# Any eco-friendly screenprinting alternative?



## Ross B (Apr 28, 2006)

There seems to be some momentum gathering in sales of organic T-shirts and apparel generally. It has occurred to me that screenprinting using nasty conventional dyes (plastisol, I think?) rather defeats the purpose of using organic blanks! 

There are herbal and other dyes around that are people and environment friendly and some companies are using them to dye organic T-shirts blanks - apparently effectively - so I'm wondering if any of the screenprinters out there know of an eco/people-friendly screenprinting dye that could be used, or is being used? It must be possible, surely.

Or perhaps that rubbery stretch quality is only currently possible with plastisol dyes? 

Anyway, interested to know the story from you screenprinting experts.

Cheers


----------



## Fluid (Jun 20, 2005)

well plasticols are inks not dyes and I'm not sure whats out there that is truly eco friendly. Waterbased inks are friendly yet the chemical to clean are not.
Emulsion and reclaim chemicals are still harsh so even waterbased printers are not totally eco friendly. Its a step in the right direction IMO


----------



## Ross B (Apr 28, 2006)

Yeah, Fluid, I suspected I had my terminology mixed up a little. I was referring to screenprinting inks, not dyes.

So, water-based inks are as good as it gets at the moment, it seems. What is your view on whether they are as good in finish and as durable as plastisol screenprinting inks?


----------



## Fluid (Jun 20, 2005)

I think the finish product is pretty close to plasticols yet the durability is with Plasticols if cured properly.


----------



## tdeals (Dec 13, 2006)

Ross B said:


> Yeah, Fluid, I suspected I had my terminology mixed up a little. I was referring to screenprinting inks, not dyes.
> 
> So, water-based inks are as good as it gets at the moment, it seems. What is your view on whether they are as good in finish and as durable as plastisol screenprinting inks?


From what I have researched over the past few months (and still learning), water-based inks are a step in the right direction of being more eco-friendly vs plastisol inks ***edit*** but moreso as it relates to the printing on the apparel and not the printing and disposal processes used with it. (Sorry about the mix up, as my understanding is that water-based inks have to be flushed/washed down a drain whereas plastisol does not.)

All screenprinters I've spoken to over the past 3-4 months have said that once the ink is on the apparel, there should be no negative impacts on health. This is even for inks with PVC, lead/metal and formaldehyde in it. I can't vouch for the level of truth in this as I'm not a chemist.  

I have been hearing more of PVC-free plastisol inks with a soft(er) hand than expected. As well, there are formaldehyde & lead free water-based inks available too. I hope to see samples of the soft hand plastisol inks at the Printwear Show in 2 weeks, even though I'm planning to use only non-formaldehyde water-based inks. 

Here are some screenprinters you should reach out to, as well as ink manufacturers, regarding your questions:

[Screenprinter] Eric Henry of TS Designs

[Screenprinter] Noah Hargrove of Screen Gems 

[Ink Manufacturer & Screenprinter Supplier] Larry Cahill of Nazdar SourceOne (Inquire about their 9500 series of inks)

[Ink Manufacturer] PolyOne (Inquire about their Wilflex QuantumOne Non-PVC and Plast-O-Meric WTR Water-Based Inks)

Let us know if you have any more questions or perhaps learn something that we don't know, as inks are evolving.  

AB


----------



## tdeals (Dec 13, 2006)

Ross B said:


> Yeah, Fluid, I suspected I had my terminology mixed up a little. I was referring to screenprinting inks, not dyes.
> 
> So, water-based inks are as good as it gets at the moment, it seems. What is your view on whether they are as good in finish and as durable as plastisol screenprinting inks?


I forgot to respond to your question about the "finish." From the samples I've seen of water-based ink prints, the finish is different than that of standard plastisol ink prints. Water-based inks soak into the apparel/fabric completely whereas plastisol sits on top. 

As for what's good regarding the finish, it's all in what you're looking for. Some people prefer plastisol that sits on top of the tee as they want to feel it. Others don't want to feel it at all and would be driven to buy/use waterbased prints or soft hand plastisol.

Soft hand plastisol, which now that I think of it, I believe I felt this past week on a friend's Old Navy shirt, is a hybrid feel of barely sitting on top of the fabric and soaking into the fabric. You can feel the ink just slightly. 

AB


----------



## Solmu (Aug 15, 2005)

Fluid said:


> I think the finish product is pretty close to plasticols yet the durability is with Plasticols if cured properly.


To be honest I don't think this is true. There's a reason waterbased is used on anything that will be high traffic (e.g. soft furnishings). Unlike plastisol it doesn't require special care for the owner once printed.


----------



## Solmu (Aug 15, 2005)

AdriaticBlue said:


> my understanding is that water-based inks have to be flushed/washed down a drain whereas plastisol does not


Neither of them have to be, and ideally neither of them would be. Both can be disposed of by a waste management company (although I think waste plastisol is often cured into a solid mass and thrown out in the normal rubbish?).


----------



## Solmu (Aug 15, 2005)

As far as eco-friendly screenprinting... to a certain extent it's not possible, as the process uses a fair bit of water and chemicals. Obviously we're talking as friendly as practicable, but I figure it doesn't hurt to mention. Admittedly you can re-use water *extensively *(e.g. amazingly filthy water will still clean a squeegee) so with appropriate water recycling facilities a shop could probably be good enough.

TS Designs have their Rehance technology, but I'm not sure what (if any) the difference is between that and waterbased inks.

I haven't done any extensive research, but in my opinion the best option (balancing quality and impact) for the moment is waterbased screenprinting, but it seems likely to me that DTG is going to be more environmentally friendly in the long term (no water and no screens (meaning no photographic emulsion or screen reclaimer)), it's just a matter of the technology catching up on quality.

From what I can tell (I'm no chemist either, so it's hard to know) the screenprinting industry seems to have been good about OH&S and environmental impact, so over the years it has always improved it's chemicals and inks wherever possible. I've read many claims that plastisol is quite safe to work with, and if properly disposed of not unduly burdensome. That said, I'm in no position to critically assess those claims (and I've also heard the sign industry swear up and down their advertising isn't an eyesore, so I take everything with a grain of salt...).


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

Ross B said:


> There seems to be some momentum gathering in sales of organic T-shirts and apparel generally. It has occurred to me that screen printing using nasty conventional dyes (plastisol, I think?) rather defeats the purpose of using organic blanks!
> 
> There are herbal and other dyes around that are people and environment friendly and some companies are using them to dye organic T-shirts blanks - apparently effectively - so I'm wondering if any of the screenprinters out there know of an eco/people-friendly screenprinting dye that could be used, or is being used? It must be possible, surely.
> 
> Or perhaps that rubbery stretch quality is only currently possible with plastisol dyes?


This is a controversial subject because we don't usually discuss science and facts and impact on society. I am eager to hear about trends in new materials and methods. That curiosity is what's made me who I am.

Sales
Shirt sales have very little to do with the actual process of printing.

"_There seems to be some momentum gathering in ..." _is about sales and yes, sales is way more important to a business, rather than a hobby or research and development or printing.

"_There seems to be some momentum gathering in" _popular music, fashion, every move some celebrities make, game and reality based TV shows. People are making fortunes pandering to what is popular and that's good. I'm glad I live in the USA.

What's going to sell is a very important focus for your business. Without sales you have no business.

