Monroe Litho recently added the Sustainable Green Print Partnership (SGP) certification to its impressive list of credentials as an environmentally sustainable printer. President and CEO Chris Pape shares his thoughts on how the journey to sustainability has been worth it, every step of the way.

A few years ago, if you told me Monroe Litho would be one of the most widely recognized sustainable printers in North America and a business that places sustainability at the heart of everything we do, I would have been at least a little skeptical. It's not that Monroe Litho placed little value on being environmentally sustainable. In fact, we thought pretty highly of ourselves in this area. After all we were doing all the little things such as offering recycled paper as an option to our environmentally conscious customers. We were in compliance with government regulations designed to protect the environment. But in reality, we had barely scratched the surface of what sustainability can and should mean for today's successful business. Notice I didn't say "progressive" or "responsible" business. I say "successful" business because at Monroe Litho, we attribute our success over the past 5 years to our transformation into a company that truly considers sustainability our greatest competitive advantage.

Our credentials include Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) certification, operating on 100% wind power and just a few months ago, we earned Sustainable Green Print Partnership (SGP) certification. To learn more about our certifications and how Kodak has been a trusted guide on our journey toward sustainability, please watch the following video featuring Monroe Litho's VP of Sales and Marketing, Tony Harris.



As the saying goes, "A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." From the outside looking in, that first step may seem daunting. We've certainly experienced some growing pains along the way. But keep in mind that the key word here is "growing" - not "pain".

Today, Monroe Litho's sustainability initiatives continue to bear fruit and we look for every opportunity to share our success with those who would benefit from our experience as a sustainable printer. So whether you're new to the green movement or you've been on board for a while, best wishes to you and your customers on the road to success with sustainability. I can say from experience, it's worth the trip!

After reading Esko's "revolutionary" press release dated March 25 we did a fair bit of head scratching, and while it is not our normal style to comment on our competitors' press releases, we just had to respond with a couple of simple questions. So what is really new, and how can something that is not new be revolutionary?

So how is 4000dpi laser imaging and hybrid screening revolutionary for flexo? Hybrid screening has been in use for many years and there are lasers that are used for imaging flexo at 9600 and 12400 dpi.

Matching offset with flexo. Well that's nothing new either. The Kodak Flexcel NX System has been doing that for the last 18 months with a 2400dpi Squarespot imaging device. It achieves 1:1 image transfer from the digital file to the plate from 10 microns up to 300lpi using AM, hybrid and FM screening, the same as they use in offset.





And about square pixels in the data file and a round laser beam, even John's three year old Lilly knows that the round block does not fit properly in the square hole. This means that a 1:1 digital pixel to dot on plate can never be achieved with a round laser beam.

Irrespective of this "revolution" in resolution and screening technology (which as we said before is really nothing new) the fact that it is applied to traditional digital black mask flexo plates still remains, resulting in oxygen inhibition and rounded bullet shaped dots. These rounded bullet shaped dots are clearly accepted by some of the statements in the press release as causing variation in the press room, delays in press set up, reduced plate life and production inconsistency. This means that the plate is a major cause for variation in existing digital black mask flexo plate systems (here at Kodak we have been saying that for more than a year). The new imaging and screening does not change the profile of the printing dots, so how can it significantly affect their performance on press? High resolution and hybrid screening can certainly help your highlight and fine line performance; we have technology to do this too. Keeping the rounded dots there and keeping them consistent in real world production is the challenge, and only a flat top dot can enable the stability and wide impression latitude that we all desire for true consistency - it is simple physics 101!



Lilly also loves to draw with an ultrafine pencil, which is comparable to small dots, but even Lilly knows that coloring in the shapes in her coloring book takes a long time with such a fine pencil. It is just lucky that as a Flexo industry we don't need to do large solid areas on our plates, otherwise that could slow imaging down greatly.

ESKO claims that more than 90% of all digital flexo plates and sleeves are imaged on CDI imagers. We know this is not true. Kodak is a major supplier of flexo imaging devices and unless none of our customers are actually using their Thermoflex and Trendsetter NX devices to image flexo plates, then the statement must be false. I have actually visited and seen them working in trade shops and printers all around the world. When you see clearly overstated claims like this in a press release it makes you start to question all of the other claims.

