Global Insulation Conference & Exhibition 2022
2 - 3 November 2022, Lisbon, Portugal
The 15th Global Insulation Conference, Exhibition and Awards took place 2-3 November at the Estoril Congress Centre near Lisbon, Portugal, alongside the 20th Global Gypsum Conference, and attracted around 370 delegates in total with around 50 exhibition stands. The conference will next take place in Chicago in 2023.
Purchase the Global Gypsum & Insulation Conference Pack 2022
The conference pack is available for purchase (use the link below) for GBP£695 (includes the video, presentations and proceedings from the event).
Yves Bromehead, a building materials market specialist, kicked-off the insulation-specific lecture programme with a presentation on insulation demand, regulation and competitive dynamics. He suggested that the Covid pandemic was a bonanza for the insulation industry, since lockdowns caused home to become the absolute centre of people’s lives, and household savings reached an all-time high - significant amounts of that time and money were expended on home improvements and on insulation investment. European building permits spiked through the early part of Covid, apart from Italy, France and Spain, which had particularly hard lockdowns including on construction. The US also saw very strong levels of housing starts over the period. These levels of activity have fed through - so far - to healthy levels of profit for insulation-players, on the back of continuing pricing strength or ‘greedflation’ as Yves put it. However, it is likely to be more challenging for insulation producers in the coming months in light of today’s inflation levels, higher interest and mortgage rates and a squeeze on household budgets. High levels of inventory may also further impede future profit margins. Both European and US housing starts have collapsed over the last few months and Yves forecast a tough situation for insulation demand in 2023. A chink of light in the forecast may be that higher energy prices will spur a renovation wave in the short term, while ever-stronger energy-efficiency regulations and national renovation plans will strongly support insulation demand in the medium to longer term. Industrial production capacity and labour shortages will present bottlenecks to future growth. Yves also warned that the green image of insulation may be under greater scrutiny in the future. He finally pointed out that the insulation industry, especially in Europe, is already hugely consolidated, which makes it hugely attractive as a takeover target by other building materials companies, private equity and venture capital.
Grazyna Michener of Polychemtech gave the next presentation, on the importance of ‘size’ in insulation foams. The well-known Knudsen effect shows that the smaller the size of pores in an insulating material, the lower the contribution of convection in gases in the pores. Grazyna showed that for every foam there is a an optimum density to reduce conduction, while cell size, shape, cell wall thickness and other factors also control the insulation’s performance. In lower density foams, pores may be more open, or absent, instead being in the form of struts, cables, tubes, fibres, strands, plates or meshes - each of which has its own advantages and disadvantages, including effects on Mie scattering (where the size of scattering particles is similar to the wavelength of the incident radiation). She showed how the performance of foams can be finely tuned, according to their environment of operation, such as at low or high temperatures.
Andreas Guertler of the European Industrial Insulation Foundation (EiiF) spoke about the work that the non-profit organisation (NGO) does in promoting the deployment of industrial insulation. He set the scene for his argument by offering some headline reasons for the recent spike in energy costs in Europe, declaring that in a study the EiiF found a potential energy saving of 160MWh from industry in the European Union. He then presented a number of industrial case studies from the foundation’s TIPCHECK programme to show how installing technical insulation could help end-users save money. In one example, installing insulation on the 4000m2 roof of a heated oil tank could significantly reduce the facility’s energy costs. Installing Energy Class G insulation could deliver a payback in less than two-and-a-half years and installing Energy Class A insulation could do the same in less than one year. Guertler then raised example of new legislation promoting industrial energy efficiency in both Germany and the Netherlands. He finished by explaining how TIPCHECK offers energy audits and inspections and detailed the foundation’s digital tools including a website-based technical insulation estimation service and a mobile-phone application tool.
Bruno Bach Jensen from Tentoma promoted his company’s RoRo StretchPack packaging product with case studies from two insulation producers in Finland. At Rukki’s Alajärvi plant the producer was looking to keep its sandwich panels waterproof during subsequent storage at construction sites. It also desired tighter packaging to prevent the trailing of film during transportation by truck and to further decrease water ingress during product movement. After a new Tentoma packaging machine was installed, the packaging capacity increased by 40%, less time was spent changing film rolls and the ability to print the company’s logo on the packaging was also added. In Bach Jensen’s second example at Isover’s Forssa mineral wool plant, the ability of the RoRo StretchPack to take up less space compared to a regular packaging line and a heat shrink oven was a contributing factor to its installation. Other benefits that were outlined included less film usage, energy savings from not using an oven and tighter packaging during transportation. Bach Jensen concluded his talk by explaining how RoRo StretchPack uses less film than other products by stretching instead of shrinking, with certain customers reporting savings of up to 60% of film. Packaging in this way also saves energy compared to heat shrinking. One weakness of the process that was mentioning included higher capital expenditure of equipment and a slightly higher polyethylene (PE) film price.
