Simone Wilson

PFAS, a topic with explosive power for industry. Where regulation meets technical reality, tensions arise, but also opportunities. In our second episode of the IDT podcast, we focus on practice.

How do companies like SAMSON AG assess the current development around the planned PFAS ban? What does this mean for research, development and production processes and what does it mean for everyday use in application technology? Welcome to the IDT podcast, which provides new perspectives and fresh impulses for the industry and sealing technology.

I am very much looking forward to talking to Peter Schermesser, R&D Manager at SAMSON AG, a company with more than 100 years of experience in valve technology and high standards of innovation. And I am also pleased that Jörg Skoda, our Head of Application Technology at IDT, is back today to classify the technical background and consequences. My name is Simone Wilson.

I am the CEO of the sealing specialist IDT. In our podcast, I take on the role of moderator, ask questions, have conversations and, together with exciting guests, shed light on the topics that will shape the industry and sealing technology of tomorrow. Yes, Mr. Schermesser, I just rang it in a bit.

PFAS is still a topic that moves the world, that definitely moves the industry. Now SAMSON AG's claim is quite self-confident, improving the flow of the world. For listeners who do not know the company, who is SAMSON and what are the main areas of activity of the company?

Peter Schermesser

Hello Ms. Wilson, hello Mr. Skoda. Thank you very much for the invitation to this podcast. Who is SAMSON?

SAMSON AG was founded in 1907 and we like to describe ourselves with the slogan, we keep the world running. This means that wherever materials are flowing, where they are running, valves from SAMSON, for example, are used. Valves were and are the core business of SAMSON, of course expanded in today's world to include many digital solutions and digital services.

For example, products in the pharmaceutical industry, we regulate energy and material flows with the valves, we are active in the refinery sector, we are active in the chemical industry, these are the main focuses. And as indicated, today supplemented by many digital services. The aim is also to transform the company from a component supplier from the past to a system supplier, to a partner for the plant operator and the customer in order to make their processes more efficient.

Simone Wilson

So that means in the end I would also find SAMSON products in every chemical plant or in many chemical plants?

Peter Schermesser

With great security, with great security. Looking back on the many years of experience and expertise, I would also expressly underline that. And with our customers, who of course started in Germany and Europe, we also went all over the world through internationalization.

Simone Wilson

And the headquarters are in Frankfurt.

Peter Schermesser

That's right, the headquarters are in Frankfurt. We are currently preparing the move to Offenbach. Maybe we'll get to that later.

But yes, the headquarters are in Frankfurt.

Simone Wilson

Very exciting, thank you very much. The identity of SAMSON, I also looked at it before, I also found very, very nice, puts people and progress in the center. So People, Passion, Progress.

And that's quite nice. Now we are adding PFAS and that sounds like excitement and explosive power. Maybe you can say this topic of innovation leadership or innovative, then also the values of SAMSON and now we have this current PFAS restriction procedure.

How can I imagine this field of tension?

Peter Schermesser

Of course, such a long tradition always leads to transformations in the company. And we took this as an opportunity to really put these buzzwords People, Passion and Progress in the foreground, in the center. Of course, we want to stand up for our products with total commitment and then generate added value for our customers.

We want to provide the customer with a solution that optimizes their processes. That is the claim. And from this context, we naturally always have our finger on the pulse of the times in order to anticipate where the needs and requirements of our customers will go in the future, even in a conservative industry such as the process industry.

We know that substance regulations are relevant for industry. This is an ongoing process. We have a staff department that also coordinates and moderates these topics.

So, we've been dealing with it for a long time. From the past, we know various topics that are generally known. Asbestos or lead or similar.

But many other chemical substances have been added to this restricted or prohibited list over time. We have always tried to shape this conversion and transformation very quickly, so that we can continue to bring the products to market, but also comply with the regulatory requirements in terms of environmental protection. PFAS naturally has a new quality, because these many thousands of substances and substances that are affected mean a completely different scope and extent.

Ultimately, every SAMSON product, with the exception of digital services, will be affected to varying degrees of strength and importance. Therefore, no, not a full stop, but already a large package of tasks if these restriction procedures come as announced.

Simone Wilson

Jörg, now Mr. Schermesser says that every product at SAMSON will be affected. I haven't asked how many products there will be, but I'd be worried about that now. What is your observation when you look at the industry and at the users?

