Innovation is hard, but necessary.
By Ben Kay (Enviropacific) 

The word innovation is increasingly becoming part of our everyday vernacular, yet in reality, humans have been doing this well before we were even humans. The need or desire for change has cultivated countless ideas throughout history that have led to progress of tribes, groups, civilisations and societies alike. So why are we talking about it more and what exactly is it?

Innovation can be anything from a new idea to a completely disruptive product or service. It doesn’t have to be groundbreaking, it just has to be useful and it can take many forms. Consider this definition from the Cambridge Dictionary.

Innovation (noun): a new idea or method, or the use of new ideas and methods.

From a business perspective, an innovation doesn’t have to be something that no one else has done before. It may simply be something that the business itself has never done, or perhaps something that has never been applied in a certain way within an industry. It is a novel step-change which leads to sustained improved outcomes – a new normal from which a business now operates. New problems need new solutions.

A distinction should be made however, between similar actions that are sometimes considered innovation – but are not necessarily so – often referred to as continual improvement. Continual improvement focuses on existing organisational processes to improve a business’ performance. These are enhancements to existing elements which result in incremental increased business success. Examples are improving quality, generating greater customer satisfaction, streamlining processes and/or increasing efficiencies. The difference between continual improvement and innovation is that continual improvement is predictable, whereas true innovation unlocks potential.

Figure 1 - Innovation and continual improvement.

Innovation can be created from both a business’ desire to be more successful, as well as being forced due to market or regulatory changes. In the contaminated lands industry, we know this all too well when policies or laws are created or changed. A business must adapt if it wishes to provide similar services.

The mindset for innovation, however, is different to that of a business-as-usual, project delivery approach common in a STEM-heavy industry. Some people naturally see possibilities and opportunities, others need to be stimulated. Either way, innovative thinking requires both concrete and abstract thinking which creates conflict between the operational and the innovative worlds. On one hand you have operational governance with processes and procedures which need to be followed, and on the other you need creativity and experimentation fostering an environment where ideas are born.

But how do you generate ideas and how do you know if they’re worth pursuing? What if you have multiple ideas – how many do you include? How much time and effort will it take to get there? How do you budget for the unknown? Will the idea still be worth pursuing over time and should you cut your losses?

Firstly, we need to focus on what can be done rather than what is being done. There are lots of tools to help with thinking of an issue from a different perspective to generate an idea, but for it to be worth pursuing it needs to be accompanied by data. Data that likely needs to be collected includes business alignment, market landscape (maturity, size, competitiveness), idea differentiation, technology/process maturity, effort required, budget, risks and opportunities as a start. Answers to all these questions won’t be known initially, so setting up stage gates with defined value metrics at each gate is important. For example, the first gate can be an initial go / no-go assessment based on a small number of metrics, which if passed, leads into a more detailed opportunity assessment with increased technical and economic data gathering. A second gate has more metrics that need to be met with more detail, which may then lead into a detailed business case and investment submission for further review at a third gate. This will likely be iterative and will evolve throughout the process.

Ultimately this staged structure is designed to reduce uncertainty as exposure to risk grows through the process, so it needs to be coupled with strong risk management. Without this, a business risks missing opportunities with gates filtering out bold, riskier ideas, in place for smaller, incremental ideas more closely aligned with what the business already does well.

The innovation process can take many months (or years) and throughout this period it is important to ensure the assumptions and data that decisions are based upon, remain current. Perhaps it turns out the technology can’t achieve its goals, market economics become uncertain, another company has the same or better idea, or legislation simply changes. There’s little value in continuing to invest if the expected outcomes do not meet the required gate metrics. Not every single idea will yield tangible increased business success, so if it is to fail it’s best to fail fast. This approach is key as it allows alternate opportunities to be focused on and ensures that a business’ limited resources are put towards the highest potential ideas, facilitating a transformation from a predictable business trajectory, onto one of true potential.

If you don’t move forward, you begin to move backward.

Innovation: An Acetylene Cylinder Recycling Facility Case Study.

Noting the above discussion on innovation is only general in nature, below is a case study relating it back to the remediation industry.