If you like, (or don't like) but can sell the rubbery, armor feel popular with athletic uniforms, you design with heavy deposit plastisols and cure it for a long time.

I prowled some stores in a mall in North Carolina last week and by my study, the world is crazy for foil skulls.

If you like organic food, bio fuel, organic clothing AND A SOFT HAND, you can do that with advanced screen printing skills like - high mesh count, high tension screens and soft hand plastisol. 

Plastisol, or water-based, oil based, oil phase, water phase inks. Any ink. Your real enemy is that you think plastisol is bad and water based is good. Or that any ink is bad. Everybody knows that drinking and driving is bad. Everybody for the last 30 years knows that smoking is bad. I don't know of any textile chemicals from commercial companies that are harm to any innocent person like asbestos or DDT.

If you're scared of the ink we use, use it safely. Handled safely, almost anything can be safe. When I got back from Texas after the Printwear show I paid a man to inject me with drugs and then he put a pliers in my mouth and pulled out one of my wisdom teeth. 

I have to pay for my ink I don't want ANY ink to go down the drain because it costs money. It used to be that morons that screeched their tires were using Mom's card and didn't pay for tires. Now there's a whole lifestyle based on drifting and burning up tires.

I have participated in several threads on this site about the benefits of WB or plastisol inks to the environment, (please search for water base). Cured, they have almost the same eco-impact except for the fumes released by ANY evaporative ink that will be more than 50% of the ink. Water is just the _vehicle. _Most poisons are water based. You have no control of what goes into the water based ink you buy, and no knowledge of what is released into the environment.

A gallon of WB ink yields less than a gallon _on the shirt_. In many ways that is OK, because when you make it yourself, it is very inexpensive. I love water based ink and have printed drums and drums of it. I don't like the chemicals that evaporate into the air and the fact that it dries in the screen. I have loved several women in my life, but that doesn't mean I don't want to strangle them sometimes.

Plastisol is 100% solids. It cures and fuses on the shirt without any evaporation. It is the international standard for high opacity on dark colors. It has many rules about disposal although many people wash up with ink degradents and send it down the drain. You have no control of what goes into the plastisol ink you buy, but you know that 100% of it is fused and trapped on the shirt and their is no release into the environment.


Mom and every chef alive has a distinct method of cooking. They could be good eco-citizens in the kitchen *or not*. If you love hamburger - If you eat meat, you know the 22% fat burger you get a t Paul Newman's restaurant in Connecticut is amazing. If you worship the cow as the Hindi's do, I've committed a mortal sin - or worse a crime. George Sanders is famous for regularly ordering pork sausages in Israel.

You as a designer or producer need to say what you want, and every chef you meet will try and please you. If you don't like what you get, you date somebody else.

If you can sell 'herbal dyes' and corner the market - great. If you are making millions and you find that 'tiny crippled Chinese slave children' die every year grinding up the herbs, you get to decide if you want to make change in your products.

Unskilled printers that under cure ink, make bad separations and pour things down the drain where they don't belong are like that insane person that you were so hot for 3 weeks ago. You recognize the traits they had and you avoid people like that no matter how excited you got.

Nasty? UV ink that is on every CD you own might not be cured completely. Any uncured monomers that enter your body stay that way for the rest of your life. 

Nasty. Solvent based vinyl or epoxy inks. Ask the person printing that stuff every day.

Nasty. I did 2 days of consulting work in a tannery once. Perhaps the 2 worst days of my life. I never liked the bakery I worked in after school because I always burned my arms.


I don't accept the entire premise that organic is somehow, by definition, safe or better. There's lots of fear mongering. It reminds me of the arguments we had about bio-degradable. Even plutonium is bio degradable, it just take 500 years or so. 

Let's be more specific about the benefits and I want to continue any discussions to bring facts to light. Let's discuss what you are worried about.

Most people on these forums are just afraid to make a mistake or experiment. That's what school, libraries and these forums are for.

Oh. I'm coming out with a new organic process ink and fiber made from all natural crystal structures that are found free in nature called arsenic. The stuff is amazing.

===========
At trade shows and seminars, I always check out the shoes of eco-friendly people with questions. Most of the time they are wearing leather, brand name athletic shoes made in ..........


----------



## tdeals (Dec 13, 2006)

Hi there Richard!

What exactly is your role in the screenprinting industry? 

Let's take a different approach for newbies like me to get educated on the subject at hand.

*Tell me what what I need to be concerned with in wanting to sell eco-friendly screenprinted apparel? 

What questions should I be asking of ink manufacturers and screenprinters regarding water-based & plastisol inks, and the printing processes they're used with?* 

Thanks...

AB


----------



## Fluid (Jun 20, 2005)

Check his profile


----------



## tdeals (Dec 13, 2006)

Fluid said:


> Check his profile


I did. 

I'd like for him to elaborate if he would be so kind, as I don't want to assume what he does on his title alone.


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

AdriaticBlue said:


> What exactly is your role in the screenprinting industry?


When Gena Conti the milliner, wanted to insult her ex-son in law, she said, "He has an ego even bigger than Richard's".

My role? Blowhard, egoist, loud talker, know-it-all, industry pioneer in the 1980's with full color process on textiles, automatic printing, printing on sleeves before they are sewn, custom mfg garments, developed ultra heavy weigh fleece material (which was unheard of in the 80's). 

Most of what I learned about sewing and dying I learned at Carolina Pacific in Statesville, NC at the corner of Old Mountain Road and I-44. I took that experience to the textile region Northwest of Philadelphia where Jeffrey Gitomer and I started Shadow Graphics where we knit, cut, sewed and printed shirts. For a few years Jeffrey, Duke Daulton and I created an inhouse school at Daulton Imprints in Hickory NC, for screen printers that accepted students from the outside. This is the only place that has specifically focused on fine line automatic printing.

I wrote a column in Screen Printing for 9 years and was Technical Editor for Printwear magazine for 5 years. Member of the Academy of Screen Printing Technology. That's quite a few years putting my opinions in print for peer review. I now work for Ulano as Technical Product Manager.

Which is all well and good, but you have to decide if what I wrote makes sense, or helps you understand.

To promote your business you could focus on how all the materials were disposed of in an eco-friendly manner, including can recycling, water recycling, heat exchangers, low volume toilets, conversion of those huge sodium lamps to low cost fluorescent lamps, swamp coolers, trash separation, womb to tomb documentation of your ink and stencil waste disposal, other alternative clothing materials like hats for sun protection, not leather, not fur, not animal tested and certainly not driving about in an inefficient gasoline car. 



AdriaticBlue said:


> Let's take a different approach for newbies like me to get educated on the subject at hand.


OK. What do you mean by different?



AdriaticBlue said:


> *Tell me what what I need to be concerned with in wanting to sell eco-friendly screenprinted apparel? *


Why are you concerned? You make a list and it will be simple to make any concern into a mission to find an alternative you can live with, then boast about it.



> -Desire a human and animal "healthy" ink on apparel
> -Desire an ink that's environmentally-friendly
> -Desire an ink that allows the fabric to breathe
> -Desire a complete, soft-hand feel
> ...


A lot of what I wrote above, is on the same path as what I wrote to you in March, when you were exploring WB ink and alternative materials for shirts.



> Don't be seduced into specifying WB inks.
> 
> WB requires nastier internal chemicals than plastisol - and they all go into the air.
> 
> ...


