Record Display for the EPA National Library Catalog


OLS Field Name OLS Field Data
Main Title On-site waste ink recycling : technology evaluation report /
Author Gavaskar, Arun R. ; Olfenbuttel, R. F. ; Jones, J. A.
Other Authors
Author Title of a Work
Olfenbuttel, Robert F.
Jones, Jody A.
CORP Author Battelle, Columbus, OH.;Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH. Risk Reduction Engineering Lab.
Publisher U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory,
Year Published 1993
Report Number EPA/600/R-92/251; EPA-68-CO-0003
Stock Number PB93-141026
Subjects Printing ink--Recycling.
Additional Subjects Waste recycling ; Pollution abatement ; Printing inks ; Performance evaluation ; Newsprint ; Economic analysis ; Reviews ; Environmental protection ; Distillation ; Filtration ; Product development ; Quality assurance ; Waste minimization ; Newspapers ; Hartford(Connecticut)
Internet Access
Description Access URL
Library Call Number Additional Info Location Last
NTIS  PB93-141026 Most EPA libraries have a fiche copy filed under the call number shown. Check with individual libraries about paper copy. 01/01/1988
Collation 60 pages : illustrations ; 30 cm
Recycling ink has good potential as a way to reduce waste and promote long-term cost savings. The evaluation summarized here addresses the product quality, waste reduction, and economic issues involved in recycling printing ink in a facility such as The Hartford Courant newspaper in Hartford, CT. The specific unit evaluated is based on the technology of distillation and filtration. Selected performance tests on the waste, recycled, and virgin inks determined product quality. The recycling unit achieved a good product quality of recycled ink, and the recycled ink fared well in such laboratory tests as viscosity, grind, residue, tack, tinting strength, water content, and water pickup. Qualified professionals, in comparisons with newspapers printed with virgin ink, favorably reviewed newspapers printed with recycled ink. Ink and solvent that would have gone to waste were recovered and reused. The resulting cost saving gave a payback period of about 10 years.
"EPA/600/R-92/251." "January 1993." Microfiche.