Jörg Skoda

It must be said quite clearly that the industry, as you can also see in the example of Mr. Schermesser, is up to the task. This means that you don't wait for someone from somewhere to say, I have something great, that could set in, but you are looking for alternatives for the PFAS used. In your case, it's the seals, but lubricants are also affected.

That means there are different areas that you have to tackle, where you have to look, what is there as an alternative? And you can see very well here as well, the time has been since 2020 and we are actually still pretty much at the beginning. This means that we have areas where there are no alternatives.

There are also areas that are already occupied by alternatives, but they are just not yet so strongly represented and don't always work. So there is this sentence, typically, there are also PFAS-free seals, that's true, but they are just not usable for this application we are talking about. And that makes the whole thing a bit difficult.

For me, it is always clear that SAMSON is perhaps also exemplary, they are dealing with the topic in the industry and we are working on it. And this dealing alone, including the discussions with those responsible from the authorities, brings us forward because we understand both sides. And we have to continue to work on that, because I don't think that if a direct ban were to come now, that we would have alternatives in 18 months, they simply don't exist at the moment.

Simone Wilson

But I would like to come back to the fact that almost all or very many products are affected. How do you act that then? So, how do you go about it?

So how is it organized at SAMSON that they then deal with this topic? Because the outcome is still very uncertain.

Peter Schermesser

Correct. Mr. Skoda hinted at it. Of course, there are a large number of seals, but there are also auxiliary materials such as lubricants, they are membranes, they are linings, they are sliding elements.

So it's a variety of substances or materials, semi-finished products that we buy from partners and then use for the products. And let's stay with the topic of seals. I was talking about the core issue of valves.

There are seals installed. They are necessary, as well as on the user side. And as mentioned, we want to use the time.

We also entered into an exchange with our suppliers, with our partners, quite early on to see how affected they are. What PFAS concentration is present? Or do these substances that we buy in contain PFAS?

Are there any technical alternatives with similar technical characteristics, with similar technical performance? That's a part we do. Of course, we have identified our products in mind, where such PFAS-containing purchased parts are installed.

As a large team, we are in the process of considering launching alternative technologies. Possibly on these, I say it a little more generally, to do without plastics completely. Is that possible?

Isn't that possible? We also approached our large customers, or rather the large customer associations, quite early on in order to enter into an exchange and to maintain the requirement profile of the clientele once again. With the ulterior motive of possibly launching alternative materials that meet customer requirements, but are not subject to these full technical properties as the previous products affected by the restriction procedure.

In other words, a variety of activities. Nevertheless, yes, a fully comprehensive alternative technical solution in the sense of material is still not available today. It is possible that one technical approach, one technical solution, will have to be turned into three or four later.

Simone Wilson

Yes, that sounds like a huge effort and now also not like business as usual. How did you organize this within SAMSON? Is there a task force?

How can I imagine that exactly?

Peter Schermesser

Yes, it's a big effort. Yes, there is a task force led by our purchasing department that coordinates communication towards our partners and suppliers. There are regular meetings and exchanges in the area of R&D.

And yes, of course we face up to our responsibility and want to buy PFAS-free alternatives sooner rather than later. It's just not our core competence. That's why we rely on the strong partnership from the sealing industry.

Let's stay with the topic of seals. And another part of what we are already doing is that we have identified the affected parts in the respective types and devices in order to see, first of all identify them, and secondly then to bring the alternatives, the technical alternatives to the table and derive possible development projects internally or externally from them. No, not business as usual.

A really big effort, up to public relations, up to association work. We are also active together with Ernst Ruder through various workshops.

Simone Wilson

Yes, and in principle it is also the same as you have just described, that is, that you have a group, a department in the house that deals with harmful substances or substance regulations in principle. It's also about sensitivity. How can we simply become even better in the area of sustainability?

And I guess it's not like SAMSON is closing its eyes.

Peter Schermesser

No, not at all, not at all. As indicated, these regulatory procedures, that persistent and toxic substances have been gradually removed from the market environment in recent years, we know that, and we also support that. Of course, with the approach of responsibility not only for the employees, but also for future generations.

We are facing up to this. We want the long term or we think long-term as a company. That's why we are aware of our responsibility and take it seriously.

And we would very much like to switch to alternative products sooner rather than later. They are not available at the market stall today. It is a daunting task.

