HP admits that Indigo prints "disrupt recycling"
- Thread starter Green Printer
- Start date
Green Printer
Registered Users
Next step. Who is responsible for the disruption HP, HP press purchaser, printing purchaser or the end user. HP is aware the press purchaser should be aware if HP informed them. The printing purchaser should be aware if the press purchaser informed them. The end user wouldn't have a clue.
Green Printer
Registered Users
nanography info https://www.ingede.com/ingindxe/news/news2016/news1607-pub.pdf
gordo
Well-known member
Last edited:
Green Printer
Registered Users
Until about 1980 virtually all printed paper was recyclable. Now we are at a cross point of possibly destroying the recycling chain without government regulations, interference with possible outright ban on some printing process. All of the non recyclable fibers cannot even be used for toilet paper and sanitary products. Who is going to wipe with plastic embedded. The next problem is when the paper enters the waste sewage treatment system how are they going to remove the small plastic pieces. Plastic is not biomass the sewage treatment bacteria cannot eat the plastic. The plastic ends up in retention ponds and then landfilled or dumped into the local stream, river etcetera eventually ending up in an ocean.
With all of the collective knowledge of this forum members what can be done to solve the non recyclable fiber problem.
With all of the collective knowledge of this forum members what can be done to solve the non recyclable fiber problem.
AP90
Well-known member
If it is as bad as you say, there are really only 2 options. Ban the types of printing that are not de-inkable. That will go over real well in the US let me tell ya. Second would be that maybe instead of the printing industry being forced to come up with the solution, the recycling industry should be the ones to solve the problem. Printing has evolved. Has recycling?
gordo
Well-known member
Surely it’s better to avoid the problem in the first place than focus resources after the fact in trying to fix it?
Maybe the use of much more agressive chemicals at the de-inking phase? No, thanks. Make inks which can be removed with a sane process. Remember that the printed materials can reach geographic areas where there are no sophisticated recycling methods employed, or there is no recycling at all. Ultimately the printed paper should stay bio-degradable by Mother Nature.
Agree with you, gordo and Puch.
Print products have changed from being homogeneous, from standard prints in offset and gravure, towards a lot of different products with additional varnishes, new inks, or completely different processes. The recycling industry has not changed? This is a frequent killer argument. If tomorrow you decide to print on plastic, it will be clear that this product does not match the paper recycling process. What if you do not change the matrix but the ink? It is less obvious but the same problem: if one decides to put a plastic layer on paper which is more of a lamination than a printing process. Paper recycling has been designed for printed products, not for laminated products. If one designs a new product, producer responsibility would mean to look into the life cycle. Does this product match the existing cycles? If it doesn’t, you better design a collection and recycling system with it! Or why should others have to clean up after you and allow you to abuse their established and fine-tuned system?
Glass recyclers cannot recycle cans nor plastic bottles. Still either of them can be recycled, no problem, as long as they are kept separately. It is more difficult with printed (“processed”) paper, but this is where France now starts asking for more producer responsibility. If you laminate a paper with a plastic film, it is not a printed product. And it is not the job of paper recyclers to clean up after those who fail to design a sustainable product. If you collect laminated products separately there are ways to recycle them. But not in the mix. And there is no way to separate them other than either at the source or by a label: “Do not put this laminated product into paper recycling.”
And Puch, you're absolutely right, but one problem that is sometimes overlooked: Not everything biodegradable is deinkable. In Europe, e. g. soy inks are not so common, there is no ecolabel for them -- when drying, they polymerize and attach to the fibers, difficult to remove. Other vegetable oils do both -- degrade and deink.
Print products have changed from being homogeneous, from standard prints in offset and gravure, towards a lot of different products with additional varnishes, new inks, or completely different processes. The recycling industry has not changed? This is a frequent killer argument. If tomorrow you decide to print on plastic, it will be clear that this product does not match the paper recycling process. What if you do not change the matrix but the ink? It is less obvious but the same problem: if one decides to put a plastic layer on paper which is more of a lamination than a printing process. Paper recycling has been designed for printed products, not for laminated products. If one designs a new product, producer responsibility would mean to look into the life cycle. Does this product match the existing cycles? If it doesn’t, you better design a collection and recycling system with it! Or why should others have to clean up after you and allow you to abuse their established and fine-tuned system?
