business focus 19


Joint funding deal secures finance for new AD plant


Oxfordshire anaerobic digestion (AD) specialist Agrivert has joined forces with Grundon Waste Management in a multi- million pound deal which provides funding for its third AD plant.


The agreement sees Grundon, which has its headquarters at Benson, near Wallingford and operations throughout the Thames Valley, providing £5 million as a shareholder loan, while the remainder of the £11m price tag for the development will be provided by SQN Capital Management, through its adviser Summit Asset Management via a senior debt facility.


Construction has already begun on Agrivert’s new plant, which is being built at Trumps Farm in Surrey. It is expected to be fully operational by Spring 2014 and when commissioned, will be capable of processing 50,000 tonnes of food waste and generating 2.3MW of renewable electricity, enough to supply around 4,000 homes.


AD is the Government’s preferred recycling treatment solution for food waste and the new plant will target local waste from Surrey and surrounding areas, processing both municipal and commercial waste.


Agrivert, whose head office is near Chipping Norton, is recognised as one of the UK’s leading design, own and operate AD companies, and managing director James Astor, said: “We are very pleased to have raised funding for this important project. We believe that Agrivert is extremely well positioned to take advantage of the significant opportunity in the UK AD market and are delighted to be maintaining the momentum of our AD plant rollout.”


Grundon’s investment marks a major drive into the food waste market – it recently launched a dedicated food waste collection


service and, as deputy chairman Neil Grundon explains, the deal delivers a twin benefit for the company and its customers.


“We see a big future in food waste, which is why we have made this investment. We have a good working relationship with Agrivert and a real respect for its business, so we are delighted to be part of this exciting new project,” he said. “At the same time, our customers will benefit because having an AD facility closer to London means we can further extend the services we provide.”


Currently, food waste collected by Grundon is typically processed at one of Agrivert’s two existing AD plants at Cassington and Wallingford in Oxfordshire, where it is broken down into Biofertiliser and also used to produce Biogas, used as a fuel for the production of electricity and/or heat.


Since the launch of its new food service, Grundon has already seen volumes increase from 2,000 tonnes per annum (tpa) to over 6,000 tpa in the past four months, and that is likely to increase further as the company is expected to supply a significant quantity of feedstock to the new plant.


Despite the fact that every year the UK produces over 10 million tonnes of food waste, the country’s AD capacity for treating source segregated food waste is less than 1.5 million tonnes.


Agrivert successfully commissioned its first 2.1MW AD plant at Cassington in 2010, which was followed by a 2.3MW plant at Wallingford, officially opened on May 17 by Defra resource minister Lord de Mauley.


DC Advisory acted as financial adviser to Agrivert, and Addleshaw Goddard and Herrington & Carmichael provided legal advice to the shareholders.


THE BUSINESS MAGAZINE – THAMES VALLEY – JUNE 2013 www.businessmag.co.uk


URM/Regus survey highlights business continuity weaknesses


At the end of 2012, Ultima Risk Management (URM) and Regus (World’s leading provider of flexible workplaces) conducted a survey of 200 organisations to assess the status of business continuity (BC) in the UK. Here, Julian Thrussell, senior consultant at URM, highlights four of the key findings from the survey.


84 % of organisations have business continuity plans (BCPs), although only 70% of SMEs


Whilst smaller organisations may be thinking that BCPs are not needed, BC is essential for SMEs (less than 50 employees) in order to be able to deal with disruptions such as loss of key staff and denial of access to key sites. SMEs often argue that their people are capable of ‘thinking on their feet’, but it begs the question of what happens if those individuals are not available.


26% of respondents had not conducted a business impact analysis (BIA)


This is a key finding in that there is little benefit in having a BCP, if you are not protecting your key products or services. The process of identifying key products/ services and critical activities is known as a business impact analysis or ‘BIA’. If you don’t base your plans on a BIA, you may be focusing your recovery efforts around the wrong business processes and building your plans on sand.


Only 46% of respondents issue regular BC communications to staff


Internal communication and the "lack of awareness of BC arrangements" represented the biggest concern for most survey respondents and for large organisations in particular. It is


Julian Thrussell


pointless having plans in place if staff do not know what to do. It is essential that staff are given specific BC responsibilities and are trained to ensure that they are competent to carry out those responsibilities. It is also essential that staff not involved in the immediate recovery know what to do eg call a number/stay at home/visit BC website. The last thing you need when managing an incident is staff calling you asking you what to do.


Only 52% of respondents had discussed BC with their suppliers


For many organisations, BC is wholly internally focused on their own products, services and activities and there is a lack of attention on suppliers and supply chain. However, an organisation is only as strong as its weakest link. It doesn’t matter how robust an organisation’s BCPs and processes are if its critical suppliers cannot provide the level of service required or anticipated.


Want to know more?


For a full copy of the survey findings or to attend the next free URM/Regus BC seminar, use contact details below.


Details:


info@ultimariskmanagement.com 0118-9027450


www.regus.co.uk/about-us/ future-of-work.aspx


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60