How Green Is 3D Printing?

This could turn into quite the argument. How environmentally friendly, or 'Green' is 3D Printing?

On one hand it is cutting down on the waste of subtractive manufacturing, while also leading to less fuel use in shipping products to market, but on the other hand 3D printing can also create more plastic in the environment, hence more pollutants. The following article looks at both sides of the argument: http://3dprint.com/6388/green-3d-printing/

What do you guys think? Is 3D printing a net positive or negative for the environment around us?

There's plastics and plastics. The oil-based ones are probably not the most environment friendly but PLA and the others can probably be a bit more green.

Also the filament extruders may change our habits and incite us to take a proactive part in recycling. That 's for home use.

Who knows ? In 20 years with the cost of fuel going up we may end up recycling this precious matter locally instead of burying it or sending it thousands of miles away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LambdaFF

In 20 years with the cost of fuel going up

---

Not to get too political, but in 20 years the cost of fuel (gasoline) will either be irrelavent, or we'll have much bigger problems than garbage disposal.

One of the popular industrial 3D printers I've run requires a solution of heated sodium hydroxide to remove the support material. The odor this process emitted was terrible. The used liquid solution could not be flushed into the local water treatment system and had to be removed by a toxic disposal service. When the machine was purchased my company did not understand waste removal permits were required. And the add fees for such stuff ...

Another high end industrial 3D machine I've run uses UV light to cure the liquid resin. The resin comes with warnings. Wear glasses, use gloves, don't make children's toys, avoid full time contact with skin, etc. This machine makes it's support material with a series of somewhat loose fitting micro dots of plastic. The support material is then washed away with high pressure water inside a wash box. The wash machine does have a weir tank to try and catch the micro dots but there is always a percentage going down the drain. When the weir is full the percentage is higher requiring constant oversight and maintenance. And ... while the weir removed material from the water stream it's still going to the dump. In that facility a 55 gallon can of solid waste was generated once a week. There is no way to know how much plastic went down the drain.
The biggest problem is : a waste water treatment plant does nothing for non organic matter. Large plastic is trapped in screens. Micro plastic passes right thru the process plant and on to the fish population.

How wise is that ?

As Steve's message makes clear, we have to discuss specific machines and processes for this discussion to be meaningful. There certainly is potential, among the multitude of 3D printing approaches, for a more "green" solution to be found. But there's no justification for claiming that 3D printing in general is more environmentally benign than competitive processes for making equivalent parts, and the reverse may well be true.

If we restrict the discussion to the hot plastic filament extruder machines that most people here seem to be using, there's still quite a bit of variation in the sourcing of the filament, the frequency of failed prints (which are rarely recycled) and the failure rate of finished parts. While there's a theoretical advantage to producing parts at the end location as opposed to shipping multiple small parts, the filament still has to be shipped, and it can originate at distant locations, where it might be produced in environmentally questionable ways. At this point, 3D printing waste is still environmentally trivial, but that can change. However, these thermoplastics are more recyclable than other sorts of materials, so if it does become more of a problem, the solution isn't far off.

If it does become possible for people to print replacement parts for things they own rather than throwing them away and replacing them, then there's some potential for environmental savings, since consumer items could last longer, stay out of the waste stream, and offset the need for purchasing new products. But that's still mostly a pipe-dream at this point; I'd guess there are many more new 3D printers being sold than products being saved by them from the waste-stream.

Andrew Werby
www.computersculpture.com

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by awerby

If it does become possible for people to print replacement parts for things they own rather than throwing them away and replacing them, then there's some potential for environmental savings, since consumer items could last longer, stay out of the waste stream, and offset the need for purchasing new products.

---

I hope that printing replacement parts could become a new consumer way. However, will industrials go that way ? I remember a few years back a car manufacturer put all new screw types on the oil filters and various consumables to try people to stop maintaining their car and provide more customers for their maintenance centers. Agreed, now you can buy the appropriate tools and still do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by awerby

As Steve's message makes clear, we have to discuss specific machines and processes for this discussion to be meaningful.

---

I agree with that part too : the various processes and products are extremely different. For that reason and due to the specialized requirements of each process / product, perhaps it would make more sense to do it in a local pro facility rather than at home ? I know some hardcore DIYers can "build a nuclear plant at home", but SLS powders and SLA resins are nasty stuff.

So if I go back and try to apply the carbon foot print to the liquid resin printer I used to operate ...
The starting point of the resin is a European country widely known for it's chemical engineering skills and while this country has been proactive in solar generation there is no doubt carbon energy is used in the refinement process.
This raw stock is then transported to a country on the Northern African continent to be blended and packaged into a proprietary container.
For use in North America it is shipped to a warehouse on the upper east coast.
Facility I worked at was on the west coast in a state known for it's progressive environmental attitudes forcing oversight and permitting etc.
Roughly 10,500 miles (16,900km) from it's starting point to end use.
The expensive machine and resin system is proprietary so there are no other options.
Also adding to the footprint, it is strongly recommended the machine and resin be used in a climate controlled environment.

The visual quality of the prints with this machine is excellent but realistically that is all it can accomplish. Strength or repeated used of the final product is not possible.

Open source printers using recycled feed stock from a local source is an idea that makes environmental sense ...