Making money so you can stay in business is the most important vision you need. If you know the eco-friendly screen printed apparel business, or have a vision to lead in that market you know how you have to manufacture by default. If you lead with eco-friendly, you are selling a promise and a process, which is more than the 'brand' selling off athletic teams and shoe logos. 

When I was working a trade show, the only time I was ever handed back a sample shirt was when I gave a Jimmy Buffett "Cheeseburger in Paradise" shirt to a vegetarian. I quickly substituted a fabulous Penguin shirt. I didn't scoff, I got her something she would like. If ink chemicals or bleached white shirts scare her, I would get her what she wanted. You have to be more specific about what scares you. 



AdriaticBlue said:


> * What questions should I be asking of ink manufacturers and screenprinters regarding water-based & plastisol inks, and the printing processes they're used with?*


You need documentable testimonials on how the invisible processes used to manufacture your line can be used to help to you sell your line. Look at how American Apparel promotes their urban/USA/LA downtown heritage, which is different from the corporate Hanes/SaraLee international conglomerate structure.

I hope I didn't miss you at the Texsource Open House last week. You missed your chance to pigeon hole the Union, International Coatings and Charlotte's own Rutland ink reps. They will all be in Charlotte again at the end of next week for the Printwear Show. Go to the ink booths and tell them what you are scared of. Alas, I won't be there because I will be in Berlin at the FESPA show.

I've arranged for Denise Breard to substitute for me at the 4 seminars I usually teach at the Printwear shows. This is the first Printwear Show I have missed since they started. Call me and I'll fix you up with a pass to the screen printing seminars. 646-294-2799. I leave for Berlin Friday night.

NBM Shows: Charlotte June 7-9, 2007!

If I was there, I'd take you to Vince DiCecco's sales and marketing seminars Friday and Saturday. Vince is a former Wilflex, Nalco and Dow Chemical employee and would be full of insight on how to avoid a nasty chemical reaction to the manufacture of t-shirts. 

I'd invite you do dinner with Vince and Helen Hart Momson who would supply moral support and years of Southern experience dealin' with the Good Old Boys in the textile trade. 

If you were still in Charlotte on Saturday night, I'd take you to Sullivan's with Jeffrey Gitomer (who still has the front column in Printwear magazine and is in over 80 Business Journals around the world). You could fence your way through dinner as he would steer you an a positive direction on how to promote and sell your line.

I know you're afraid of something, we just have to drill down and find out what that is. It still feels to me like you are still fishing for a problem. I don't assume there is - except that people blindly believe water based ink is somehow safer to the environment.


----------



## tdeals (Dec 13, 2006)

Wow - what a wealth of information and what a guy you are Richard!  I want to thank you for sharing details on how you started and what you have done & do in this industry. You've made some great points that I must do to make any business work.

I will call you, as my business partner and I plan to be at Printwear in Charlotte on Thursday, June 7th. Yes, I missed the Texsource open house, wasn't aware of it. What time of the day or evening between this Sun-Wed is best to call? I sent you my number in a PM. I'm a late night person, usually up until 2am everyday but I'm up in the mornings too. Let's just say, I'm up more than I'm sleep.

I am new to the idea of selling apparel, and new to the idea of selling screenprinted apparel - that should be obvious.  It's very easy for me to have concerns that may not need to be concerns, as there are so many unknowns and assumptions when I'm not making the inks or doing the printing. I'm glad you said what you did, as it got me thinking more about just what my concerns are.

Over the last 6 months, my goals have changed in the markets I would like serving in this industry. After reading your reply last night, I called my business partner, asking just how in the world I got on the bandwagon for eco-friendly products/processes when eco-friendly buyers are not one of my target markets??? We discussed and remembered when. Targeting "green" buyers is truly moving away from the sole reason I considered this business.

However...In considering this business, my overall concern is - a customer, their child or their pet experiencing a harmful effect as a direct result of wearing my screenprinted apparel with chemical-based dyes and screenprinting inks. I have yet to read of such a story or case but I've read some about harmful effects of PVCs & phthalates. 

This is a concern I've created because common sense is saying, if I'm selling a product that has chemicals in it/on it, from the t-shirt dyes to the ink printed on it, then it _could_ be harmful to someone. 

Tell me if my concern does not need to be there so I can let it go, though I need to know why I should let it go. The other question I have with that is, if there shouldn't be a concern, why are ink manufacturers and screenprinters making products and processes more "green?" I am thinking this is moreso to help the environment than to prevent the tshirt customer from experiencing an immediate harmful effect from putting on that shirt. Please correct me here if I'm mistaken.

I feel it would be the right thing to do for me to partner with screenprinters, fabric source companies and ink manufacturers who do not make use of any sweatshops to bring forth their products, and whose processes/products are safe for humans and the environment. That's all.

Again, I'm not targeting those who seek to buy only "green" apparel. I'm not wanting to sell a promise or process about inks and printing. But hey, if I earn the business of an environmentalist, then I've done something I wasn't planning to do. 

AB


----------



## Solmu (Aug 15, 2005)

AdriaticBlue said:


> However...In considering this business, my overall concern is - a customer, their child or their pet experiencing a harmful effect as a direct result of wearing my screenprinted apparel with chemical-based dyes and screenprinting inks. I have yet to read of such a story or case but I've read some about harmful effects of PVCs & phthalates.


I think that's a problem for those working with those substances, not the wearer of the end product. I suppose someone with allergies might be effected by an improperly cured shirt, but I've never heard of any negative effects from a printed product. The chemicals are a problem for those working with them - the shirts are not full of them. As far as I know the worst chemicals are those used for cleaning; they never come in direct contact with the clothing.



AdriaticBlue said:


> The other question I have with that is, if there shouldn't be a concern, why are ink manufacturers and screenprinters making products and processes more "green?"


Because it's a concern for those of us who have increased exposure to the chemicals (i.e. people working in the industry), and for the environment as a whole (the less poison we put into the water table the better). Just because some of the by-products are unsafe, doesn't mean the end product is unsafe.


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

As I walked home from breakfast this morning I thought about AdriaticBlue's questions about what to ask vendors, perhaps, I think I understand more about what she is trying to learn.


I was distracted by the blind assumption that water-based ink was a safer solution to 'nasty' plastisol, that we use in a screen printing shop.

I focused my discussion to the actual use I make of these inks in the shop, not their manufacture or disposal.

There is *no question* that vinyl chloride exposure during _manufacture is dangerous_, so I can see that *any *person that prints *any* ink should wonder if the manufacture of the product causes health problems. Laws were changed in the early 1970's to limit exposure, even though the real problem is chronic exposure even at low dosage. 

There are known hazards to resin workers at risk when PVC pellets are converted into consumer products. Industry workers in Italy bagging resins while their bosses knew it was dangerous, ground water and air contamination near chemical plants never goes away once absorbed into the body. Italians have lead the cause in Europe as they discovered that the Venice lagoon was knowingly being polluted by manufacturers. 

I can see that AdriaticBlue could benefit from documenting the results of her investigation (just as food producers document the origins of their raw materials), to ensure that workers at fabricators are not exposed to the building block of polyvinyl chloride, vinyl chloride, whether it is in water based ink or plastisol.

