IN1771

Case Study

Closed Loop PET Recycling in Malta

The Economics of Circularity

Source: Pixabay.com

07/2021-6673
This case study was written by Lisa Duke, case writer, under the direction of Atalay Atasu, Professor of
Technology and Operations Management and Bianca & James Pitt Chair in Environmental Sustainability,
and Luk N. Van Wassenhove, Emeritus Professor of Technology and Operations Management, both at
INSEAD. It is intended to be used as a basis for class discussion rather than to illustrate either effective or
ineffective handling of an administrative situation.
To access INSEAD teaching materials, go to https://publishing.insead.edu/
Copyright © 2021 INSEAD
COPIES MAY NOT BE MADE WITHOUT PERMISSION. NO PART OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE COPIED, STORED, TRANSMITTED, TRANSLATED,
REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED IN ANY FORM OR MEDIUM WHATSOEVER WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNER.

This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.
 Marcus Baggio, Innovation Director of the Alpha Beverage Bottling Company (Alpha) in Malta,
looked at the spreadsheet in front of him. Plastic pollution was one of the most pressing
environmental issues worldwide. Production of single-use plastic products was increasing. In
developing countries, swathes of plastic waste were clogging up what were once free-flowing
rivers and pristine beaches. And in the developed world, mismanaged plastic waste was a problem
especially where recycling rates were poor. PET was the second most-used plastic globally,
particularly for beverages. Alpha produced 7,500 metric tonnes of PET annually – a significant
portion ended up as landfill and the rest was exported to recycling plants in mainland Europe.

While the company had made efforts to collect rainwater for cleaning its trucks and for irrigation,
and to introduce energy efficiencies into production facilities, Marcus wanted it to go further and
investigate the feasibility of building a PET bottle recycling plant in Malta – an island in the
Mediterranean that was essentially an isolated system. This would ‘close the loop’ – end the import
and export of PET bottles.

Although behind in recycling, Malta, as a member of the European Union, was improving plastics
collection and implementing regulations on using recycled material in line with EU directives. An
island offered the possibility to identify limits and flows more precisely.

Understanding the economics was the challenge. Various potential solutions had different cost
considerations– technology choices, energy to power the facility, collecting sufficient used PET as
feedstock and warehousing options. Marcus had to carefully research and build the business case.
If successful in Malta, the plant could serve as a model to roll out elsewhere.

Recycling PET
PET (polyethylene terephthalate) is the chemical name for the polymer often used for food and
beverage packaging. It is clear, strong, lightweight and resistant to micro-organisms. It is produced
by combining ethylene glycol and terephthalic acid to form a polymer chain. The strands are then
extruded, cooled and cut into pellets, then melted for extrusion or moulding into the desired shape.
Originally synthesized by DuPont in the mid-1940s, it is used for fibres and fabrics (polyester) and
for containers (PET).

PET bottles were patented in 1973. By 2020, more than half of all synthetic fibres were made from
PET. It is not biodegradable but is recyclable, either by shredding and extruding into pellets or by
“enhanced chemical recycling” to form new PET resin (rPET), a process defined as “any
reprocessing technology that directly affects either the formulation of the polymeric waste or the
polymer itself and converts them into chemical substances and/or products whether for the original
or other purposes, excluding energy recovery”. 1

Depending on the decontamination process, rPET is used to make bottles, jars, carpets, textiles,
fibrefill for clothing and sleeping bags and protective packaging. It is used by auto-makers and in
construction, and other industrial users. 2

1 https://www.chemicalrecyclingeurope.eu/about-chemical-recycling
2 An Introduction to PET, PET Resin Association, http://www.petresin.org/news_introtoPET.asp

Copyright © INSEAD 1
This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.
 In response to the rise in demand for recycling, not only from consumers (in some countries) but
NGOs pushing it up the political agenda, companies began looking to close the loop in production.
In 2018, the New Plastics Economy Global Commitment led by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation
with the UN Environment Program prompted more than 450 organizations to set ambitious targets
to reduce plastic waste and pollution by 2025 3 by making all plastic packaging 100% reusable,
recyclable or compostable. 4 Among the many global companies aligned with these commitments
were The Coca-Cola Company’s ‘World Without Waste’ – a vision to achieve 100% recyclable
packaging by 2025, with bottles and cans made from 50% of recycled materials, and a pledge to
collect and recycle a bottle or can (regardless of where it came from) for every item it sold by
2030. 5

European Directives

In the past decade, the focus on recycling had increased, and so had regulation. The European
Commission adopted the philosophy of extended producer responsibility (EPR), whereby
producers were responsible for reducing their environmental impact and managing the entire
product lifecycle. A series of directives were related to the integration of environmental costs into
the cost of production, improved waste management, reduction of disposal by landfill, reduction
of the burden on municipalities, and the design of environmentally sound products. Article 14 of
the Waste Framework Directive 2008/98 stated, “In accordance with the polluter-pays principle,
the costs of waste management shall be borne by the original waste producer or by the current or
previous waste holders.” 6 In some cases, producers would pay a third party (either private or
government organizations) to collect and deliver their waste products to recycling plants. In others,
they organized collection, and sometimes recycling, themselves.