Their sustainability statements are a little questionable too. Once again others seem to be hung up primarily in the solvent vs thermal debate instead of looking at the big picture, where industry data indicates that the greatest environmental impact that can be affected by flexo plate choice is in print production. So it's clear that the flexo plate should be chosen to reduce the actual number of plates used, optimize productivity and minimize waste in the pressroom.

Esko's statements throughout the press release indicate that the current digital black mask flexo plate system has a whole series of issues that need addressing - issues that have a serious effect on production performance, resulting in higher levels of waste. It's hard to see how just smoothing the dot edge of a round top dot will have the significant effect that they claim in all but the exceptional cases.

Wide impression latitude, significantly extended plate life and consistency are key parameters in minimizing this environmental impact. Sort these issues out and you really start to see the environmental benefits. The improved predictability, reliability and consistency that Kodak's plates deliver, with their 1:1 image reproduction and flat top dots, enable printers to achieve significantly improved waste reduction in production.

The Flexcel NX plate system was built for superior press performance, addressing many of the significant weaknesses of traditional digital flexo. The inherent weaknesses of digital flexo just can not be overcome with 4000 dpi imaging and hybrid screening alone, although they can do a nice job of masking some of the issues!

At best Esko's step forward is evolutionary for them..... it's certainly not revolutionary for flexo!

This post was co-written by Emma Schlotthauer, Global Current Marketing for Flexo at Eastman Kodak.

Independent industry consultant John Zarwan recently wrote a report about the offset plate-making process, focusing on the environmental aspects and plate chemical usage and waste - a worthy and often neglected perspective.   You can download his report for free.

Chemical usage is very difficult to nail down - partly because every vendor measures it in a different way and partly because it can vary dramatically from one customer's setup and needs to another's.  Given those large variables, a "one size fits all" comparison isn't possible.  There are a few areas that you should go deeper into when making a plate system decision for your own business:

Should you base decisions on volume of chemistry consumed and disposed of?

• From a business perspective, the analysis should be cost-based, not volume-based.
  
  
• Include the cost of the processing equipment itself.  More complicated processors like the Fuji ZAC aren't necessarily economically feasible for low-to-mid volume customers
  
  
• Cost-based analysis closes the gap between processed plates and "Chemistry Free" plates, because the price of the "Chemistry Free" chemistry is significantly higher by volume than normal plate developer.  
  
  
• Don't get fooled by chemical concentrate systems like Fuji's ZAC!  While the advertised replenisher volume may be lower, concentrates cost more and generate just as much waste after dilution.  The only clear winners are true non-process plates like Kodak's Thermal Direct and Fuji's Pro-T. 
  
  
• From an environmental perspective, chemical volume means very little because a large percentage of the volume is water.  The concentration and impact of the actual chemicals that affect the environment vary dramatically from product to product.  Specifically, I take issue with claims of low chemical usage where the volume may be lower, but the concentration is much higher.  The net result may be little if any environmental benefit.  Ideally for the environment, you would compare chemical usage and waste excluding the water content - which is not available for obvious competitive reasons.  (Kodak will gladly participate in such a study if an independent Notary can get objective and comprehensive data from every major vendor's primary products)
  
  
• Don't get me started on the whole "Chemistry Free" thing... I'm with Derek Awalt on that one.
  
  
• Pre-press chemical usage is only a tiny part of the total economic and environmental impact of your plate choice.  For example, saving 50% of the chemistry per plate means nothing if you have to do multiple sets of plates to complete your press run, or if you generate more make-ready waste.  First, you should determine which products will perform adequately to your prepress and pressroom performance needs, second, analyze all prepress or pressroom benefits and costs, and third factor in other environmental impacts to decide between the feasible choices.
  
  
• Kodak takes the environment seriously - this is not an area to take marketing liberties.  Before making any environmental claims, we have a rigorous internal approval process that demands proof points and supporting documentation - something that I fully support, and would encourage every  vendor to rigorously implement. 
  
  

John's report is a start to making the right choices for the environment - give us a call and Kodak will help you ensure it's also the right choice for your business.