by Mike Horsten, Marketing Manager Mimaki Europe

Why there is so much discussion about sustainability and a more environmental conscientious approach, when most of us are worried about surviving this economic downturn? Politicians say the crisis is over, but the wide-format industry has not yet seen any clear indicators of recovery.

Economic uncertainty does encourage introspection and new ways of working. We do need to adapt and engage in new ideas and innovations. And as sustainability is a topic that comes up so frequently when we talk about innovation the two have become synonymous.　In many ways, it is driving research and development. However, it should not be the only consideration, the business and its employees need to be fully supportive and the ethos has to be implemented throughout the whole operation.

Of course there are great innovations that reduce CO2 emissions and create products that are better for the environment, our own health and more. I stand behind these great new technologies that will help make our planet better. But new innovations in our print industry have also given us an economic burden.

Do we really need to buy equipment every time something new hits the street?

Do we work better just because of innovation? I don’t think so.　Yes, we have been printing for many years, but can we or are we willing to change our views of dirty printing?

We all recognize becoming 100% green is something that is not going to happen overnight -even 10% would be a great start. But as long as we only focus on the smaller elements such as eco-inks, emission free substrates or one printer using less energy than another, no-one will become 100% sustainable – only a bit more environmentally conscientious. It really does not add up and you are not changing the world. You are simply responding to the market. You are not thinking or believing in the green movement as whole.　The result is green washing because you believe that you became environmentally sound after buying a printer with improved energy consumption. While a step in the right direction there is a still a long way to go and not really much to shout about to customers even if this printer is the latest Mimaki Latex system.

Sustainability is an important consideration in our world today. Large corporate buyers are starting to demand certification involving yearly audits in respect to ecological commitment. Unfortunately most certifications are not geared for the wide format industry – yet. We could set up our companies to achieve them but they built on different business models. So until one is devised then we should do as much as we can to reduce our impact.

That’s where textiles come in. The current generation of dye sublimation are more sustainable than most of their fellow UV or (Eco)solvent printers. Using Dye Sub or Latex inks　on polyester substrates results in relatively　green products. Coupled with energy conservation and waste disposal efforts you are well on your way to big gains – a step at a time. Let’s take this production example and compare a traditional vinyl print with a textile print.

The logistics of producing and installing a 2 x 3 meter vinyl wall in a retail area would require it to be printed, protected in a sturdy carton roll and transported by lorry due to its size. Two people would then be needed to mount the image taking them out of the production area for at least half a day each. Also to be considered is the liner and the previous vinyl image that needs to be recycled at extra cost and time that should be passed on. On top of this the image can glare and smell.

Using textiles can skip many of these steps and the savings can be easier to achieve. Customers would need to buy or lease an aluminum profile frame to be mounted in-store locations binding them into your logistic cycle.

Then the steps are: print the image and attach a silicon strip to hold the fabric in place on the customer’s frame. This means the shop staff can install the new images themselves. And as fabric can wrinkle, using a stretchable fabric eliminates this problem. What’s more, 2 x 3 meter image can be folded and shipped in a small box overnight. The same box could be used to send the old graphic back to the printer for recycling. No expensive transportation costs, no extra staff and no complicated recycling systems. Additional benefits include the customer knowing old images will be properly recycled.

So by changing some ways printers can save themselves and their customers money, transportation, recycling and staff time.

All we have to do is rethink our ways!

Mimaki’s strategy is to innovate new technologies that combine high print volumes and sustainable performance. To that end, Mimaki has decided to become a founding exhibitor at EcoPrint, taking place in Berlin, Germany, September 26-27, 2012. The EcoPrint concept recognises that sustainability doesn’t exist without commercial viability, yet to be commercially viable you must be a sustainable and creative business. Adopting a sustainable business strategy makes good business sense and EcoPrint will afford visitors a significant head start in this respect.

You can also read this blog on the drupa website.

It seems that news from Drupa suggests sustainability is high on print’s agenda. And this is timely indeed. Because in April, without fanfare, and without anyone really even noticing it, the EU Eco label has been launched into the market, and the news is that there is a specific EU Eco label for print. But does print need a label or indeed a standard at all?

This is a debatable issue. Print is most certainly an industry in which standards have been discussed many times before. And if you take a look at other industries, you can see that they have unified themselves behind supporting one standard or certification that defines whatever is the agreed and accepted definition of ‘good’, ‘reputable’ or ‘responsible’ or indeed ‘sustainable’.

The discussion around quality standards in print is one I have been witness to and whilst there is no one single global or European standard, there are ISO standards and various regional and local certificates that can help buyers of print to readily isolate and source print companies of a reputable ability and quality.

I can see the point of a label for sustainability in print. Why? Because one of the major problems with sustainability, to use a climatic word, is that it is a clouded issue. And in an attempt to lift this cloud many public and private bodies around the world have tried to place a standard, kite mark or label against what is deemed to be acceptable ‘sustainable’, ‘Eco’ or ‘green’ print.

In Europe alone, there are multiple labels and standards that bear some relevance to print. These might have had some good intention behind them, they might have been useful at some point, but local relevance aside (Nordic Swan for example), they don’t mean a lot to a buyer or a business not located within the limited national confines of a European country, or in this case the Scandinavian region.

And for a pan-European consumer brand this poses a problem. Why? Because there could be a need for a label or a standard that is specific to that industry but one that also transcends limited national boundaries. So enter the EU Eco label. How applicable and how realistic is this to attain? And has the EU consulted the print industry? Not as far as I know, but I am happy to be corrected.

This whole issue provokes another question. What about the misinformed or uninformed consumer? Labels in consumer purchasing do have a point. They do have a purpose. The fair trade labels provide value for the consumer in that the information and reassurance that the money made on the product returns to the community .

In print, the closest thing we have that is truly international is the FSC kite mark. The paper industry generally has got its act together through the work of organizations like Media Mundo in Germany, Ingede in Germany and Two Sides in Northern Europe and the USA.

For me, the heart of the issue with labels and standards is that when consumers pick up a piece of print, whether it is on packaging, point of purchase or promotional print, they are not actually looking at the print. What, I believe, consumers see is the design and the substrate. But this kind of ignores the fact that the print could be poorly executed using toxic processes. If consumers were more educated about printing, then our media or industry would start to position itself as a more compelling, relevant and sustainable process for generations to come.

But in order to achieve the creation of a label that actually helps print buyers, printers, manufacturers and in the long term consumers, make informed decisions, clearly leadership and unity would be required. At the moment, the print community in Europe is too fragmented around the issue of sustainability to possibly reach a quick conclusion and solution. To some extent this is a uniquely European problem. Unity. So what is it going to take to get print to unite in Europe? I don’t know a short answer to that, I must confess.

Perhaps this could be a discussion point at EcoPrint and this event could become a key forum for change. For good.

Marcus Timson is the Director & Co-Founder of EcoPrint Show.

Please also check out a previous drupa blog post on sustainability on the drupa website and feel free to share and leave a comment!