Yes, we want to face it and continue to use the products that are used for a variety of products, including medical devices or pharmaceutical products, medicines, and manufacturing, which can also continue to bring to market.

Simone Wilson

Jörg, Mr. Scheinmesser says that if he could, then he would, he would very much like to.

Jörg Skoda

I don't think that's the only one. I would like to change many of them. PFAS free.

PFAS free. That's always the case, you often see it in advertising. We can be PFAS free.

You have to be a little careful. These are always only marginal areas. This applies to an application, not to an application parameter that we actually need at the moment.

I often hear that this is always the counterexample. Yes, everyone moaned about asbestos. Can't we replace?

Can we? It doesn't work at all. And we can't live without asbestos.

We know that it can be done today. That was 40 years ago. It's interesting that people worked differently back then.

The UBA commissioned me to do something, namely to look for alternatives. Listen and be amazed, in 1985, I have the part here next to me, there was then a volume on the subject of poetry. And what was recommended?

PFAS, namely fluoropolymers. And here, too, you have to look at it a little more differentiated. We are talking about 10,000 possible PFAS. So depending on the source, it can be 14,000 or 15,000. Let's stay with the well-known 10,000. PFAS is a term that we actually talk about in application. However, there are 38 substances, namely 38 fluoropolymers, which are not critical in terms of application. Production and disposal, remains to be seen.

You really have to take a closer look at the whole thing. And that's a bit of a problem. You can also see it in the ICHA's time window.

If the issue of PFAS were so easy to regulate, then we would be through. Then we would have alternatives. Then you could say, okay, we don't take PTFE anymore.

We use something else for that, because it works just as well. And we have this problem at the moment. There are applications where this is possible.

It will be done there, I'm pretty sure of everyone. But we also have a lot of applications where it doesn't work.

Simone Wilson

But now tell me, Jörg, what is PFAS-free?

Jörg Skoda

Yes, you hear it again and again. Graphite is not PFAS. There has never been PFAS in it either.

But you can also advertise it that way. Then all the fiber seals. Kevlar fiber is also no PFAS in it.

Attention, there are exceptions. Some still coat them, but as a rule there is nothing in it. There is polyethylene.

It's very good. Is not PFAS. It's just a plastic.

But it only goes up to 80 degrees, not up to 200 degrees, as we would need it. Chemical resistance is not given. You can only name others.

Pi, polyamide. All substances that we know, but which do not bring what PTFE brings us, for example. PTFE is highly chemically resistant.

We can use it in dynamic applications, for example at SAMSON, without any problems, where something is turning. We can use it in our static area. And that doesn't offer us.

We once had a very interesting conversation with some of the authorities. They said, then take Pi, that works great. Then I took the first gasket made of PTFE, moved it a bit.

It was dynamic, you could also move it. With Pi, it just breaks right away. You can see that the material looks good on paper, but is not usable at all in the application.

And that's what makes the whole thing so difficult.

Simone Wilson

And PFAS-free PTFE?

Jörg Skoda

It's a great story. That sounds a bit like Grimm's fairy tale. So there is simply no such thing.

PTFE is inherently a chain that describes PFAS. It's all about carbon floor chains. And the longest of them are in the PTFE.

This means that no matter how you make PTFE, no matter where you buy it, it will always remain PFAS.

Simone Wilson

You have just said, Mr. Schermesser, that seals are installed in your products, but you do not manufacture seals yourself. In other words, you don't have this expertise in the end. How important is it then that you have good development partners at your side?

Peter Schermesser

Very important, very crucial, because, as mentioned, it is not our core competence. Our expertise lies in the design, development of valves, digital services, digital positioners, attachments. This is our competence, development, production, service for customers.

Ms. Wiesmann, this is one of the decisive points, the strong partnership and the support from suppliers with the corresponding know-how. We can't do it alone, we don't have it in our portfolio of expertise so far. I don't think that's our strength either, not even in the future.

Therefore, very strong development partners are really crucial for further success. Not only for us, but also for the market competitors and the entire valve industry.

Simone Wilson

Jörg, do you also accompany such development processes? How do I have to imagine that? How do you work together?

Jörg Skoda

I think that's the main problem. First of all, all the applications. We didn't say as EDT, because we also process PTFE, that we want to sell it because we think it's great.

Or we invented it. No, that was basically the requirement. SAMSON has the same problem.