As an industry, I'm sure we are more interested in the value and convenience we get from these products, not their womb to tomb manufacture or disposal. The recycling impact of ink is impractical compared to PVC plumbing pipe and I hope that manufacturers take precautions to protect their neighbors and environment. Here the European demand to eliminate PVC from as many products as possible is targeted at the raw manufacture of products and especially disposal.

Alas, we are a tiny consumer of vinyl chloride, but it is crazy not to acknowledge that hazards of the manufacture of the raw materials and the dangers of disposal, especially if dioxins are released when it is burned. We survived the elimination of lead from our inks because of the chronic danger to EATING the lead. That damn Nader lead the cause to eliminate those sharp knobs on the dashboards of cars, just because it killed people. 

PVC in baby toys, pacifiers and disposable packaging is a focal point that *will effect* what we use when screen printing shirts.


----------



## Ross B (Apr 28, 2006)

I have sat on the sidelines and watched with interest as the discussion has unfolded. Thanks especially to Richard for his willingness to share his obvious expertise and industry experience. However, I am still not sure whether I understand completely, and think it's time to check.

To summarise thus far (and Richard, please correct me if I have something wrong):

1. There are environmental plusses and minuses with plastisol and water-based screenprinting inks. It is not possible to come out 100% on the side of one or the other. Neither, therefore, are ideal from an environmental POV.

2. In terms of worker safety at the ink manufacturing stage, water-based inks are preferable. This is also true in terms of the human environment generally.

3. For screenprinters working with these inks, neither pose a significant health risk if the printing process is managed properly.

4. Neither pose significant environmental risks at the waste disposal stage, providing this is handled responsibly.

5. For the client (wearer of the T-shirt), neither ink printed on a T-shirt poses any sort of health risk.

6. In terms of the final screenprinting appeal, plastisol has a definite hand and a good, sharp, vivid finish, and is as durable as any screenprinting ink.

7. Water based screenprinting is equally durable, but looks a little different: "softer" in appearance; little hand evident, since it "soaks" into the fabric rather than staying on top of it.

OK. Now, to organic apparel itself, and if I have escaped with understanding intact with the points above, this is where I am not so sure I have things right.

A. My research indicates, and I have been told by industry professionals (at least, that was their claim) that the farming of organic cotton is a far more environmentally friendly process than conventional cotton farming. Why? Because none of the usually extensively applied and multiple pesticides are used and only organic fertilisers are used. Water use is still high.

B. I have been told that organic cotton is *stronger and better quality* than conventionally grown cotton. True or false?

C. I have been told that the chemicals (pesticides and fertilisers) used in conventional cotton farming are detectable in the finished fabric product through scientific analysis. If true, surely this suggests strongly that organic cotton is better for the end user. But IS IT TRUE?

D. Internationally credible certification exists that gives a reasonable guarantee that organic cotton is truly organic, in that it adheres to a set of internationally agreed upon criteria. I choose to believe this, but would be interested in the views of people directly involved in the certification process.

E. Finally - and this is getting away from my original post while still being relevant to anyone interested in organic apparel, since it involves the human environment - how certain can one be that the process of producing organic apparel does not entail so-called sweatshop labour? 

Organic industry folk I have been communicating with claim that their products are "sweatshop-free", but one industry person from Turkey casts doubt that these claims hold true in the case of produce from India and China. I understand that the whole concept of "sweatshop-free" is hazy and open to philosophical interpretation, but would be interested in the views of informed people nevertheless.

Cheers all!


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

I have sat on the sidelines and watched with interest as the discussion has unfolded. Thanks especially to Richard for his willingness to share his obvious expertise and industry experience. However, I am still not sure whether I understand completely, and think it's time to check.

To summarise thus far (and Richard, please correct me if I have something wrong):

1. There are environmental plusses and minuses with plastisol and water-based screenprinting inks. It is not possible to come out 100% on the side of one or the other. Neither, therefore, are ideal from an environmental POV.

Greaves: Is it possible to come out 100% for an ideal on any environmental issue? This is an attitude that has no boundaries and fuels argument. 

A vegan would never eat a free range chicken. Many people feel saddling and riding horses cruel. Therefore there is no ideal for the environment when it comes to inks or t-shirts or bleached toilet paper.

2. In terms of worker safety at the ink manufacturing stage, water-based inks are preferable. This is also true in terms of the human environment generally.

Greaves: Why? As I've written in these posts there are sometimes aggressive chemicals in water based ink. Simply not wearing a mask while handling powders can be dangerous. 

Like #1, broad black & white approaches to these question will never work. 

What will work are the specific promotion of the benefits of how you produce your products. 

Ulano documents on most of their labels that 'All Ulano Products Are Phalate Free'. 

I see Penelope Cruz advertising some hair color "and it doesn't have any ammonia." 

No animals were harmed in the printing of these shirts.


3. For screenprinters working with these inks, neither pose a significant health risk if the printing process is managed properly.

Greaves: I don't want to breath fumes from water based ink or ZFS (discharge fumes). I don't want to breath fumes from shirts because I don't know what's in it - organic or not. I don't want to breath the vapors or fumes from stain or haze removers. They should be properly ventilated outside the building so all the people in the neighborhood can share the smells.

4. Neither pose significant environmental risks at the waste disposal stage, providing this is handled responsibly.

Greaves: Yes.

5. For the client (wearer of the T-shirt), neither ink printed on a T-shirt poses any sort of health risk.

Greaves: I wouldn't want a customer to wear a discharge shirt without washing it first. I wouldn't want a customer to wear a shirt printed with under cured white plastisol.

6. In terms of the final screenprinting appeal, plastisol has a definite hand and a good, sharp, vivid finish, and is as durable as any screenprinting ink.

Greaves: No, I don't accept the premise.  Plastisol with a heavy deposit will have a hand. If the only tool yo have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. If you print plastisol and it has hand, that was your choice.

This is more a function of the mesh thickness, squeegee angle and the ink. Plastisol designed to have soft hand will be soft, but not if it's printed through a 110 mesh! I can show you plastisol prints I've made with no hand.

Water based ink for opaque printing on a dark garment can feel hard because of the film required to cover up the color of the shirt and the stiffness of the water based resins usually used. As the new discharge trend shows us, discharge is the future - that is until digital takes over.

Properly cured - completely cured textile ink will outlast the fabric.

7. Water based screenprinting is equally durable, but looks a little different: "softer" in appearance; little hand evident, since it "soaks" into the fabric rather than staying on top of it.

Greaves: Wet on wet liquid plastisol using soft resins can have the same hand as water based ink on light colored shirts.

OK. Now, to organic apparel itself, and if I have escaped with understanding intact with the points above, this is where I am not so sure I have things right.

A. My research indicates, and I have been told by industry professionals (at least, that was their claim) that the farming of organic cotton is a far more environmentally friendly process than conventional cotton farming. Why? Because none of the usually extensively applied and multiple pesticides are used and only organic fertilisers are used. Water use is still high.

B. I have been told that organic cotton is *stronger and better quality * than conventionally grown cotton. True or false? 

Greaves: That statement would be like saying that all German cars are better than American cars. Hundreds of growers, hundreds of processors, hundreds of knitters. Who could say? What's the point? If I were you I'd be making demonstrations of how YOUR cotton and your printing skills make YOUR shirts worth the premium price you charge. 

By the nature of your question, you force me to answer False, because inferior cotton grown by even just one farmer forces me to say say no.