Recognizing the negative environmental and health impacts of single-use plastics, in May 2019
the European Commission approved legislation (part of a European Strategy for Plastics in a
Circular Economy) to prevent them entering the market and subsequently the natural environment.
A directive aimed to reduce the volume of single-use plastics (SUP) – the biggest source of marine
litter in the EU – by phasing out unnecessary items, offering economic incentives to reduce
consumption and a transition to reusable packaging, establishing high collection rates, and
extending producer responsibility schemes.

Increasingly, companies were taxed (particularly in Europe) for not recycling their plastic materials
(those that turned into waste at the end of their lifecycle). The European Commission announced
a levy on non-recycled plastic packaging waste of €0.80/kg as of January 1, 2021. While the levy
applied at the country level, member states taxed the plastic producers, 7 who duly began looking
for ways to increase recycling rates of the waste they generated and the use of recycled materials
in their products.

3 https://www.newplasticseconomy.org/projects/global-commitment
4 The vision, https://www.newplasticseconomy.org
5 What is World Without Waste? Coca-Cola company, https://www.coca-colacompany.com/faqs/what-is-world-without-
waste
6 EPR Club, https://www.eprclub.eu/about-epr-club/what-is-epr/
7 Smalley, M. “EU approves tax on nonrecycled plastic”, Recyclingtoday.com, July 28, 2020,
https://www.recyclingtoday.com/article/eu-commission-approves-tax-nonrecycled-plastic-2021/

Copyright © INSEAD 2
This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.
 Competition for rPET

Competition for recycled PET (rPET) was high. Not only was it easy to recycle but it yielded high-
quality output. H&M, Adidas, Nike and Ikea were all looking to use rPET in their products. Unlike
other recycled plastics, waste PET was generally free of contaminants. PET bottles were easy to
separate and clean, whereas textiles, particularly clothing, were usually made of mixed materials,
including metals (zips, fasteners and decorative rivets), chemicals (dyes), and cotton (for
stitching), which had to be separated from the polyester. Once rPET was diverted to textiles, it
was lost to beverage producers as the recycled materials could not be restored to sufficient quality
for food contact use. The textile industry had lower purity requirements than bottlers, which meant
their recycling costs were lower and they could afford to pay more for rPET than food and beverage
producers. The packaging and beverage industries were the driving force behind the push to
create a closed loop to ensure high-quality PET would be used to support the circular economy
and meet EU recycling commitments.

Recycling in Malta

Malta is an independent nation formed by two main islands (Malta and Gozo) covering 316km2,
located south of Sicily in the Mediterranean Sea (Figure 1). The capital, Valletta, has a population
of less than 500,000 but Malta receives 1.6 million tourist visitors per year (from April to
November). English and Maltese are the official languages. With a GDP of $15 billion, the
economy is 89% services, 10% industry and 1% agriculture.

Figure 1: Malta’s Location and Main Towns

Source: Google Maps & WorldAtlas.com

An EU member since 2004, Malta signed the European Commission directive EU 2019 on single-
use plastic, by which plastic bottles had to be 90% made of recycled materials by 2029.

Copyright © INSEAD 3
This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.
 In 2017, 2,371 tonnes of plastic (not just PET) were recycled on Malta 8, and 90% of collected
waste went to landfill. By 2019, the figure was 83% – the highest rate of all EU countries. The
average recycling rate in the EU was 30%, compared to Malta’s 7%. 9

In September 2020, the government announced the implementation of a deposit return scheme
(DRS) to encourage recycling, which proved effective – with an average return rate of 89%. 10 It
announced that by the end of 2021, 350 reverse vending machines would be stationed across the
country, paying 10 cents per plastic drink bottle returned for recycling. 11

