Printech Archive
Re: Blanket Wash Effective?


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Jeff Adrian (jeffadrian@johnroberts.com)
Date: Wed Jan 28 1998 - 05:46:16 CST


Deb:

The Prisco Autowash 6000 is classified as a low vapor pressure wash at
2.7 mm Hg. With proper housekeeping, i.e. closed containers for solvent and
for soiled shop towels, this product shouldn't be much a VOC issue, even
for areas of the country in serious, severe or extreme non-attainment. This
is especially true given the total annual usage stated.

The other products listed in the inquiry do have some possiblilities, but
they will likely require considerable changes in work practices, i.e.
precisely how the solvent is used. They also are typically considerably more
expensive on a per gallon basis. Since they clean in a somewhat different
manner, the tendency for many users is to do what they have always done
when the cleaning process appears less effective, and that is to simply add
more solvent. Aside from being very costly, my tests have shown the more
solvent does not improve efficiency and may in fact make things worse.
There is a reason that better manufacturers of these low-VOC products
carefully spell out usage instructions! Determination of suitability is often on
a case-by-case basis.

Regards,
Jeff Adrian
The John Roberts Company
Debra Kramer wrote:
>Another inquiry was posted from the PNEAC web site. I will forward
>responses to originator.
>
>Deb.
>
>--------------------------------------------
>
>This facility is currently using Prisco Auto Wash 6000 for a blanket
wash.
>The product contains 6.48 lbs VOC/gal; vapor pressure is 2.7 mm Hg;
flash point
>is 105 F. The facility uses about 600-700 gal/yr. I have been
searching for
>alternative blanket washes and discovered one possibility in the EPA
>Design for Environment Printing Sector project, Cleaner Technologies
>Substitute Assessment: Lithographic Blanket Washes. The wash is
identified only by
>number, 26. Is anyone familiar
>with the product and its performance on both heatset and non-heatset
webfed
>litho
>presses?
>
>Other possible alternatives that I have encountered are SoyGold which is

>made by Ag Environmental Products of Lenexa, KS and Prifer 30303+(or
The Ink
>Eater) which is made by Unichema and marketed by Flint ink of Detroit,
MI. How well
>do these products work?
>
>Does anyone have other suggestions for replacing a petroleum distillate
>blanket wash with a low vapor pressure, less than 30% VOC product?
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------

>Debra Kramer
>Waste Management & Research Ctr. - IL DNR
>(PNEAC)
>3333 W. Arthington
>Chicago, IL 60624
>773/265-2036
>773/265-8336 FAX
>Kramer@cmcusa.org
>http://www.pneac.org
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>RFC822 header
>-----------------------------------
>
>RECEIVED: from SF_Database by POP_Mailbox_-1326148334 ; 28 JAN 98
07:56:02 UT
>Received: from SUPERIOR.GREAT-LAKES.NET by mail.johnroberts.com
> with SMTP (1.0); 28 JAN 98 07:55:58 UT
>Received: (from majordom@localhost)
> by superior.great-lakes.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) id IAA09988
> for printech-outgoing; Wed, 28 Jan 1998 08:36:33 -0500 (EST)
>X-Authentication-Warning: superior.great-lakes.net: majordom set sender
to
>owner-printech@great-lakes.net using -f
>Received: from pop3.cmcusa.org (pop3.cmcusa.org [38.153.234.29])
> by superior.great-lakes.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09984
> for <printech@great-lakes.net>; Wed, 28 Jan 1998 08:36:31 -0500 (EST)
>Received: by pop3.cmcusa.org from localhost
> (router,SLMail V2.6); Wed, 28 Jan 1998 07:35:07 -0600
>Received: by pop3.cmcusa.org from debra.cmcusa.org
> (38.153.234.97::mail daemon; unverified,SLMail V2.6); Wed, 28 Jan
1998
>07:35:06 -0600
>Received: by debra.cmcusa.org with Microsoft Mail
> id <01BD2BC1.900B8B00@debra.cmcusa.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 1998 07:51:38
-0600
>Message-ID: <01BD2BC1.900B8B00@debra.cmcusa.org>
>From: "Debra Kramer" <kramer@cmcusa.org>
>To: "'PRINTECH'" <printech@great-lakes.net>
>Subject: Blanket Wash Effective?
>Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 07:51:36 -0600
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by
>superior.great-lakes.net id IAA09985
>Sender: owner-printech@great-lakes.net
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: printech@great-lakes.net
>X-Comment: This message was sent to you from the PRINTECH email
>X-Comment: discussion list. If you reply to this message, your message
>X-Comment: will be sent to ALL members of the list.
>X-Comment: If your reply is of a personal nature, please address it to
>X-Comment: "Debra Kramer" <kramer@cmcusa.org>
>X-Comment: Please verify all addresses before sending email.
>X-Comment: Thank you for your participation in PRINTECH.
>


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view
 
PNEAC
Disclaimer / Copyright Info
Email the PNEAC Webmaster