You are still looking for some sort of moral high ground. You don't have to worry about ALL the cotton, just yours.

Here in the USA, there are millions of people that don't buy American, they buy what they percive as the best value. The #1 retailer is Wal-Mart, not Lord & Taylor. Is the mens underwear at Lord & Taylor *stronger and better quality* than Wal-Mart? To some people yes. To some people the control, speed, handling and long life of a Porsche, make it an excellent value and have no problem paying.

The doctors motto "First, do no harm" is a principle taught to all medical students, yet doctors kill over 100,000 people per year. Does this make all doctors good, or bad?

C. I have been told that the chemicals (pesticides and fertilisers) used in conventional cotton farming are detectable in the finished fabric product through scientific analysis. If true, surely this suggests strongly that organic cotton is better for the end user. But IS IT TRUE?

Greaves: This means that all the chemicals absorbed by any plant (or human hair) is detectable. If you keep insisting on looking for a black & white answer that organic cotton is better you need documentation on YOUR cotton you can promote. 

"Our cotton is free of all heavy metals such as lead, arsenic, mercury, ureas or other nitrates, DDT, animal by products, gene enhanced proteins and only watered with acid and smog free rain by 18 year old virgins."

D. Internationally credible certification exists that gives a reasonable guarantee that organic cotton is truly organic, in that it adheres to a set of internationally agreed upon criteria. I choose to believe this, but would be interested in the views of people directly involved in the certification process.

E. Finally - and this is getting away from my original post while still being relevant to anyone interested in organic apparel, since it involves the human environment - how certain can one be that the process of producing organic apparel does not entail so-called sweatshop labour? 

Greaves:  Document and promote your suppliers so your customers know that you are "Kosher". Rabbis have been doing it for thousands of years.

Organic industry folk I have been communicating with claim that their products are "sweatshop-free", but one industry person from Turkey casts doubt that these claims hold true in the case of produce from India and China. I understand that the whole concept of "sweatshop-free" is hazy and open to philosophical interpretation, but would be interested in the views of informed people nevertheless.

Greaves: This is another statement without boundaries. There are good and bad cops, doctors and lawyers. In China, children may work 12 hours a day, 6 days a week and paid $3 per day. This might be great for them, but a scandal in Australia.

Consider the huge textile upheaval in Australia when Fiji manufacturing went down the drain when George Speight toppled the Fijian government. Much of Australian textiles were made in Fiji because of the less expensive labour there. 








Of course, they needed some environmental training.


I'm going to Berlin on Friday for FESPA. This subject will be on my mind and I will load up on what I can find on Turkish textiles and the latest on the PVC disposal measures.


----------



## Ross B (Apr 28, 2006)

Jeez, Greaves (I am using your first name, yes?), do I take from your responses that I have not properly understood virtually anything, then?! 

Must admit, I find some of your responses mercurial. I can't make up my mind whether you are being pedantic, or answering in the fashion of some Eastern mystic! And I mean this honestly - I do not intend this as a criticism! 

I'll have to study your answers when I have more time, and see if I can get to the core of them. May have to check back with you!

Cheers and sincerely, thanks for your time.


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

Ross B said:


> Jeez, Greaves (I am using your first name, yes?), do I take from your responses that I have not properly understood virtually anything, then?!
> 
> Must admit, I find some of your responses mercurial. I can't make up my mind whether you are being pedantic, or answering in the fashion of some Eastern mystic! And I mean this honestly - I do not intend this as a criticism!
> 
> ...


There are other Richard's in this forum, so Greaves is clearer. 

A pedant and Eastern mystic! I do live in NYC now so that's the East. There is no question I pontificate in this forum. I hope everyone has seen as I made jokes in the posts that I see room for a discussion. This is unlike a discussion of why it's a bad idea to under-expose a screen, then let the stencil remover dry on the mesh where there is not room for discussion.

I put my comment about a vegan never eating a free range chicken at the front of the post to make that point. Perhaps I was too mystical? You can cut through that by being specific about what you question.

If you make broad unprovable statements you can get elected to political office, but I wanted to change your viewpoint - what ever it was - with my tongue in cheek examples of how you can say what you want, tell the truth AND sell the shirts you want to. A company AdriaticBlue mentioned "Screen Gems", has some pretty scary dogmatic statements that are debatable. Screen Gems Custom T-shirts Organic Cotton Environmentally Friendly Inks

But there is the key - debate. They dismiss the ZFS formaldehyde used in discharge inks, "It is used in such small quantities that it is hardly there and it washes out of the shirt in the first washing."

I compare this to the statements they make protecting you from nasty PVC, which state is completely fused 100% to the shirt. It seems to them that it is OK that they promote disposal of formaldehyde in the discharged water of your washing machine.

I don't mind this. They are clear about what they promote.

Like many beginners, looking for understanding, you are looking for answers. If I didn't persuade you that dogmatic final answers can rarely be true, then I certainly didn't make myself understood.

If you tell me that all plastisol prints feel rubbery or thick, I know you don't know what I know. I avoid saying you are wrong, but you are. You started by saying ALL. That's just asking for an argument.

If you say, "I've never seen a plastisol print as soft as water based ink", you aren't wrong. Just a different way to say almost the same thing.

"I have not properly understood virtually anything, then?" Even this is black and white. The things I contradicted, you didn't understand - That's why you asked for help.

Only you can tell me what you didn't understand. Only you can tell me what you are afraid of or don't understand how to convince your customers, girlfriend or employees what you believe.


----------



## Ross B (Apr 28, 2006)

Greaves,

(Actually, I'd rather call you Richard if that's your first name...I don't think you'll be in any doubt that it is you whom I am addressing, regardless of how many other Richards are subscribed to this forum! But, your call...)

I get the philosophical point you are making about dogma by its very nature not encompassing the full truth (or sometimes any of it - heh heh!)...but it would be an impediment to effective communication to labour this point too much, I think?

Yes, I am relatively inexperienced in this industry, but I have been investigating the business from different angles for over a year now, and am not uninformed. It has only been quite recently that I have started researching the organic side, though. 

A point I need to take up re your comment: "...you can say what you want, tell the truth AND sell the shirts you want to." I am not interested in getting away with literal truths while leaving the full story unsaid in the interests of sales spin that will make me a successful business. 

My stance and interest in the organic apparel industry IS moral/ethical AND business-orientated. The two are surely not mutually exclusive. I am committed to having my values aligned to the business I am in. 

Mainstream companies do, as I understand it, exploit workers (yes, that is my value judgement based on the factory conditions and remuneration as I believe them to be based on my research...allow me that much room for imposing my own morality and interpretation on the facts as my research has uncovered them - if one starts to question everything and insisting on 100% proof or casting everything in a philosophical light, you end up getting nowhere at all!). So, I do not wish to be associated with worker exploitation or to support companies that exploit workers (in my terms in which I understand exploitation). 

Further, I am seeking the facts on organic apparel in an effort to determine whether the environmental and client benefits that are frequently claimed by distributors and agents are supported by evidence. The only way I can determine this, not being an expert myself, is to ask the experts and hope they are indeed knowledgable and honest! Hence my queries here.

I really will have to give more time to studying your responses to ascertain whether any of my queries have really been answered, or whether I need to re-frame the questions. 