8 Borg, B. “What a waste: Malta’s recycling hurdles by the numbers”, Times of Malta, February 7, 2019,
https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/what-a-waste-maltas-recycling-hurdles-by-the-numbers.701329
9 Mamo, C. “Malta’s record on recycling: the worst in Europe?”, thenewfederalist.eu, March 10, 2020,
https://www.thenewfederalist.eu/malta-s-record-on-recycling-among-the-worst-in-europe?lang=fr
10 “New research shows explosive growth in DRS”, recycling-magazine.com, December 15, 2020,
https://www.recycling-magazine.com/2020/12/15/new-research-shows-explosive-growth-in-drs/
11 Borg, J. “350 plastic bottle return machines to be stationed around Malta and Gozo”, timesofmalta.com, September 14,
2020, https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/350-plastic-bottle-return-machines-to-be-stationed-around-malta-and.818056

Copyright © INSEAD 4
This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.
 From Current PET to Closed Loop Lifecycle Process in Malta
Alpha’s PET lifecycle in Malta had six stages. PET polymers were created and transformed into
PET preforms in Italy and elsewhere. These were imported by Malta, turned into the final PET
bottle forms, filled at the local bottling facilities, then distributed via vending machines, retail
outlets, and hotels/restaurants/cafes. Discarded bottles were collected by the municipal authorities
(wherever possible). Approximately 5,000 tonnes of mixed plastic were sent to the EU for recycling
(exact figures for PET were not available) (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Current Process

Source: Authors, Malta & Italy graphics by unknown author used under creative commons (not to scale)

Alpha wanted a study to explore the feasibility of building a recycling facility and related
infrastructure to fully recycle PET in Malta rather than having to import pre-forms and export
collected PET for recycling. As an island nation, it seemed obvious to focus on self-sufficiency of
production. Marcus’ proposed project would ensure that the entire lifecycle would remain in Malta.
Some PET might still arrive from the mainland but used PET would be collected and taken to a
recycling plant powered by wind or solar energy, and the recycled PET would go back to the
bottling plant (Figure 3).

rPET obtained through conventional mechanical recycling gradually degrades in a closed loop.
For this reason, Marcus considered enhanced chemical recycling to ensure consistent high
quality. The process, although more expensive and not fully industry tested, returns the polymer
to its virgin state, so the quality of the rPET remains high – closing the loop as much as possible.
He designed the system to handle up to 10,000 tonnes of PET in Malta per year.

Copyright © INSEAD 5
This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.
 Figure 3: The Planned PET Recycling Loop in Malta

Source: Authors, Malta & Italy graphics by unknown author used under creative commons

His proposal offered two alternative solutions of different hourly capacity for the initial sorting and
washing of the collected material. The washed plastic would then be decontaminated in an
enhanced chemical recycling facility capable of polymerizing the recovered monomers and sent
to another company’s facilities to produce the preforms to feed back to the bottling plant. To exploit
Malta’s geographical position and offset the energy costs of such installations, he proposed that
another company be engaged to install and operate renewable energy to power the recycling
plant.

Calculating the Investment

In the worst-case scenario, the investment would need to pay off within 20 years – the lifespan of
the machinery. Marcus considered various cost estimates based on different options for each step
of the new process (excluding the existing production and bottling elements), as shown in Figure
4.

Copyright © INSEAD 6
This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.
 Figure 4: The PET Recycling Process.
Source: Authors

From PET Bottles to Washed Flakes

As a tourist destination, the production and consumption of PET bottles in Malta was highly
seasonal, with a peak from April to October. Accordingly, two options were considered for the
sorting of collected PET and washing of flakes, with a target annual input capacity of 10,000
tons/year. The first was a low-capacity plant requiring storage of collected PET; the second
operated at full capacity but only during peak season (Table 1). Exhibit 1 shows photographs of
the two options. The sorting and washing equipment were of the same quality for both options.
The input material was collected used PET bottles in large square bales, which after processing
became hot washed flakes (HWF).

Table 1: Capacity Options for Sorting and Washing

Option / Criteria 1. Plant with low capacity 2. Plant with double capacity
Capacity & running: Full capacity for the full year
Full capacity only during peak
almost 24/7, requires large
season, requires minimum
feedstock storage, especially
feedstock storage
during peak season
Input capacity: 2,000 kg/h 4,000 kg/h
Output capacity: 1,500 kg/h 3,000 kg/h
Working hours: 5,000 / year 2,500 / year
Installed power: 950 kW 1,600 kW
Indicative price for
EUR 4,375,500 EUR 8,890,000
equipment:
Source: Authors

Copyright © INSEAD 7
This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.
 From Hot Washed Flakes to PET Resin

The recycling plant would use a new process which enabled the recycling of PET bottles/food
containers profitably using a chemical process. The technology was supplied by a European start-
up, Yesil, that had developed an enhanced recycling solution to turn PET flakes into virgin-like
high-grade polymer material that could be shaped into pre-forms. The process ensured the almost
complete depolymerization of the PET HWF, converting PET into its two core components to
produce virgin PET. The technology was a major step in allowing to close the loop but was still at
pilot stage.