After lunch, Morten Seeberg and Martin Valgren from Qubiqa presented on their company’s recent developments on ways to boost insulation sustainability and productivity in cold-end handling. Martin spoke first, regarding the ways that European plastic waste taxes, some already in place, are affecting insulation packaging trends. With an EU-wide tax for plastic waste set at Euro450/t soon to be implemented, he agued the case for thinner films, including machine direction orientation (MDO) film approaches that allow up to 600% stretching without compromising integrity. A UK-wide tax of GBP200/t is already in place for plastic waste that contains less than 30% recycled content. Martin provided case-studies from Sweden and the UK that showed how MDO films and Qubiqa equipment could provide a return on investment in just five months. Morten then spoke on the subject of machine automation and connectivity, introducing Qubiqa’s approach to digital twinning, the use of virtual reality (for example in maintenance and problem-solving applications) and documentation / online access to machines. Morten explained how it can be hard for equipment manufacturers to gain digital access to operators’ equipment for optimisation and fault analysis, due to difficulty establishing trust. This element of the presentation led to particularly animated discussion with the assembled insulation plant operators.
The next presentation was another given by two presenters, Manuela Mora and Martina Pellegrino from Bocedi srl. They spoke on the topic of Bocedi’s stretch hooder technology, starting with a short video. The Bocedi stretch hooder is the largest on the market, able to accommodate pallets (and double-stacked pallets) up to 3600mm x 1800mm across and 3000mm tall. There are a wide range of wrapping options, including conventional pallet wrapping, under-pallet wrapping, pallet-less wrapping and systems where the insulation material itself is used as a beam. The discussion touched on several elements of the previous presentation, including the potential effects of using recycled content in Bocedi’s equipment, which can already handle 30% recycled content. Tests are ongoing with recycled content up to 50%.
After the first day’s programme, delegates boarded buses to attend the Awards Dinner at Arriba, Guincho, a venue perched on a cliff-top overlooking the Atlantic, arriving just in time to see the sunset. The Global Insulation Awards 2022 were presented at the event.
Alessandro Gullà from AWS Corporation was next to speak, on the topic of wet electrostatic precipitator (WESP) technology for insulation manufacturing plants, specifically the company’s ‘Electroclean’ WESP. The first WESP installed in the insulation sector was at a plant in Chile, with dozens more subsequently installed, predominantly in Europe. Alessandro outlined the high performance of WESP systems, which have no moving parts. This results in low maintenance needs and low operating costs, increasingly important in today’s high-cost energy market. Before installing a new WESP, AWS can perform tests using its mobile test unit. Alessandro provided case-studies from the glass wool sector, in which an AWS WESP achieved dust emissions below 5mg/Nm3, ammonia emissions below 10mg/Nm3, phenol emissions below 5mg/Nm3 and volatile organic compounds at less than 50mg/Nm3. A series of CFD illustrations showed how AWS can adjust air flow for maximum efficiency, depending on the application.
Tom Redant, co-founder of Hammer-IMS, then spoke on the topic of ‘M-Rays’ for inline density and basis-weight measurements for polystyrene and for glass-fibre based insulation wools. Tom’s well-received presentation explained that ‘M-Rays’ is a term used by the company to describe electromagnetic waves with wavelengths in the 1-10mm range, which are also used in full-body airport scanners. Tom outlined how M-Rays slow down when passing through insulating materials. By reflecting M-Rays back to a detector, it is possible to detect the time of flight, and hence thickness of the material. When material thickness is well controlled, this can be used as a proxy for density. Tom outlined the advantages of using M-Rays compared to more common radioactive methods, including greater accuracy and safety. Tom concluded his presentation by touching on a number of case-studies from insulation, plastics and other sectors.
The next two presentations detailed research projects from the INNODAEMM (innovative thermal insulation materials) network. Tanja Graef from the Technical University of Dortmund presented the findings of the fly ash vacuum insulation panel (FA-VIP) project whereby an alternative material for the core of a vacuum insulation panel (VIP) was tested. The porous core of a VIP is typically composed of pyrogenic silica but this is energy-intensive to manufacture. Other issues with VIPs include the production cost, poor lifespan and inability to customise after creation. The project tested the substitution of proportions of fly ash from hard coal, brown coal and rice husk ash along with pyrogenic silica and fibres at the start of the VIP production process before the core is pressed. Previous studies had identified low heat transfer, small pore diameters and the processibility of the panel core as being a challenge to core substitution so these were the main areas of scrutiny. FA-VIP found that a fly ash substitution rate of 40 – 60% worked best for density, processability and thermal conductivity although the latter was at least one-and-a-half times worse than that of a common VIP ( 4.2mW/(m K) compared to 6mW/(m K) ). However, a 60% fly ash substituted VIP with a thickness of 29mm and an area of 1m2 cost Euro39 compared to Euro55.5 for a normal VIP.
