protecting food from spoilage in India besides aiding towards efficient distribution…
AC: Barrier films form the backbone of flexible packaging. Barrier properties required by various food items will be different from each other and would have to be scientifically ascertained and optimally designed in the overall packaging structure. By enhancing the shelf life of food items through appropriate packaging, both brands and consumers can enjoy an extended window of opportunity for selling and buying the food products.

RR: What are some of the barriers to using recycled-content materials, specifically PCR, in new flexible packages?
AC: The recycled material specifically from multilayer flexible packaging is usually not transparent. Therefore it restricts the use of such content for new packaging. Multilayer flexible packaging waste owing to various substrates involved has different molecular weights and therefore its migratory properties remain unknown. It should therefore not be used in flexible packaging for direct food contact.

RR: Have you made any developments on the ALOx front?
AC: ALOx coated films are a regular part of the polymeric film portfolio at Uflex. Earlier in 2016, we launched 9.5-micron speciality ALOx polyester film, FlexAloxProtect F-PGX which happens to be the thinnest PET ALOx film available globally. Despite being the leanest, the 9.5-micron ALOx polyester film exhibits excellent barrier for oxygen and water vapour as WVTR (gm/sqmt/day) and OTR (cc/sqmt/day) are both < 1.0. No player other than Uflex offers such a thin PET ALOx speciality film with such superior barrier properties. Being a downgauged film FlexAloxProtect F-PGX is 24 % lighter than its 12.5-micron variant and almost 60% lighter than the 23.5-micron variant. Furthermore, the price coordinates are better and so is the yield. While the 12.5-micron ALOx film has a yield of 57.14 sqmt per kg and the 23.5-micron film has a yield of 30.4 sqmt per kg, the 9.5-micron speciality ALOx film yields 75.18 sqmt per kg. 

RR: That is a substantial yield…
AC: This brings major cost savings for the converters.  The fact that the film is transparent and demonstrates excellent barrier properties, the need for a sandwich (barrier) layer which is typically a metallised film is completely eliminated. The PET ALOx film can be reverse printed and then laminated with a sealing substrate. Depending upon the barrier properties required by the product to be packed, ALOx coated films can be used in two-ply structures right up-to multi-layered laminates.

RR: Can you chart out the production stages where aspects of food safety come into the picture?
AC: Food safety needs to be carefully handled at the following four stages: packaging material manufacturing stage, in the supply chain of the packaging material, at the packing and filling lines and the last mile product delivery supply chain. Every year our plants are audited by BRC and AIB on GMP for food safety. No material that we use has migratory properties more than that permitted by FDA.

RR: We hear about upcoming Indian regulation on packaging safety. Can you brief us about its impact on Uflex? Also, being the experts in your individual capacity is there any method of evolving the upcoming regulations to the next level in the future. If yes, what more would you expect from a body such as FSSAI?
AC: Presently the food safety regulations in India are generic and far from being specific on issues like migration, hygiene and GMP levels. While FSSAI does not clearly state many food safety aspects related to packaging, Uflex being a leading global exporter of flexible packaging solutions in over 140 countries is mindful of the requirements of various MNC food companies (clients) and has been meeting all the major international food safety norms. Uflex is geared up for any potential intervention by FSSAI towards upgradation of the food safety norms in India. We comply with the REACH regulations of the European Union; Food & Drug Administration (FDA) of United States and Swiss norms for food safety regulations both for Indian and international clients of flexible packaging.

RR: Exports have emerged as a major source of revenue for Uflex. Yet the regulations (especially sustainability related) are very strong. How are Indian companies coping with it? Especially Uflex selling its products in more than 140 countries!
AC: In 2017 the carbon footprint for our packaging business stood at 1.92 MT per MT of flexible packaging manufactured. While we may be higher than the company that has the lowest carbon footprint in the flexible packaging industry we are less than the industry average. We have a definitive roadmap to keep reducing our carbon foot-print till it becomes the lowest. The industry and clients across the globe acknowledge the efforts we are making in terms of sustainability and carbon footprint optimisation thus it has never been a challenge for us in selling our products in various countries.

RR: Uflex has announced an investment of Rs 1,700-crore in Uttar Pradesh at the Uttar Pradesh Investors' Summit 2018. How much money will be invested in sustainability- and what is the plan?
AC: We have ambitious plans to substantially enhance our manufacturing capacity for flexible packaging in Uttar Pradesh in the next few years. This would entail the need of following machinery and capital equipment in a phased manner: conventional gravure and CI flexo printing machines, hi-tech gravure and CI flexo printing machines with LED curing system – the first of its kind in the world, extrusion coating lamination machines, solvent-based and solvent-less lamination machines, high speed inspection and rewinding machines, slitters and doctoring machines, utilities like – boilers, heating systems, chillers and generators.

RR: How much investment has been reserved for this from Rs 1,700-crore?
AC: For seeing the aforesaid through fruition from scratch to finish, we endeavour to invest Rs 500-crore towards the project. We would require around 75 acres of land for doing this.  
Our capacity enhancement would generate employment for additional 500 people. To achieve this goal well in time, we solicit Government’s support in terms of quick approvals, infrastructure towards road and rail transportation, well-developed industrial land with proximity to residential hub for easy sourcing of manpower and uninterrupted power supply among others.

RR: And the remaining Rs 1,200-crore will be spent on?
AC: As a group we lay a lot of emphasis on environmental sustainability in all our business processes therefore we propose to set up a solar project on 300 acres with an investment of approximately Rs 1,200-crore. The land requirement works out to about four to five acres per megawatt depending upon various technologies of photovoltaic cells. The useful life of a typical solar plant spans across 25 years. 
The proposed project is expected to generate employment for 250 people at various levels. Thus the electricity produced will be used for captive consumption and the surplus shall be supplied to a state or national grid. 
This would be Uflex’s contribution towards Government of India’s target of achieving 100 GW of solar power by 2022.