I can't help feeling, though, like King Midas, whose wish was that everything he touched be turned to gold, and who ended up being unable to drink, because the water turned to gold, and effectively lost his wife and daughter, who turned to gold when he touched them, etc... Poor old Midas, of course, MEANT to wish for instant and unlimited riches, but in taking him literally, the genie or fairy (or whatever it was) played a cruel trick and gave him his wish while taking everything else away! 

Could you please, do you think, WHERE POSSIBLE, ease up on the pedantic literal interpretations and philosophical considerations, and gimme some facts as you know them?! 

I feel bound to say again, I am not meaning to complain or criticise. I mean it! Whatever else I mean...well I'm not sure any more! Go on - put forward the proposition that if I'm not sure, I can't expect anyone else to be!


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

Ross B said:


> Could you please, do you think, WHERE POSSIBLE, ease up on the pedantic literal interpretations and philosophical considerations, and gimme some facts as you know them?!



No.





What possible part of my answers were not based on facts?

Which examples to your answers were not based on making a clear statement in response to your questions?


----------



## Ross B (Apr 28, 2006)

RichardGreaves said:


> What possible part of my answers were not based on facts?


I don't know! You are making assertions about all sorts of things I am trusting are "facts" - but to take your pedantic line, I cannot KNOW whether all or any of your asserted facts are _actually_ facts. I am not an expert. I can only hope you know your stuff and I think you do. However, I've been given many conflicting answers to some of my queries, all by people who claim to be industry pros. Some such conflicting info may be simply a matter of different personal perspectives or possible misinterpretation of my queries, while others appear to indicate that some individuals are correct and others are incorrect. And while my sense is that you know your stuff, I feel you are fond of pontification for its own sake. Nothing wrong with that per se, except that I find it sometimes makes your responses difficult to understand! I speak only for myself here. (Frustrated? I am only mirroring your mode of response back at you! And, I'm being entirely "factual" in speaking my truth.). I will desist from this mirroring from this point on. Just wanted to make a point.



RichardGreaves said:


> Which examples to your answers were not based on making a clear statement in response to your questions?


Your answer to my point 1. In effect, all you had to say was "yes" - and in effect, that's all you did say, though rather circumlocutously!

Your answer to my point 3. Again, in effect the answer was simply "yes"! I had already added the proviso about the process being properly managed. You elaborated on this management, but this was extraneous to my query.

Your response to my Q5: The point about the undercured white plastisol is extraneous to the query. I think implicit in the query for most folk is the assumption that the screenprinting is done properly.

Your responses to my Qs A & B! 

eg:


RichardGreaves said:


> By the nature of your question, you force me to answer False, because inferior cotton grown by even just one farmer forces me to say say no.


Pedantic in the extreme! Of course, there is always the exception, but isn't it obvious that I was asking the question on the assumption of competent commercial farming practice?


RichardGreaves said:


> If I were you I'd be making demonstrations of how YOUR cotton and your printing skills make YOUR shirts worth the premium price you charge.


Fine, but at this stage this is entirely hypothetical, since I don't HAVE any organic cotton apparel and am not a screenprinter (and in the case of the latter, have no intention to be). At this stage I am trying to get some answers to some basic questions, which I have expressed as simply as I know how. There MUST be some basic answers! That is all I seek!



RichardGreaves said:


> If I were you I'd be making demonstrations of how YOUR cotton and your printing skills make YOUR shirts worth the premium price you charge.


Sure - but I first have to find out enough to identify a good source, and to find a good source, I have to separate fact from myth. That is the stage I am at currently, and is my purpose here in this thread. 

I will try again by reframing the question: *Can premium organic cotton be better quality than premium conventionally produced cotton, due to the organic farming methods?* 
It is certainly true that premium organically grown fruit and veges are superior to the best conventionally farmed equivalents in flavour and nutritional value...I know the former is true, at least, because I grow organic veges and fruit and can taste the difference for myself, and logic tells me that exhausted, mineral depleted commercial farm soils will not produce veges and fruit of premium quality! Rich, carefully and correctly managed balanced organic soils will bear dividends nutritionally in the produce that comes from them. So, logically, it seems reasonable to suppose that the same may be applied to organically produced cotton. I would like to know if anyone can provide scientific evidence that this is fact, though.

Your response to Query E!


RichardGreaves said:


> This is another statement without boundaries. There are good and bad cops, doctors and lawyers. In China, children may work 12 hours a day, 6 days a week and paid $3 per day. This might be great for them, but a scandal in Australia.


Obviously so! Did I not acknowledge in my query that the whole concept of "sweatshop-free" is "hazy and open to philosophical interpretation"? You have simply reiterated this point by way of example - and I was clearly already aware of it, and needed no further demonstration! 

Again, I'll reframe my query, this time into two parts: 

*Is it possible that organic cotton farming criteria and sweatshop-free practices are less likely to be stringently adhered to in India and China than Turkey?* 

*Is it possible that organic certification may not be as strictly applied, or faked, and that this is more likely to occur in India and China than Turkey?*

Phew! That's all I've got left in me for now.

Cheers


----------



## mikiec (Aug 2, 2006)

If I may just interrupt here...... in a book I have, there's a line "Ask better questions", so here goes.

Are there any dangerous chemicals/materials used in the production of the inks, emulsions, cleaning products, and general chemicals associated with screen printing, and/or fumes, toxins, etc., created in the use of these products?

If so, what are they, what are their effects and what alternatives are there currently available?


----------



## Solmu (Aug 15, 2005)

RichardGreaves said:


> I was distracted by the blind assumption that water-based ink was a safer solution to 'nasty' plastisol, that we use in a screen printing shop.


I don't think anyone makes blind assumptions (we're not that committed), we're just ignorant - we go on what little knowledge we can scrape together, because no-one is willing to teach us. Instead everyone with the knowledge just gets defensive and dismisses the questions.

So far when looking for information on this topic I've found only two types of people: those who don't know enough to help me, and those with an agenda (who don't agree with each other, so there's no consensus).

Too many people saying "it's all subjective, there are no absolute answers, so I won't give you _any_."



RichardGreaves said:


> You are still looking for some sort of moral high ground.




Maybe we're just trying to wrap our heads around big issues so we can make informed decisions. You need to remember we're starting from a position of ignorance, in many cases not even knowing what questions to ask let alone what the answers would mean, not one of decades of experience.




RichardGreaves said:


> Only you can tell me what you are afraid of or don't understand how to convince your customers, girlfriend or employees what you believe.


I think this is the heart of the problem - very few people (if any) here are trying to convince customers (etc.) of what we believe. We're trying to form a superior understanding so we can make better decisions.

What constitutes a "good decision" isn't black and white - but that doesn't mean we should give up and turn it into a cynical marketing exercise.



RichardGreaves said:


> Which examples to your answers were not based on making a clear statement in response to your questions?


Um... every single part of it? It is possible to be factual and useless at the same time.


----------



## tdeals (Dec 13, 2006)

RichardGreaves said:


> As I walked home from breakfast this morning I thought about AdriaticBlue's questions about what to ask vendors, perhaps, I think I understand more about what she is trying to learn.
> 
> 
> I was distracted by the blind assumption that water-based ink was a safer solution to 'nasty' plastisol, that we use in a screen printing shop.
> ...


Hi there Mr. Greaves!

Let me make it clear the role I plan to play in this industry - Wholesaling screenprinted bamboo apparel using water-based inks. I have no desire to open a screenprinting facility. Therefore, I would be contracting out screenprinting services and providing the apparel.