Glass recyclers cannot recycle cans nor plastic bottles. Still either of them can be recycled, no problem, as long as they are kept separately. It is more difficult with printed (“processed”) paper, but this is where France now starts asking for more producer responsibility. If you laminate a paper with a plastic film, it is not a printed product. And it is not the job of paper recyclers to clean up after those who fail to design a sustainable product. If you collect laminated products separately there are ways to recycle them. But not in the mix. And there is no way to separate them other than either at the source or by a label: “Do not put this laminated product into paper recycling.”
And Puch, you're absolutely right, but one problem that is sometimes overlooked: Not everything biodegradable is deinkable. In Europe, e. g. soy inks are not so common, there is no ecolabel for them -- when drying, they polymerize and attach to the fibers, difficult to remove. Other vegetable oils do both -- degrade and deink.
Green Printer
Registered Users
At this moment there are over 4400 users on line. How about some comments this effects the whole printing industry world wide. Hp and other manufacturers need input.
AP90
Well-known member
I feel like this is a much bigger deal and more concerning in countries other than the US. I know we're way behind europe and Canada as far as recycling goes, but I also know businesses are self driven. That means that if you put big restrictions on toner (plastic on paper) products, your going to have some major push back. It wouldn't go over well. But in all honesty, the local area I live and have my company in does not make it easy to recycle for our business. Like honestly its a huge PITA.
Green Printer
Registered Users
I posted a link to this thread on various other forums. They were all removed in a matter of hours. Mr. White thank you for letting this progess.
gordo
Well-known member
Why do you suppose that happened?
This problem is much larger than just having printers separating the waste. Most of the waste will be in the hands of consumers. They have no way of knowing how products are printed and are not likely to care. This issue reminds me of the recycling issues raised with UV inks and coatings. In many discussions with the recycling associations, there was no give on changing anything is their processes. Why? It costs more money and there was no incentive to change. As someone stated earlier, locations doing recycling are not widespread and are limited in capacity. They can be very selective in their incoming waste. I will not pretend to have an answer, but I believe it we need a coordinated effort between Material, Machine, and Recycling Companies. As technologies change, ALL involved have to make changes as well.
kansasquaker
Well-known member
We have a Nexpress, I say we make Indigo illegal 
Green Printer
Registered Users
These issues have been known for 20 years and nothing has been done. No one has come to the plate offering any kind of solutions. I chose not to use an INdigo press went with toner based production for variable data and short runs of 200 or less which is recycleable. All other production is with offset.
Green Printer
Registered Users
Apparently the green movement has evolved to nothing. Nobody cares unless they are forced in any way shape or form to comply. If you can sell it with no repercussions go for it. At this moment most environmental problems are just kicked down the road let the next guy fix it. With all the prining firms in the world from what info I have gathered less the .5% are certified in any kind of green programs.
As i have said before NO BODY CARES.
As i have said before NO BODY CARES.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 16349
Guest
I tend to agree with you. Real environmental issues have been made invisible but I think a large part of the fault of this has been the over zealous and wrong effort by some environmentalists and climate alarm activists to put the emissions of CO2 as the one and only evil issue to be addresses or we will all die. I see no lack of printers who want to do lip service to their small emission footprint, even if many know it is mainly for marketing reasons.
If people are pressured, by government, customers and activist shaming efforts, into dealing with non problems then that is going to affect dealing with real problems such as some of the chemical and deinking issues you have brought here for discussion.
Every potential environmental issue can't be THE MOST important issue. Some rational prioritization is required.
AP90
Well-known member
Id have to agree with your statements. But its because of one main thing. Profits. Having these programs, paying for certifications, implementing heavy recycling all cost money. That eats into profits. Its easy for the workers and everyone to want to do the recycling. They still get paid for it. It cost owners money out of their pockets. That is why its hard to get people on board with recycling or "green printing".
Similar threads