The proposal used a best-case scaled-up simulation for the technology, based on the process
conditions, to estimate the scale required for the closed-loop project.

The process assumptions for the enhanced recycling elements included a reactor, a purification
plant with all needed ancillaries that would produce output efficiency of 95%, and a polymerization
column. Plant design is shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Yesil Plant

Criteria Details
Plant design: 7,500 tonnes/year total
Indicative price for
EUR 25,920,000
equipment:
Source: Authors

From PET Resin to Preforms

This part of the loop had not previously been executed in Malta to turn PET pellets into PET
preforms. The process used a technique whereby the melted PET was injected into a mould.
When the mould was closed, the PET was cooled and became a preform, and was ejected by a
system of extractors (see Exhibit 2 photographs). The diameter and thread type were the main
features of the preform, which determined the type of screw cap and the use of the bottle (e.g., for
still water, sparkling water). The preform injection required two injection machines and 6x48 cavity
moulds powered by an electricity system (1,000 kW) and cooling system. Table 3 gives plant
design details.

Copyright © INSEAD 8
This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.
 Table 3: PET Resin to Preforms Requirements
Criteria Details
Plant design: Capacity 250 million preforms per year
Capacity 6,500 tons/year PET
6x preforms formats
Indicative price for
EUR 5,000,000 equipment
equipment:
Source: Authors

The last step of the process was the same as in the existing process. The preforms were blown
into the final plastic bottle shapes at Alpha’s existing facilities on the island.

Powering the Facility by Renewable Energy

The new process would need a power source. Imported oil and gas were the main fuels used for
power generation in Malta. 12 A 95km undersea electricity cable connecting the island to Sicily was
laid in 2014 and became operational in 2015. By 2019, the interconnector supplied 23% of
generated power to the island. Malta relied on electrogas (53.8%), Diesel-engine (13.9%),
Photovoltaic Panels (6.7%) and the remainder through an emergency backup plant. 13

There were currently no wind farms on the island. Solar energy was particularly interesting as a
power source for the recycling facility. Given its proximity to Africa, of all European countries Malta
had the highest potential for power generation from photovoltaic panels with respect to nominal
energy yield per square meter. 14 It was behind the EU in terms of renewable fuel usage but had
set a target of 10% by 2020. 15 Further environmental benefits could be obtained for the recycling
facility by using solar and/or wind energy.

The current charge for energy from the grid was EUR 0.12/kW. To ensure the recycling facility
had the least environmental impact, both wind and solar energy generation were considered. Solar
was marginally more expensive but excess solar power could be sold back to the grid. Assuming
access to 7,500 t/year PET volume, the recycling facility would require 1,130 kW/t of energy or
612,083.33 kW/month. To offset the costs, revenues from selling excess solar power would
subsidize the new plant, bringing EUR 0.14 /kW sold to the grid. Estimates and indicative costs
are shown in Table 4.

Table 4: Wind & Solar Costs

Criteria Wind Solar
Indicative investment 2,860 kEUR 3,432 kEUR

Power availability factors 32%  42% (used in simulation)

12 Malta – infrastructure, power and communication,

https://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Europe/Malta-INFRASTRUCTURE-POWER-AND-
COMMUNICATIONS.html
13 Carabott, S. “How could a ship’s anchor take out a key source of Malta’s power?” Timesofmalta.com, January 1, 2020,
https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/how-could-a-ships-anchor-take-out-a-key-source-of-maltas-power.760365
14 Master Thesis: Modelling Malta’s Energy System towards Sustainability, Erik Breuer, Eleonora Pilla (2014)
15 Assessment of climate change policies as part of the European Semester: Country Report Malta, ICF Consulting Services
(2015)

Copyright © INSEAD 9
This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.
  Value of renewable energy sold to
the grid 0.140 €/kWh 16
 PV energy cost expected 0.024
€/kWh 17
 Sunshine 3,054 hours/year = 35% of
full year
 Sky description: 62% clear, 34.5%
partly cloudy 18
Source: Authors

Overall Project Costs

In total, Marcus calculated the investment required to be between EUR38 and EUR43 million, as
shown in Table 5. The figures excluded land and building for both the sorting and chemical
recycling stages and the energy, steam, water utilities production requirements.