My primary concern still stands - would a customer experience any health issues wearing my screenprinted apparel based on the chemicals used to dye and the ink used in screenprinting? 

I'm taking from your answer Richard that this should not be a concern now, though it should be if one were to print with discharge inks and if the tees were printed with an under-cured white plastisol ink?

I do not plan to make use of any discharge inks whatsoever.

Thanks!

AB


----------



## AustinJeff (May 12, 2007)

RichardGreaves said:


> B. I have been told that organic cotton is *stronger and better quality * than conventionally grown cotton. True or false?
> 
> Greaves: That statement would be like saying that all German cars are better than American cars.


That would be true if he had said ALL organic cotton is stronger and better quality. But he didn't. According to this logic, we could not make statements like, "Humans are bidpeds," because if you find one human without legs, the statement would be false. 

However, I do agree with that in this case such generalizations are irrelevant and that YOUR material is the only material that really matters.

This thread is very interesting and helpful. And it keeps reminding me of a song by the Pixies called "Mr. Grieves":

 What's that floating in the water
Old Neptune's only daughter
I believe
In Mr. Grieves

Pray for a man in the middle
One that talks like Doolittle
I believe 
In Mr. Grieves

Do you have another opinion
Do you have another opinion


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

AustinJeff said:


> That would be true if he had said ALL organic cotton is stronger and better quality.
> 
> But he didn't. According to this logic, we could not make statements like, "Humans are bidpeds," because if you find one human without legs, the statement would be false.
> 
> However, I do agree with that in this case such generalizations are irrelevant and that YOUR material is the only material that really matters.


I have been told that organic cotton is *stronger and better quality * than conventionally grown cotton. True or false? 

I am given 2 choices, T or F. If I say True, I will be quoted a saying "organic cotton is *stronger and better quality * than conventionally grown cotton", and that is not a quote I would make. 
 
And yes, "organic cotton" implies ALL. 

If I wrote T, then I would be WRONG every time you used organic cotton based on my say so. Cotton strength and quality are also variables. Dozens of ways to be wrong and only one right.


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

AdriaticBlue said:


> My primary concern still stands - would a customer experience any health issues wearing my screenprinted apparel based on the chemicals used to dye and the ink used in screenprinting?
> 
> I'm taking from your answer Richard that this should not be a concern now, though it should be if one were to print with discharge inks and if the tees were printed with an under-cured white plastisol ink?
> 
> I do not plan to make use of any discharge inks whatsoever.


I wouldn't want a customer to wear a discharge shirt without washing it first. the active chemical could reactivate with body moisture and irritate the skin.

I wouldn't want a customer to wear a shirt printed with under cured white plastisol. It would smell and be releasing the peroxides that are usually in them, and could irritate the skin.


----------



## tdeals (Dec 13, 2006)

RichardGreaves said:


> I wouldn't want a customer to wear a discharge shirt without washing it first. the active chemical could reactivate with body moisture and irritate the skin.
> 
> I wouldn't want a customer to wear a shirt printed with under cured white plastisol. It would smell and be releasing the peroxides that are usually in them, and could irritate the skin.


Thanks - I appreciate the explanation.  

I mentioned some time ago on the forums (in the Lounge) that I have a screenprinted tshirt given to me that still smells of a chemical after owning it for about 8 years. 

Someone on the forums replied that it may not have been cured properly. It's a black Hanes 50/50 tee with white plastisol ink. The other shirt next to that picture (the gold one) has started peeling and I assume it's coming off in my wash? It appears to be a mix of plastisol ink and some type of "puffed" ink, as the ink is raised on the spikes around the cat's arm.

Also, Richard, please let me know if you check your PMs through the forum here. I'm currently at work and away from personal email. 

However, I can send you that info you requested immediately using the PM system on the forums. I won't be near personal email until late tonight.

Thanks!

AB

_______________

Richard,

I just sent you an email from a wireless device of the information you needed. That's the cool thing about having coworkers with fancy phones around. 

AB


----------



## tdeals (Dec 13, 2006)

Richard,

Let me know if you got my email and/or if I need to call Denise Breard. 

Thanks!


----------



## tdeals (Dec 13, 2006)

AdriaticBlue said:


> [Ink Manufacturer] PolyOne (Inquire about their Wilflex QuantumOne Non-PVC and Plast-O-Meric WTR Water-Based Inks)
> AB


Just to correct this info:

After re-checking my correspondence received from the PolyOne corp and revisiting their site, their Plast-O-Meric inks are plastisol, not water-based.

Their QuantumOne ink (Non-PVC / Non-Phthalate) is also plastisol and their Wilflex Oasis ink (Non-Formaldehyde) is a water-based discharge ink. There are so many that it was easy for me to get confused. 

Btw, has anyone used any of the Aquatex water-based inks by the Lancer Group? 

AB


----------



## Ross B (Apr 28, 2006)

It appears that the queries that started this thread were, in the end, unable to be answered with any clarity. Despite my best efforts, and those of others who have posted, to hone the questions down to their essence in an effort to draw some useful factual information, no further responses from anyone with industry experience or expertise have been forthcoming.

The only reasonable conclusion I can draw from this is that the organic apparel industry is still in relatively early stages, and that time and expertise in the mainstream T-shirt/screenprinting industry will not provide satisfactory basic factual answers to the questions posed. And why should they, when you think about it? 

I guess what is needed is some expert advice from unbiased people with grassroot specialist experience in the ORGANIC cotton industry - probably quite rare specimens (and let's not even think about the organic hemp and bamboo industries,which are positively arcane by comparison!).

If any such person is out there (sounds like a lonely signal beamed out into space in search of extraterrestrial life!) and happens upon this thread, the posts herein are evidence that I am not the only one who would be very grateful for some informed specialist advice on the areas queried.

In the meantime, I think the best advice that has been given thus far is to ascertain everything possible of any relevance to clients about any organic produce one is offering. That still leaves the problem - a big one, it seems - of effectively discriminating between myth and reality in order to decide on a realistic set of criteria to apply when choosing a supplier. Trial and error seems a long, potentially expensive road to take, but in the absence of reliable factual information there currently appears to be no other practical alternative.

Cheers


----------



## tdeals (Dec 13, 2006)

It has been a bit frustrating Ross to get some concrete answers, I know. 

What I have decided, since I like knowing of options and believe that flexibility for some things can be rewarding, is to take a look at not only screenprinting companies and those who manufacturer screenprinting inks at the upcoming Printwear Show, but to also visit Dye Sub, ChromaBlast and DTG printers, and any others I've never heard of.

This has got to open up a wealth of options and perhaps I may have to undergo a change of heart and cease limiting my choice only to water-based ink screenprinting.

AB


----------



## CritterLife (Sep 27, 2007)

Whew! I'm completely exhausted after reading this thread!  The ping-pong match was interesting to say the least.

I'm in a similar boat, wanting to be as environmentally friendly as possible (without compromising economic viability). I stumbled upon AdriaticBlue's thread re: plastisol vs water-based and then onto this one. Thanks for your discussions - they're of great assistance, and are helping me realize I'm not as far behind as I thought I was. I don't mean YOU'RE behind  - I mean the printing industry seems to still be developing re: inks that are more environmentally benign.