Mathias Klinger of the Institut für Strukturleichtbau und Energieeffizienz (ISE) followed Graef’s findings with another INNODAEMM project, this time on the SUHITEMPIN (sustainable high-temperature insulation) initiative to develop a high temperature thermal insulation material using waste silica fibres. The goals for this project included creating a material that could handle operation at temperatures of up to 1200°C, have a density of approximately 250kg/m3, a heat conductivity of 0.2W/(m K) at 1000 – 1200°C and be relatively lightweight and cheap. One of the industrial project partners was ASGLAWO technofibre, a producer of fibre-based insulation and the source of the offcuts the project used. The project worked its way up from the laboratory to the technical scale using mixers provided by another project partner, Buckau-Wolf. The first results of the material development contained 67.5% of waste calcinated silica fibre content along with cement, chalk, alumina powder and water. The materials were mixed, cast into a mould, cut into slices or blocks and then dried at 110°C for 48 hours. The project was ongoing at the time of the conference with SUHITEMPIN’s density and porosity within target but the thermal conductivity still too high at 0.4W/(m K). Applications that the material is being considered for include fire protection for cabling, ducts and column cladding in buildings and as an insulating brick in industrial furnaces or kilns. Its benefits are its low cost, relatively high insulating ability and low weight however it is also a brittle material and this is being considered with regards to its applications.
Robert McCaffrey of Global Gypsum Magazine gave a late addition to the programme in the form of his presentation on how the cement industry is changing. His argument was that major cement companies have previously comprised combinations of adjacent production processes centred upon the key steps of cement, aggregate and concrete manufacture because this is where the best earnings reside. However, a mounting list of risks including increasing global carbon and fuel prices and recession fears may be encouraging the larger multinational cement companies to diversify away from cement, aggregate and concrete into connected sectors such as insulation, gypsum wallboard, construction chemicals, roofing and more. Rob McCaffrey gave examples from Holcim, Cemex, CRH, Heidelberg Materials and Votorantim Cimentos and also noted a trend from some of them to divest away from markets in some developing areas. He ended by pointing out that Lafarge’s decision to sell its wallboard business in the early 2010s might come to be viewed with hindsight as a mistake. The first audience question asked which wallboard and/or insulation company might be acquired by a cement company, leading McCaffrey to suggest that an answer “can be best discussed over several beers.”
Jari Kaasinen from Coldins spoke about a new insulation material concept which conducts heat energy preferentially in one direction. Much discussion took place among delegates about this early-stage technological development.
Meghan Lamm of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory gave the final presentation in the programme, on her laboratory’s attempt to make an effective thermoplastic insulation material with lower environmental impact compared to ‘traditional’ polystyrene. A polymer matrix was chosen called Elvacite 4021, which had a variety of advantages. A wide variety of foaming agents were assessed, and a liquid (Expancel, from AzkoNobel) was finally chosen. Porous hollow glass spheres were used as an insulating filler. Extensive laboratory work indicated the best dosages to create an optimised insulation material, which is competitive with commercial thermoplastic foams in compressive strength and thermal resistivity, without using harmful blowing agents.
Insulation Panel Discussion
After the final presentation, the insulation lecture theatre was packed for a 30 minute discussion on the Future of Insulation, featuring panellists Grazyna Mitchener (PolyChemTech), Andreas Gürtler (European Industrial Insulation Foundation), Andrew Kerr (Superglass Ltd) and Yves Bromehead (industry expert). The discussion was split equally into three questions: 1. Where will growth come from? 2. What limits growth? 3. New Materials - Evolution or Revolution? There was animated discussion in all sections, with numerous contributions from the audience. The consensus was that insulation would continue to be driven by its existing core markets in Europe and North America, with growing contributions from elsewhere. Indeed in Europe, there currently exists too little production capacity, with Andrew Kerr pointing out that supply chain issues now mean that building new capacity could now take up to five years, compared to two before the Covid-19 pandemic. Andreas Gürtler called for greater national government clarity on industrial insulation. In terms of new products, Grazyna Mitchener outlined a 'tick-list’ of requirements for a ’step-change insulation material’ noting that the promises of vacuum insulation panels and aerogels had broadly gone unrealised. From a practical standpoint, it was pointed out by a member of the audience that even the best-performing materials can be let down by poor installation, so the focus for efficiency should lie with installation. Several panelists identified a lack of knowledge in developing markets as a major contributor to poor insulation uptake and performance. The panel discussion raised a number of other points and will be repeated at future edition of the conference.
Farewells and prizes
The awards for best presentation were presented at the Farewell Party at the spectacular Estoril Congress Centre. In third place was Meghan Lamm of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, with Morten Seeberg and Martin Valgren from Qubiqa in second place. The best presentation prize went to Bruno Bach Jensen from Tentoma.
The conference was strongly praised by attendees, with 91% being satisfied with the event’s Covid testing regime, and others lauding the networking opportunities, gala dinner and technical programme.
The 16th Global Insulation Conference will take place on 31 October-1 November 2023 in Chicago.