First of all, it comes from chemistry. Then, of course, you look at what the technical network is currently giving us as alternative materials. And there you are, graphite often doesn't work, fiber often doesn't work, plastics work on paper, but not in application.

But you can really only say, we're trying, we're trying to work on it. Strictly speaking, you should now bring those who also produce such products to the table. Because even if I have a great idea tonight and say I have a plastic structure in my head, I can't produce it.

I need someone, you can make different ones, Daikin you make something, BASF makes plastics, Covestro makes plastics. You would actually have to say, guys, you actually have, you are the ones who make the mass. Because in my opinion, both SAMSON and EDT will always use an end product that someone has created and who then also makes it available in terms of tonage.

That's a bit of one of the main problems. We would like to do more and we try it by all means, with what is there and unfortunately find that it doesn't work. The second problem, which is added to this, is that our seals as well as the fittings are bought and used universally.

This means that we do not know the chemicals at all. PFAS can actually only be eliminated in this way if you say, okay, I have an application, pressure, temperature, medium and I'm going to pick something out for this application. We don't need to talk at 80 degrees water, we have an alternative.

With hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, phosphoric acid, that's where it gets funny. And that's just a bit of a problem with what's there. If we really try everything, we are also lucky that it is sometimes really feasible, but we also very often have the problem that we say that this is a great idea, but unfortunately it doesn't work.

Simone Wilson

So I understand that the user of the end product actually needs maximum flexibility in use and that is ultimately given by a PTFE seal, but not with many others.

Peter Schermesser

Yes, I would support and sign like that. The trend among plant operators is really towards universal applicability, because even under certain circumstances the running times of a process change and become shorter, and this flexibility naturally gives the operator a completely different option. And with the properties described by Mr. Skoda, we have a range that we can't achieve with new or existing alternative materials.

And there are still open points, many open points, unresolved points, also with a view to the plant operator, how can he still guarantee plant availability later after possibly a restriction procedure. Up to topics of spare parts supply and, and, and. This is a huge area of responsibility and there are still many unanswered questions.

Jörg Skoda

Perhaps as a supplement, you also have the problem of having one faucet for ten uses. If I have to write on it in the near future which application can be processed with it, that means I can't just lie down one faucet, but I have to lie down with ten. And then we still have the problem, yes, you can possibly get rid of it with good training, danger of confusion.

Simone Wilson

I would turn the focus to something else. When we had Ms. Aberbeck as a guest, the topic of lifecycle perspective came up that this would be a possibility to perhaps regulate fluoropolymers differently. How do you assess the topic of PTFE recycling, for example?

In other words, for high-quality seals or components?

Peter Schermesser

I think that's a very interesting approach. To what extent we can get involved as Samsonland, I'll try to describe in a moment. As indicated, the topic of seals or floor plastics, fluoropolymers is not our core competence.

But, as you mentioned, the fittings, although high-quality, high-priced, can also be repaired. The operator can run a few service intervals there over the life cycle. And that's where I see the approach of supporting our customers and the users.

In the sense of dismantling and orderly feeding of the then dismantled seals into a recycling process. We have the expertise, we also have the possibilities to support our customers in this regard through our after-sales organization. That's where I see the opportunities and possibilities.

Of course, we also know the exact materials that were originally installed, so we can then also give this to the recycler. The actual recycling process must then take place with the partners who have the competence and know-how. But I would say that, we can support our customers very well through the different scenarios.

Simone Wilson

But basically, I hear from this that if we were to install a good seal with Reganulat for you, wouldn't you be averse if it had the same performance?

Peter Schermesser

That is the point, Mrs Wilson. Again, there is an area of tension. Let's stay with the fittings, because fittings are long-term capital goods, quite expensive.

And depending on the industry, additional requirements are also imposed by customers and operators in terms of approvals, certifications, etc. Therefore, if we had this opportunity to work with recycled materials, the first thing to do is of course ensure functionality.

That would then be our task, to check and guarantee this, for example through construction tests, component tests, etc. The next step would certainly be to realize the acceptance of the customer side.

And depending on the applications, even third-party checks may be necessary, which then result from the application. Yes, we are open to it, if a few additional qualification steps are necessary, but yes, we are open.

Simone Wilson

A long way, that's what it sounds like. I'll ask Jörg, what do you think about PTFE recycling and recycled pellets?

