Hartford Business Journal

20 Hartford Business Journal • March 9, 2015 www.HartfordBusiness.com OpiniOn & Commentary editorial Lawmakers aren't solely to blame for CT's regulatory environment T he free market is being heavily debated in the halls of the state legislature, which should give the business community cause for concern, particularly with law- maker's penchant for overregulation. But politicians aren't always the sole source behind red tape. While businesses often err on the side of less government involvement, at times it's industries themselves that push for greater oversight, showing less concern for Adam Smith's free-market principles and more on creating their own competitive advantage. Take the current debates over Tesla car sales and ride-sharing services, which have two Connecticut industries — cab companies and auto dealers — pushing for greater government oversight. California electric car maker Tesla wants permission from state lawmakers to sell its vehicles directly to consumers, bypassing current laws that require deal- erships, many of them family-owned busi- nesses, to be intermediaries between motor vehicle manufacturers and purchasers. Those favoring a free-market approach would side with Tesla, which is essentially vying for deregulation. Requiring the elec- tric car maker, and other car manufactur- ers, to use a middleman to sell its vehicles in Connecticut is simply an added restric- tion that increases consumers' costs. Auto dealers, however, are waging a major lobbying campaign against Tesla, arguing that direct-to-consumer sales pose major consumer protection threats, particularly if the company folds. The Connecticut Automotive Retailers Asso- ciation makes some valid points, but its push to maintain a more stringent regula- tory environment is not altruistic. Auto dealers are simply looking to preserve their business model, which would be under major threat if Tesla and other car manufacturers were given the freedom to bypass local dealerships. There is a lot at stake: Auto dealers say they are trying to safeguard 13,000 jobs employed by their industry. In another hotly contested issue, Connecticut's taxi cab industry is demanding that lawmakers place much stricter regulations on ride-sharing services offered by Uber and Lyft, which allow consumers to hail a ride via mobile app. Since the two California-based transportation network companies don't own cars or employ drivers, they don't have to abide by Connecticut's century-old livery services regulations, which place strict consumer protection, pricing, and other controls on cab companies and their drivers. While lawmakers consider legitimate consumer protection concerns posed by Uber and Lyft — price gouging, driver background checks, etc. — the livery services industry is pushing for more oversight because their traditional business model is under serious threat. If Uber and Lyft can bypass the extra costs associated with abiding by Connecticut's livery services regulations, they gain a competitive advantage. We aren't taking sides on either of these issues, but we are pointing out the gray areas that exist at the intersection of business and politics. As much as Connecticut Inc. derides the state's regulatory environment, it sometimes isn't shy about preserving the status quo, or adding regulatory hurdles when it benefits the bottom line. n HartfordBusiness.Com Poll Should CT invest another $100M in its Small Business Express program? ● Yes ● No To vote, go online to HartfordBusiness.com. Last week's poll results: Should Tesla be allowed to sell electronic vehicles directly to consumers in CT? 73.3% Yes 26.7% No otHer VoiCes Additive manufacturing offers CT ways to expand traditional product development By Tom Maloney I n the HBJ Economic Forecast issue pub- lished Dec. 22, 2014, the manufacturing sec- tion included an "Experts Corner" article by Rainer Hebert, director of the UConn-Pratt & Whitney Additive Manufacturing Innovation Center and an associate professor in the UConn Department of Materials Science & Engineer- ing that focused on the use of additive technol- ogy in full-scale production and positioned Connecticut as an emerging additive manufac- turing leader. Beyond full-scale production, additive technology is, and can be, used for push- ing the design and manufacturing enve- lope beyond tradition- al manufacturing, into new frontiers for product development. With additive tech- nology, existing parts can be repaired or modified, yielding finished or near net shaped parts. New designs can be rapidly created, tested, and revamped, dramati- cally reducing time and cost of development. A variety of materials can readily be developed, melded and tested to yield specific performance characteristics such as flexibility, rigidity, light weight, or high temperature. Complex geome- tries are transformed within hours into 3D parts using plastics, metals or a mix of materials. The boundaries of what could be made through traditional manufacturing processes are being shattered with additive technology. At the Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology's (CCAT) Advanced Manufactur- ing Center, we're using additive directed energy deposition technology to help companies in the medical, energy, aerospace and defense indus- tries develop new products, repair and enhance existing parts and research new materials fast- er and at lower costs than ever before. It's this potential for limitless innovation at lower costs and reduced timeframes that is the true future of manufacturing. Cladding new material onto a worn area of a part through additive manufacturing requires a fraction of the energy used in conventional welding processes. In fact, some parts con- sidered non-repairable because of the intense heat needed to repair them are now being suc- cessfully restored. This was the case for East Granby-based Barnes Aerospace. The AMC team developed an additive parts repair and modification process that succeeded where conventional welding processes had failed. Using CCAT's 3D multi-material printer, startup LambdaVision Inc. created a proto- type surgical tool for retinal implants that eye surgeons were able to test. Based on test results, the tool design was modified within days, including altering the flexibility of the tool made with rubber-like materials. In today's energy-efficiency focused world, the demand for materials that are lighter in weight, less dense and can perform at higher temperatures is growing rapidly. Through additive technology experimenta- tion, CCAT is helping The NanoSteel Co. Inc. modify metals to achieve the characteristics their customers are seeking. According to Harald Lemke, a vice presi- dent and general manager at The NanoSteel Co., "CCAT's Advanced Manufacturing Cen- ter's expertise and capabilities have acceler- ated the development of our powder platform in additive manufacturing providing key learning and data sets that will propel com- mercialization in general industry markets." Although additive manufacturing allows for the production of near-complete shaping of parts, additional finishing or smoothing steps using traditional milling or turning machines are often required. When combined technologies are needed, the result is, in effect, a new hybrid man- ufacturing process. As more companies start integrating additive technology, hybrid manu- facturing will be recognized as the new normal. Additive technology is fueling a manufac- turing revolution — not just speeding up an existing process but enabling engineers and designers to think of product realization in ways never before possible, with material com- binations that may not have existed before. n Tom Maloney is the chief technology offi- cer of the Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology. letter to tHe editor Waterway pollution a serious CT issue Dear Editor: As the debate over new stormwater rules contin- ues in Connecticut, as described in your recent article "After municipal outcry, DEEP revises stormwater rules," the issue of waterway pollution is getting more and more attention. And rightfully so. It is important to keep in mind that while stormwa- ter runoff is a major contributor to waterway degrada- tion, pollution from point sources such as manufactur- ing and energy plants is also doing its share of damage. Last week, Environment America released a report ti- tled "Polluting Politics," which establishes a link between some of the nation's largest polluters, and their enormous lobbying expenditures and campaign contributions. While the 10 biggest polluters in the nation alone were found to have dumped over 90 million tons of toxic pollutants in 2012, the report also found that these same polluters spent more than $53 million on lobbying and $9.4 million on campaign funding for candidates in 2014. These industries are not just muddling our waters, but they are muddling our politics as well. The Clean Water Act is the bedrock piece of legis- lation responsible for keeping our nation's waterways safe and we must support the EPA's proposed rule to close loopholes in this act that would protect more than 3,000 miles of streams in Connecticut alone. While the stormwater debate will continue, Connecticut residents should voice their support for the clean water rule be- cause it is one finite step that we can agree on. Sincerely, Jack Braun Environment Connecticut Tom Maloney ▶ ▶ While businesses often err on the side of less government involvement, at times it's industries themselves that push for greater oversight, showing less concern for Adam Smith's free- market principles and more on creating their own competitive advantage.

• Cover