Table 5: Overall Project Costs

Production Element Estimated Cost (EUR millions)
Sorting to washed flakes 4.3-8.9
Washed flakes to PET 26.0
PET to preforms 5.0
Renewable energy 2.8-3.4
Total ~38.1-.43.3
Source: Authors

The proposal assumed that the Maltese Government would charge €260/t for PET bales from the
DRS collection. If the low-capacity option was chosen, the recycling set-up would also need to
include the space to store the rPET ready for the high season when there was higher demand for
beverages. This would create an additional cost of €100/t for renting a warehouse for storage.
Alternatively, if Alpha were allowed to use government facilities, the cost would be €20/t. Cost of
capital was assumed to be 1% or 2%.

A comparison was made with the business as usual (BAU) scenario, where no recycling plant was
built, and Alpha would continue to purchase raw materials, have them shipped from overseas,
store them, and send collected used PET overseas to be recycled (Table 6).

Table 6: Business as Usual – Outsourced Recycling

Element Cost (EUR)
Capital investment 0
Average inventory holding cost/t 250
Raw material cost/t 1,312
Outsourced recycling cost/t 200
Source: Authors

16 Malta Tender for large scale energy installations (2019)

17 PV cheaper than spot market electricity across Europe, E.Bellini, PV-magazine.com (2019)
18 The Renewable Energy Potential of the Maltese Islands, R.N. Farrugia et al, (2005)

Copyright © INSEAD 10
This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.
 For in-house closed-loop recycling, there were four possible configurations based on power and
capacity choices, as shown in Table 7. The capital expenditure for each option varied depending
on the technology choice of sorting and washing of flakes and the power source choice. Further
calculations were made that showed not buying energy from the grid or selling the excess power
back to the grid would save, on average, EUR 182.42/t for solar energy and EUR 81.08/t for wind
energy.

Table 7: Capex for Solar Power and High Capacity

Energy
Cost
Sort & Variable
Flake to Resin to Renewable Saving
Option Capacity Wash Processing
Resin Preforms Energy (including
Flakes Costs/t
subsidy
0.14)/t
Solar High 8,890,000 25,920,000 5,000,000 3,431,739 1,182.70 182.42
Solar Low 4,357,500 25,920,000 5,000,000 3,431,739 1,200.10 182.42
Wind High 8,890,000 25,920,000 5,000,000 2,859,783 1,139.60 81.08
Wind Low 4,357,500 25,920,000 5,000,000 2,859,783 1,155.70 81.08
Source: Authors

Outstanding Challenges
There were considerable challenges for closing the loop in Malta. The key was collecting sufficient
PET bottles in the first place and the recycling facility getting access to what was collected. Most
PET ended up in landfill or was sent overseas for processing. Were the 350 new collection points
a guarantee of sufficient volumes of feedstock for the closed loop recycling operation? Moreover,
since the Maltese government collected the PET, given the competition for PET bottles they would
sell it to the highest bidder, which might not be Alpha. Once operating, the facility could handle
more PET capacity than available in Malta. Could Alpha’s recycling facility gain access to
additional feed for the plant? Could it work with the government in some way?

Land in Malta was at a premium for tourist purposes and land costs were not factored into the
calculations. While Marcus had included an effective power subsidy of EUR 0.14 /kW to sell
excess solar power to the grid, was it possible to negotiate a greater subsidy amount? He had not
factored this into his calculations, but it would change the investment parameters and make the
business case more attractive to his CFO.

Malta was a great opportunity, not only because it was possible to separate all the parameters for
the investment but also to invest locally for the benefit of the islanders while closing the loop. The
closed-loop arguments were clear cut. For companies operating in the EU, there was pressure
from political agendas as well as their own corporate social responsibility agendas.

Could Marcus demonstrate a robust case for investment? If so, how?

Copyright © INSEAD 11
This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.
 Exhibit 1
Photographs of the Two Options

Smaller Unit

Larger Unit

Copyright © INSEAD 12
This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.
 Exhibit 2
Photographs of Injection Moulding Process

Copyright © INSEAD 13
This document is authorized for use only in Dr. Nirja Mattoo/Dr. Bikramjit Ray Chaudhuri/Dr. Arindam Das's 1304-GMP21:ESG &CS at S P Jain Inst of Mgmt and Res (SPJIMR) from Jan 2025
to Jul 2025.