Jörg Skoda

I simply believe that we will actually meet with acceptance. And Mr. Schermesser has just hinted at it correctly, of course the operator, who is ultimately there for safety, also has to play along. In addition to what Mr Schermesser has just said, I would also like to say again that we are of course also undermining regulations with the PFAS procedure.

Let's think of the TR Luft. We have implemented TR Luft for the seals. We also have it much more difficult, much more complex in the valves sector.

And you can actually already say that what is tested in terms of alternative materials will cause problems with TA Luft. So we leverage, we once have the TR Luft, we want the environment to be clean, now we bring new materials and they do not meet the TR Luft. So actually, that's a contradiction in terms.

So one PFAS set of rules, although it is not there, lifts the other set of rules TR Luft. These are things you have to think about. Such a test costs 15,000 euros, I once lit up, per faucet. We're not far away with the seals either. Of course, these are costs. Costs don't matter to the environment, I'm aware of that.

But you also have to know that if I create something today with a certain history, i.e. with a technical framework, then it may not fit in the future.

Simone Wilson

So for me, that's how it is, it needs a lot of actors. So everyone has to pull together at every point and want to do so. But you always have to start somewhere.

And then you just have to start running and maybe pull the others along with you. Now you said earlier, Mr. Schermesser, when we talked about PFAS and what that means for SAMSON in concrete terms, that it also requires a lot of activity, ties up a lot of resources. Innovation is a big topic.

Could SAMSON deal with other things if it didn't have to deal with PFAS? So other innovations would be possible?

Peter Schermesser

I would like to say that the other issues should not suffer and do not suffer from them. We have ambitious goals and are also focusing strongly on them. PFAS has just come up with an additional topic, and we are trying to work on it in parallel.

But ongoing projects should not suffer from this, by no means. Digitization is then a really huge topic area. And maybe I can give two or three examples.

We were able to integrate an Israeli company into the SAMSON Group. Runs at SAMSON under the term SumGuard. And there, the process plant or chemical plant is evaluated by means of a digital twin.

And you look ahead to see if there are any anomalies to avoid unplanned plant downtimes. This is also an increase in efficiency for the customer. Brand new on the market.

And we are the first to offer a positioner with this APL layer, i.e. the Advanced Physical Layer. This means that we really bring the Internet into the field there at 10 Mbit per second. This is also a prerequisite for the digital factory of the future.

So these are a few examples. And that is a huge topic. And I believe that customers are also increasingly perceiving us there as partners in terms of digital solutions for customer processes.

Simone Wilson

It's also exciting to see how there are always the current or daily challenges, or then again regulatory challenges such as with PFAS, which of course also have to be addressed and also want to be solved cleanly. And on the other hand, this insane further development. You just said the factory of the future. This is actually exactly the topic for you at SAMSON at the moment, because, as you mentioned at the beginning, a move is imminent, namely the MindChange project. Tell us something about it.

Peter Schermesser

With pleasure. MindChange is the largest investment in SAMSON's history. MindChange simply stands for the other main side.

We are moving from our current headquarters in Frankfurt to Offenbach. We were able to acquire a suitable site there and are building what we call the factory of the future. The goal is to absolutely optimize the value streams, material flows, to increase efficiency, and of course to drastically reduce energy consumption.

These are key points. Of course, we offer the almost 2000 colleagues in Frankfurt a huge future perspective and that's just fun. And recently, a countdown to our intranet page has also been running to see when the first start or the first partial move begins.

We will start moving electronics production to Offenbach this year and then by the end of 2026, at the turn of the year 2027, the entire factory will move to Offenbach. So in terms of goal and purpose in Frankfurt, we are limited by the possibilities, by the growth opportunities, by the growth opportunities. We are picking up on this in Offenbach and really have the best conditions for the coming decades there.

Important, we don't plan for a few years, but really for decades. And of course great, in the middle of Germany, in the middle of the crisis, in the middle of Rhine-Main. This is also a great signal for the colleagues and also not a change in the sense of how one would now move from northern Germany to southern Germany or anything like that.

So I think it's mega great and very big, very big opportunity.

Simone Wilson

Yes, I see it the same way. Very, very brave, but I would also say that you can feel that everything is in flux with Samson, right? Yes, for Germany as a business location, of course, this is a great sign and a very courageous step.

What Samson is driving forward with the transformation. But basically, the future of the process industry in Europe as well, is it now hanging by a thread due to PFAS?

