Alot of the public have woken up to the role that the medical devices they benefit from play within sustainability. While end users may pay less attention to the creation of these products than those who dedicate their craft to them, there’s still been a shift in consumer behaviour over the past decade.
It’s come at an apt time. The OECD projects global plastic waste could nearly triple – rising from 353 million tonnes (Mt) in 2019 to about 1,014 Mt by 2060 – with large regional differences in per-capita waste (e.g. OECD countries ≈238kg p.c.). And with demand for green chemicals rising globally, the bio-based polymer market is anticipated to expand substantially. The paper ‘Emerging Bio-Based Polymers from Lab to Market: Current Strategies, Market Dynamics and Research Trends’ sets out some context for this in the Journal of Carbon Research, including how compostability and biodegradability are behind the development of bio-based polymers.
This fits in line with public concerns about waste, which is just one reason why across Europe and further afield, many are considering, or even prioritising, carbon-neutrality. Production companies and academic institutions alike are increasingly attuned to this.
Medical-device OEMs are increasingly replacing traditional petro-polymers with bio-based, low-carbon resins. Life-cycle studies show some bio-resins can reduce cradle-to-gate GHG emissions substantially (in some case studies reductions approach ~50% under favourable conditions).
These bio-resins included polylactic acid (PLA) (often produced from corn starch), which is compostable and can be chemically recycled but its mechanical recycling is limited unless sorted carefully; by contrast bio-PE (e.g., sugarcane-based) is chemically identical to conventional PE and can enter existing mechanical recycling streams.
The consensus seems to be that large companies such as Philips Healthcare bear a responsibility. This is certainly being taken seriously by Chris Taylor, Philips Healthcare’s sustainability lead for the UK and Ireland, which has been carbon-neutral in its operations, including business travel logistics, since 2020.
It also achieved level four on the NHS’s Evergreen Assessment. According to NHS England, this highest ranking signifies “advanced maturity” and “strong commitment” to integrating sustainability into core business practices.
“The link between planetary health and human health is very well established now, so it’s only right we try to do as much as we can, as quickly as we can,” says Taylor, who notices that NHS supply chains are, like other countries’ systems, increasingly focused on sustainability.
What caused the shift?
Professor Sabu Thomas of the International and Interuniversity Centre for Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, at Mahatma Gandhi University, co-authored the Journal of Carbon Research paper cited above. He also explained to Medical Device Developments some of the recent movements the industry is both witnessing and partially responsible for. Thomas thinks there are myriad reasons why medical-device OEMs are replacing traditional petro-polymers with bio-based, low-carbon resins.
“I think there is a major concern about the environment and sustainability,” says Thomas.
This is in keeping with the increase in awareness from populations around the world, all keen to work towards lowering their shared carbon footprints. Manufacturers feel the need to meet this growing customer demand in its various formats.
“I also think lower greenhouse gas emissions, the potential for lower production costs and meeting changing regulatory requirements are a priority for many OEMS,” Thomas continues.
Specifically, major events like Brexit and Covid also posed an impact on supply chains and sustainability. However, Philips had already moved some infrastructure to the UK to help with resilience and retains its interconnected focus more than five years after both.
“Globally, the industry is aware that these things happen; politics changes and can cause issues. It’s been a wake-up call for some though, that’s been embraced,” reflects Taylor, adding that from a circular economy perspective, people are more understanding of the power of strong supply chains.
What’s happening now?
It’s important to focus on improving emissions all throughout the supply chain. This should start as soon as possible, or ideally already be in action.
Customers come in towards the end of this process, yet form a major part of the cycle. They’re able to feed back their own opinions to Philips, which also provides them with eco-passports.
These present products’ environmental performance, emphasising elements such as energy use, packaging breakdowns, sustainable packaging, material weight and the plastics involved – although this is of course being moved away from.
The energy use element tends to be customers’ primary concern. It uses open data from COCIR, the European Trade Association representing the medical imaging, radiotherapy, health ICT and electromedical industries, rather than Philips’ own. This is part of its focus on fairness for customers.
Recycle passports, too, tell customers about the complete product breakdown via a monitoring function and criteria for energy use. Philips also likes to get back its own equipment and secure raw materials as another way of contributing to the circular economy methodology.
Elsewhere, Philips has various priorities. From a sustainability standpoint, it’s energy and plastics are major elements to consider. The firm adheres to specific criteria with plastics, noting how hospital equipment, such as MRI scanners, is a huge consumer of energy.
Reducing energy use is a priority, from the raw materials behind it to moving away from fossil fuelbased plastics to more bioplastics. Recycling plastics throughout their life cycle in healthcare and reducing single-use plastics are other ways of doing it.
There is also a business stance for these moves, as well as being solely motivated by sustainability. After all, although it is oversimplifying it, there might only be 50 years left of fossil fuel supplies as we know them.
“If you’re building a company with longevity in mind, you have to become aware that fossil fuel solutions are going to become expensive,” Taylor advises.
“We’ve got to move away, as it’s a finite resource,” he expands. “That timespan means children being born today are going to start to see the end of fossil fuel. When you see how reliant we are on it, that’s quite a scary thought. Moving forward, we’ve got to find alternative solutions, which is where things like bioplastics play a part.”
Currently, you can pay green incentives or levies for bioplastics, making them slightly more expensive. But Taylor expects that when the industry progresses and especially as technology around them increases, this will come down in price.
Moving away does mean some challenges. For instance, Philips is careful not to compete with food production or farmland and evaluates its material sourcing to ensure responsible and ethical handling. Innovation is a core belief of Philips’, so if it encounters better solutions out there, it’s happy to switch, noting how a challenge in the industry is how quickly it can do so.
Ultimately, Taylor thinks the move is a positive one. A major benefit he notes is that plastics can store carbon, so holding onto that resource is a good way of reusing carbon. Bio-based plastics can sequester biogenic carbon (captured during plant growth), but the climate benefit depends on product lifetime and end-of-life handling (recycling vs composting vs incineration).
Philips is also aiming to move away from more harmful substances as quickly as possible, such as PVC and persistent organic pollutants (POPs). It’s open to anything industry-wide that comes to replace them, which could include working with the UK government or the rest of Europe.
What’s next?
Thomas and Taylor share high hopes for the future moving further towards carbon-neutral.
Encouragingly, Thomas predicts the carbon-neutral industry’s future to be “very bright”. “It will lead to a transitioning to renewable energy, adopting of energy-efficient technologies and implementing of circular economy principles,” he says.
However, he warns, there may be high costs: technological limitations, social and economic inequalities, and the complexities of international cooperation along the way.
It’s also important to keep end users informed during the process, Thomas recommends.
This could be done through user-friendly communication networks, with open data portals, interactive dashboards, public awareness campaigns, educational resources and stakeholder engagement.
Broadly, Taylor wants to see greater recycling of plastics. This sounds a simple ask, but backing it up is another matter. Statistics from both the OECD and United Nations suggest that just 9% of plastics are currently recycled.
Taylor also notes that the refurbished market is set to grow globally. Currently, it’s premature in the UK compared with wider Europe.
From a design perspective, refurbished equipment, including ultrasound machines, bears significantly lower carbon footprints than newer types. However, it looks and works the same, and will come with the same warranties. Refurbished equipment often has a lower carbon footprint than new units and can be ~20–30% cheaper than equivalent new systems.
“Everybody likes shiny toys, but if you can buy something that looks new, yet is cheaper and works the same, it seems a no-brainer,” concludes Taylor.
So, the industry would do well to embrace aspects like this, and work towards a more carbon-neutral future, whatever its specific focus or country of origin.
