I spent some time yesterday at a meeting of the Metals Forum . This was part of my quest to understand what the various bits of the materials community think are important and to explain what Materials UK is – and is not. I arrived a little early and was able to listen to the various members of the Forum report that although raw materials and energy costs were tight, demand meant that business was good. It is sometimes too easy to believe the rumours of the demise of the UK manufacturing industry and the kind of optimism I heard in the room was a good tonic. They also discussed the recent changes in “machineries of government” – code for the re-organisation of DTI into BERR and DIUS – the potential impact of the Leitch Report on the skill-base and some of the unintended consequences of the latest tax reforms – all the sort of thing that needs addressing.

I gave my standard presentation on Materials UK, the reason for its existence, its structure and its focal points. Even a year in, I am still surprised that many in the materials community are not aware of the Innovation and Growth Team and its report. This led to a great discussion on how to manage the difference needs of sectors of the materials industry – in particular that recycling means something different for metals and polymers. I am sure this discussion needs to be developed – the vast majority of those who buy “products” don’t even consider what they are made out of, let alone the ability of the product to be disassembled and its individual components recycled. We also talked about the supply issues for various metals. Those of you who have heard me speak will know I am a fan of Tom Graedel’s analysis of various metals “working capital” in modern society. This is not about the political or economic need to “secure” supply but the fact that we are simply going to run out of several key metals – or, more likely, their price is going to sky-rocket – unless we understand how best to use them.

David