Peter Schermesser

The danger exists. Over the many decades that these PFAS-containing materials have been used, they have been used because they have these fantastic technical properties. Yes, even with the negative effects on the environment.

We have addressed it, we face up to the responsibility. But with a view to the technical performance parameters, there are no alternatives as of today. If we can no longer both incorporate these into our products and no longer make them available to a user for his systems, then the question arises as to how Europe as a location will still be seen in the future in this respect in an international, worldwide comparison.

Yes, the seals, as Mr. Skoda has indicated, are also suitable for handling particularly problematic toxic media with a high degree of reliability. If we no longer have that, then the issue of plant safety will also be called into question from today's perspective. So yes, there is a danger, Ms. Wilson.

Simone Wilson

Yes, if I look again at what we discussed earlier on the subject of PTFE recycling, i.e. who has to go along with it. Currently, Jörg, as you also said, there are no alternatives or no alternatives that can be used so universally. It was different with asbestos back then.

There was a catalogue of alternative materials. That is, until something is developed, that's the big concern. Not that we don't want to develop, but the time window may be too small.

Peter Schermesser

That's so. As things stand today, there are these two restriction options, or a third one in the announcement and the shortest is 18 months as far as I know. That's for such a product development or modification, that's a mini-time.

As I tried to explain earlier, first and foremost we try to present and map and understand the technical functionalities. In addition, any qualifications are necessary on the customer's side, on the third-party side, and so on. So the process simply involves a lot of tasks and takes time in the prerequisite that you already have technical alternatives in the pipeline at all.

Starting from scratch, then it becomes very critical. And as I said, we with our components may no longer be able to meet certain performance parameters, but it's very similar for the operator. Of course, with a completely different dimension.

And it's not just valves that are affected, pumps are affected, measuring instruments are affected, everything is affected. It is the seals in the systems. When you walk through the large chemical plants, the first thing you see are pipelines, pipelines and towers and so on.

Everywhere you have interfaces that are sealed in some way. So that's a huge topic.

Simone Wilson

Yes, and a topic that we cannot deal with conclusively here and now. In conclusion, therefore. Our guests, Jörg, you already know that, always have one wish free at the end in our podcast.

Yes, you too, Jörg. Now you have been following the topic since the beginning. What do you wish for the industry and our customers?

Jörg Skoda

For the industry, I really wish that the topic would be taken seriously from time to time. Many simply don't take it seriously. We take care of it and you always hear in a lot of reports that you just don't want to, you can't.

I would ask myself, I would ask my colleagues to say, okay, we meet, we talk, we exchange ideas, because with exchange you can learn from both sides. It's not always a one-way street. As of today, it is not possible without fluoropolymers in particular and with some PFAS substances.

That just doesn't work. And anything else would not be the truth. It is simply a matter of maintaining the safety standard that we have with these products on the market, also with the operators, in order to be able to maintain it.

Simone Wilson

You, Mr. Schermesser, what would you like to see in the further restriction process?

Peter Schermesser

I would like to see a differentiated view. We should distinguish between PFAS in kitchens and clothing and PFAS in industrial applications, because as described, the technical properties up to medical technology are expressly advantageous and, in my opinion, outweigh the disadvantages, especially with our products. As a rule, the PFAS-containing materials in our products do not enter the environment directly on a one-to-one basis.

Yes, that it is an issue, that we face up to responsibility, that is clear. We would like to do that and we will do that, but I would like to see a differentiated view.

Simone Wilson

Thank you very much, Mr. Schermesser. I would say that this conversation has shown how complex the topic is and remains and how dynamic the debate continues to be. From the industry's point of view, I would pick up on what you said, Jörg, it is important that we remain in dialogue.

Mr. Schermesser, thank you very much for sharing your perspective with us and for giving us insights into the strategies and innovation processes at Samson AG. Jörg, thank you too for your technical classification and the clear words from practice. Yes, what do I wish for?

I would like to continue to see guests as committed and open discussions as today, because in the end, change is not decided on paper, as I think we have heard today, but in application. If you liked this episode or if you have any suggestions, please feel free to write to us. We are testing our format this year with a total of four episodes and look forward to any feedback.

In the next episode, we will dedicate ourselves to a topic of growing relevance, PTFE recycling and circular economy with two experts who take a differentiated look at technology, regulation and material cycles. Until then, thank you for listening, stay connected and until next time on the IDT podcast for new perspectives and fresh impulses in industry and sealing technology.