In this Q&A, Karl Flowers, Managing Director, Authenticae and Technical Author & Contributor for Leather Naturally and ILM, shares his thoughts on the European Commission’s revised rules for end-of-life vehicles (ELVs) and what they could mean for the leather industry.
In your recent article for ILM, you highlight the potential advantages of leather’s durability, repairability and long life under the new circularity agenda. How do you see the leather industry best communicating these strengths to Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) and policymakers?
KF: One pathway is the consistent publication of scientifically robust articles that show the hard science behind leather’s durability. Perhaps the best starting point for this is the FILK study (in the peer-reviewed Coatings journal). The UNIDO life cycle assessment (LCA) Guidelines is another respected science-based publication that goes some way to demonstrate how leather is a durable material, shown through the durability amortization methodology, proving that leather is a material with longevity.
The move towards design-for-dismantling could create new opportunities for materials that are easier to identify and recover. What could the leather and automotive industries do together to make leather even more attractive from an end-of-life perspective?
KF: Making automotive seating out of one or two materials is a great “designing for the end in mind” approach. If a metal frame is the skeleton for a seat that has collagen foam, thread, leather and collagen stiffener, the end of life of the entire seat is pre-set. These materials, made for both performance and compostability, can be variably shredded, whilst the magnetic metal fragments are removed and the rest can be composted into high quality fertiliser. Similarly, the seat can be constructed so that the seams can be easily released and repaired or remanufactured easily, meaning that high wear panels can be replaced and the seat can easily go into its next cycle.
You identify traceability as an important area for leather, particularly in demonstrating responsible sourcing. Could greater traceability become a positive differentiator for leather as the circular economy develops and are there areas where the leather industry could improve traceability and transparency?
KF: I believe radio frequency identification (RFID) chips are vital for the tracking of products like shoes and handbags. The vehicle identification, nesting tracking in cutting, and batch numbers against part numbers are highly advanced in automotive trim and seating systems. The advanced state of traceability in automotive parts (for recall functionality) makes end-of-life decision-making easy in leather. At the end of life for leather, any leather component can be sent for the correct waste management with ease. Improvements in leather track and trace, digital product passports, will only improve this.
With OEMs taking greater responsibility for the end-of-life of vehicles, do you see an opportunity for closer collaboration between car manufacturers, leather suppliers and recyclers to develop better circular leather solutions? What might that collaboration look like?
KF: It is in the interest of OEMs to use long-lived materials, making the circular economy easier to implement. Increasing extended producer responsibility is going to make these strategies “no-brainers”. I see future OEMs with greater due diligence for end-of-life considerations and more careful control of the harvesting of secondary materials going back into their circular supply chains. This will save OEMs enormous impact and cost savings.
You suggest that leather and other collagen-based materials could play an interesting role in more biogenic and compostable vehicle interiors. What developments have you seen or would most like to see from the leather industry to turn this opportunity into a practical, scalable solution?
KF: The best example of homogenising the materials used in automotive products can be seen in the use of collagen in making seating foams. To replace the multitude of materials in a car seat towards a biomaterial such as proteins, increase its biocircularity, and lower its carbon footprint. The latest biogenic LCA methodologies are demonstrating that natural biomaterials have lower carbon impacts when compared to fossil-based materials. The added bonus is the end-of-life credentials of biomaterials compared to fossil plastics (which are destined for landfill). Bans that are coming for materials going to landfill are only going to make this harder. The use of recycled leather going into threads is also an exciting opportunity.
You describe automotive ELV policy as a potential test case for wider circularity in leather. What do you think the leather industry could do now to build on this opportunity and demonstrate leadership across automotive, footwear, fashion and other sectors?
KF: Leather makers must create and elevate exciting narratives, backed with science. We should support designers and OEMs – who are keen on using new innovative leathers and encourage carmakers too – bringing them something fresh to help sell the next season of cars. Trying to market past leather values to new consumers is never going to work. Biocircularity presents many new options. We should grab, use and celebrate them!