I offer one comment to Ross in relation to the "sweatshop" issue of organic cotton t-shirts. I found one company, HaeNow, that is not only certified organic by Skal of Holland, but their manufacturing plant in West Bengal has been given a clean audit from Oxfam-Benelux and Amnesty International, UK. I'm not sure if that helps you or not, but it's helped me frame my questions to other t-shirt manufacturers.

A note to AdriaticBlue about bamboo. I read recently (though in relation to bamboo 'paper', not clothing) that bamboo forests in some areas of the world are being harvested (and native forests being cleared for farms) to the detriment of native wildlife. Look, there are problems with any product or method we choose to use. The amount of water used to grow organic cotton is a huge problem! I just thought I'd mention it... Check out Earth Island Institute: Earth Island Journal
or
Rethinking paper - Bamboo cultivation destroys sensitive ecosystems - Home & Lifestyle - Earth Talk - Illinois Times - Springfield, Illinois

Thanks for the ink links to PVC/phalate-free and formaldehyde-free products! I'm going to chase these up. One thing I have going for me is that I want my designs to be subtle; only 1-2 shades darker than the t-shirts they're on. So, water-based may be ok. My problem comes when I want to do DARK shirts - and discharge printing seems nasty. I love the REHANCE idea, but it's just too expensive for someone like me who's re-selling wholesale to giftshops. I'd have to WHOLESALE my shirts for $20 or more!

Anyway, thanks for sitting through my first official post! Perhaps we can chat more about all things environmental as we head down the road less traveled. I'm looking forward to it.
Cheers


----------



## acanvas (Sep 27, 2007)

ah yes, prcisely the fab dialogue a green architect and I had recently, we were so happy to find designers even in different fields who are focusing on the same issues, what is sustainable, where does the base material come from...oh, how nice all cotton! Continental Clothing Company - Fight Child Slave Labour

We as citizens of the worlds I do believe are responsible for spending the time researching and then doing the best we can with a conciousness...there is a lot of marketing going on...oooh bamboo! Yes I do promote it's sustainability to our clients but I also explain, it's not the cure all...it is shiped by huge polluting freighters vs. organic american grown cotton thatneedn't be shipped across the seas to me, where are they getting the new bamboo farms to meet the growing demand by the entire textile and building markets? Are we seeing deforestization happen to meet our happy little socially responsible desires??? We may but for now, I do spend a vast amount of time in research and development as the director of sourcing for our little studio and I am committed to doing the best we can, with eyes wide open to the pros and cons of everything marketed in the eco friendly INDUSTRY....


----------



## OlympiaScreen (Jul 26, 2008)

Any waterbased ink would be an eco friendly alternative.. the solids after the ink is cured are biodegradable.. Plastisol is PVC and BAD here's a good article...
http://waterbasedscreenprinting.com/http://

also a good couple of waterbased suppliers noted at the end of article.. 

But keep in mind that plastisol from t-shirts as waste is not something to call Al Gore about.. there are alot of PVC industries out there that dump billions of t-shirts worth of pvc's every day..

I wanted to chime in here because I have been concerned with this for the last couple of years. More about my own health. Have been using plastisol for the last eight years (since my business started..). I've tried using water based ink but I think the solvents they use to allow the ink to dry faster are worse than plastisol// I'm waiting for a TRUE WATER ONLY BASED INK.

I heard of a recent article in national geographic that stated plastisol ink does in fact cause health problems for the wearer of the shirt. I have not been able to find the article. Some printers I met on a music tour last spring talked to me a lot about the article . I guess "they" have found plastisol causes cancer..
If the wearer of the shirt is in danger it is safe to assume that we as printers are also in danger. The article would have been released between feb and june of 08. Again I have yet to read this article but have heard about it from two people.. one in Arizona and one in New York.. if any of you can find it please post..

With all the new data coming out about plastics PVC's (water bottles, baby toys, shower curtains, new cars etc.) I think it's safe to assume that plastisol-PVC is some pretty messed up stuff to be around. IE leaching stuff into the air that will give you cancer or screw you up in one way or the other. THAT NEW CAR SMELL coming from the ink is not a good thing. For now I use ALOT of ventilation.. along with the fan on the dryer I use two squirrel cage fans tied into the same duct as my belt dryer to keep the air moving out of the shop.. one by the flash and one at the exit end of the conveyer dryer. 

I won't stop using plastisol yet. I LOVE IT. and the solvents in waterbased seem worse health wise. 

So keep the lids on your ink, filter your drains! and don't throw any uncured plastisol away! 

but check out these waterbased suppliers.. both would fit your needs..

1st choice
Matsui-Color: innovators of color changing paint, specialty inks for screen printing

not 1st choice
http://www.colormaker.com.au/Permaset/Permasethttp://


----------



## OlympiaScreen (Jul 26, 2008)

oh and by the way Continental clothing is in NO way a fair trade organization.


----------



## Ross B (Apr 28, 2006)

Good posts, OlympiaScreen. 

The further into ecofriendly and ethically sound Tshirt printing and manufacture you get, the more convoluted the path to some real answers. 

And as you point out, some of the claims of big businesses re fair trade practices are just so much corporate spin. Researching this stuff is, it seems to me, an endless maze of blind alleys. One source claims this, another that, and whitewash and deceit is everywhere. You can but try...


----------



## AustinJeff (May 12, 2007)

OlympiaScreen said:


> oh and by the way Continental clothing is in NO way a fair trade organization.


Why do you say that?

Here's what their website says:

Fair Trade Practices 

Under the organic standard, farmers and agricultural workers are protected by stringent social criteria (see appendix 1b), total traceability across the entire supply chain, but also by the ban on the use of poisonous pesticides and defoliants which can severely damage the health of farmers and families. These standards also free poor farmers tied into third world debt to chemical companies on the ‘pesticide treadmill’.


Is any of that not true? Are there other things I should be aware of? I'm seriously considering switching to Continental for my bamboo shirts.


----------



## mothertongues (Aug 8, 2005)

I was reading this thread because I'm once again investigating waterbased inks, but wanted to chime in about the Fair Trade issue. I've used HAE NOW and ECOnscious t-shirts for 2 years now. And I've applied for Fair Trade Federation membership, so I've recently done my homework about those 2 companies again, and I can wholeheartedly recommend them. In the process I've learned that TransFair USA (that does Fair Trade labeling in the US, like for coffee, chocolate, etc) is working on standards for garments, ie t-shirts. Maybe by the end of this year (doubt it) or somewhere next year, there will be Fair Trade certified t-shirts in the US. This will cover cotton growing, the mills, the making of the t-shirts... And this will weed out all the companies that SAY they are Fair Trade, sweat-shop free, etc, but leaves the buyer with no way to really know. Anyway, hope this helps someone!


----------



## massta (Sep 10, 2013)

We just made these t-shirts as eco-friendly as possible. Click on the store for a description of shirt.

Home · GRASP · Online Store Powered by Storenvy

There was another option that seemed to work well: water based ink, but is a problem on dark garments. It really depends on your image and how you want it to look. Since this is our first time making shirts, we wanted the best quality. Take a look at Herbivore Clothing. They have that washed in/faded antique look. I'll be looking at their clothing more closely at a festival coming up. Another option is the REHANCE ink with Carolina Cotton shirts. This might be the only alternative than what we chose, but ran out of time to explore this option.


----------

