Circularity gets discussed. Decisions need numbers.

A written verdict with numbers in it. That means component-level disassembly effort and cost, recoverable material mass and value with stated assumptions, and a ranked list of the design changes worth making. It is not a strategy deck and not an implementation plan. Engagements run one to four days of effort at a fixed price, and the deliverable is a document that can go in front of a board, an investment committee or a regulator.

32,000 DKK, excluding VAT and travel. That is one day of effort, delivered within two weeks of receiving your product data. For comparison: technical due diligence is from 75,000 DKK for three days and 95,000 DKK for four, and an executive briefing or course day is 35,000 DKK including preparation. Every price is a fixed fee. There is no hourly billing.

ESPR is the EU Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2024/1781, which entered into force on 18 July 2024. It does not impose requirements on your product directly. It is framework legislation, and the actual requirements arrive product group by product group through delegated acts, each with its own timing and its own data demands. So the useful question is not whether ESPR applies to you in the abstract, but which of your product groups is covered by a delegated act, when, and what data you will be required to hold when it lands. The Commission adopted its first ESPR and Energy Labelling Working Plan in April 2025, which sets out the product groups being prioritised. Establishing where a specific portfolio sits against that is a normal expert review.

A Digital Product Passport is a machine-readable record carrying the product information that a given delegated act requires. The hard part is almost never the passport software. The underlying data sits in EPDs, PLM systems, supplier declarations and spreadsheets, with inconsistent definitions across sites – product weight means different things in different factories. Establishing where authoritative data actually lives, and which of it would survive being audited, is the first real piece of work.

Yes, and that is the core of the expert review. I model component-level disassembly effort and cost, recoverable material mass and value with stated assumptions, and then rank what to change against what is not worth bothering with. The input is product data – drawings, bills of material, CAD, existing assessments – rather than a questionnaire. The underlying methodology is published and peer-reviewed, so the assumptions are visible and anyone can challenge them.

Yes. It is an independent technical assessment of a company or technology ahead of an investment decision, and it covers the engineering questions rather than the market ones: whether the process does what the deck claims at the stated yield, whether mass balance and scale-up assumptions survive contact with the chemistry, whether design and manufacturing claims hold at volume, and where feedstock and regulatory risk sit over the investment horizon. Areas covered include materials recovery and recycling both chemical and mechanical, circular manufacturing and remanufacturing, textile and polymer recovery, product design claims such as disassembly and repairability, and critical raw material exposure. The output is a written report plus a call with the investment team, from 75,000 DKK for three days.

Yes. The work is quantitative: which critical raw materials a product actually contains and in what mass, where they sit in the bill of materials, how recoverable they are at end of life, and what that implies for supply risk and for regulatory exposure. I currently lead a business case on critical raw material recovery from decommissioned assets for the European Defence Agency's Incubation Forum for Circular Economy in European Defence.

No. Everything on offer is one to four days of effort delivered as a document. There is no delivery tail, no retainer and no programme. Larger scopes get split into separately commissioned stages, each with its own deliverable and its own fixed fee. If what you actually need is implementation, I will say so on the first call and tell you what kind of firm to look for.

Yes, as a named technical expert on a defined task – ecodesign, critical raw materials, circular product engineering. The deliverables are technical notes, methodology and annexes, for capped days agreed in the subcontract. CV, availability declaration and day rate are available on request. I do not compete for lead-contractor roles and I do not take work package leadership, which means I am not a competitor to the prime.

I bring in a named associate and remain accountable for the delivery. You are told who is involved and why before the work starts, and the verdict still comes from me. Small by design.

Yes, mostly remote across Europe. Copenhagen-based, so Nordic on-site work carries little travel cost. Working languages are English and Italian.

You are buying one named engineer's judgement, at a published fixed price, delivered as a document. There is no team to staff, no discovery phase and no scope creep, because nothing on offer exceeds four days of effort. The background is mechanical and industrial engineering rather than strategy or sustainability reporting: design for assembly with Airbus, design for circular disassembly with Gorenje, and a chemical recycling process I currently run as CTO of GLYON. Small by design, and to a prime contractor a named individual expert is not a competitor.