In 2021, more than 50,000 used acetylene cylinders with asbestos containing material within them were uncovered in an illegal dump site in western Victoria. Due to the hazardous material contained within them, there was no option in Australia to recycle these cylinders. The only options were to bury them back in the ground – at a licenced facility this time – or send them offshore. Neither of these options aligned with sustainability or circular economy principles, so instead a bespoke-designed, purpose-built recycling facility was proposed; nothing of which existed in the domestic market at the time.

In January 2023 the Acetylene Cylinder Recycling Facility project commenced. When working through the technical, financial and commercial aspects as part of stage gate assessments, a number of challenges were uncovered which had to be overcome. These included:

1. Site location and planning: Identifying a suitable site and navigating planning considerations required extensive stakeholder engagement and careful coordination with regulatory agencies.
2. Regulatory compliance: Securing Development Licenses and adhering to General Environmental Duty (GED) requirements highlighted differences between regulators and interface agencies which added to the complexity.
3. Investment and market challenges: The absence of prior investment in local processing facilities for acetylene cylinders took over 12 months preparing an adequate business case to achieve required metrics and risk levels to warrant progression of the project.
4. Environmental and Safety Hazards: Proper handling of hazardous materials including asbestos, acetone solvent, and flammable acetylene gas was crucial.
5. Regulatory timeframes: Delays in obtaining necessary permits and licenses impacted project timelines.
6. Technological challenges: Integrating new technologies into the recycling process sometimes led to unforeseen issues requiring rapid adjustments and solutions.
7. International and local standards: gaps between the two sets of standards were larger than anticipated and required plant modifications.

Despite the project proceeding to construction stage, challenges capable of derailing the project were still required to be identified and managed. Evaluation of the impact of these risks materialising was continuously undertaken to ensure the project would still achieve its goals. The critical challenges included:

1. International technology replication: Adapting international technologies for local use proved challenging due to differing regulatory environments and electrical and hazardous area classification standards. Custom solutions had to be developed and parts deemed suitable in an international setting were replaced with locally manufactured equipment.
2. Market acceptance: There was uncertainty regarding the market's acceptance of a new local processing facility versus established international solutions.
3. Technological adaptations: Ongoing adjustments to the recycling technology and processes required constant evaluation and fine-tuning up to and including commissioning.

These challenges were managed by the project team through embracing an overall delivery approach. This comprised:

1. Comprehensive planning and flexibility: Detailed planning coupled with the flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances allowed the project to navigate regulatory hurdles and site planning issues effectively.
2. Strong Regulatory Coordination: Strong relationships with regulatory bodies using transparent communication helped expedite the licensing and approval processes.
3. Innovative problem-solving: Creative thinking and tailored solutions played a key role in overcoming technological and logistical challenges.
4. Dedicated team effort: The commitment and resilience of the workforce was pivotal to maintaining required quality and delivery timeframes.

By committing to healthy risk taking and employing strong risk management, the project has demonstrated what can be achieved by challenging the status quo. Not only has a sustained step-change been achieved and a new business line of potential established, but Australia now has a solution to safely recover acetylene cylinders containing asbestos with over 90% of materials being integrated back into the recycling industry. The facility will be operational in June 2024.

As Innovation Manager at Enviropacific, Ben is responsible for managing Enviropacific’s Strategic Initiatives as part of the business’ overall growth strategy. This includes responsibilities involving exploration and analyses of emerging market opportunities (e.g. circular economy, decarbonisation), expanding business service offerings, increasing technical capability and research and development projects (including patents and grants). His background is environmental engineering and has spent 20 years trying to reduce society’s impact on this planet.

Article Published on 31/05/2024

The statements, analyses, opinions, information and conclusions that may be found in the articles of this publication are those of the author and not of the Australasian Land & Groundwater Association Ltd (ALGA), which only acts in the capacity as publisher. No part of this publication can be regarded as legal advice. Although care has been taken in preparing this publication, neither ALGA nor the author represent or warrant that the information supplied is current, complete or accurate. To the full extent permitted by law, the author and ALGA do not accept any liability, or owe a duty of care, to any person in respect of any such information. No person should rely in any way on the content of this publication and are encouraged to seek independent legal or other professional advice, if required.