Going Green

Alternative Substrates: When Paper Doesn’t Grow on Trees

By Peter Nowack on April 30th, 2010

One very sexy niche emerging in the printing substrate sector is that of “environmentally preferable,” non-wood materials. But is using them really all that good for the environment?

Rob Tossberg of Plan It Green Printing is a Southern California print broker with a decidedly environmental bent (and a healthy skepticism – check out his rants and blogs at planitgreenprinting.com). Rob makes it a point to check out these new materials, and pointed out to a couple that he thought were worth a deeper look. I couldn’t resist.

The first isn’t a paper at all, but a line of film substrates called EarthFirst PLA.  Manufactured by Plastic Suppliers, Inc. in Belgium, the EarthFirst PLA line is made from something called Ingeo, a branded biopolymer fermented from the sugar found in annual renewable crops. (Ingeo is the same polymer used in “corn-plastic” cutlery, cups and plates.) According to the manufacturer, EarthFirst PLA is compatible with soy-based inks, which contributes to its environmental credentials.

The Ingo biopolymer is currently being made from the dextrose of No. 2 yellow dent corn (sounds yummy), reportedly the most abundant and cheapest source of fermentable sugar in the world, but could be made from other sugars or feed stocks, according to NatureWorks LLC, which manufactures the polymer. Making the biopolymer requires 62-68 percent fewer fossil fuel resources than the manufacturing of traditional plastics, according to NatureWorks.

Is the plant-sugar-based plastic film an ideal solution? Clearly it is not.

While EarthFirst PLA films can be broken down in industrial composting facilities, they won’t break down readily under consumer composting conditions. And the non-composted films do not biodegrade under landfill conditions, and will not dissolve in water, so they share some of the same end-of-life issues with other plastics. There also are issues in separating the plant-based plastic from a mixed-plastics waste stream. And, Deep Greens also may want to consider the embedded carbon that results from transoceanic shipping of the biopolymer to Belgium and the EarthFirst PLA substrate back to the U.S. 

Another product that has caught Rob Tossberg’s eye is Fiberstone, a durable, waterproof, tree-free label stock that is made from rock. That’s right. Rock. Calcium Carbonate, to be precise, held together with HDPE plastic resin. (Which is why you shouldn’t eat Fiberstone, as you would Tums, to calm an acid stomach.)

On its website, the manufacturer claims that Fiberstone is made using a clean production process that does not utilize water or emit toxics. The manufacturer also claims the product to be chlorine free, acid free, and actually will begin to photo degrade when exposed to continuous direct sunlight for 9 to12 months. Fiberstone can be recycled, but in the HDPE plastic stream rather than the paper waste stream. As is the case with a lot of “environmental” products, Fiberstone is a mixed blessing. As the manufacturer relentlessly reminds visitors to its website, no trees are used to make the product. Fair enough. But, as the manufacturer admits, Fiberstone does not biodegrade, and its main raw material is the byproduct of the extraction of non-renewable minerals. As for the claim of photo degradation, where the heck are you gonna get that 9 to 12 months of continuous sunlight?