Saturday, November 24, 2007

More About Dry Cleaning

In August, The Future Earth researched 3 types of dry cleaning, finding that each one posed a hazard to the environment or to the wearer. The good news is that I have since heard about 2 new kinds of professional cleaning methods- one wet and the other dry- that appear to be much safer.

Professional wet cleaning has been adapted for use on 'dry clean only' fabrics. The machines are much gentler than standard washing machines. There are no volatile organic compounds involved. This is pretty much the same thing as hand-washing clothes yourself, as I often do with my 'dry clean only' clothes. In 2003, Consumer Reports did a comparison of professional cleaning methods. This is what they found for the garments they had wet-cleaned: This method left the lambswool jacket severely pilled in all three cases. Two jackets looked as though they had not been pressed. One shrank. The sizing was removed from one skirt, so it looked limp. Another skirt shrank from a size 14 to about a size 10. The silk blouses took to water fairly well: Only one showed slight fading. They also mention wet cleaning is not covered by textile-care-labeling regulations. So if your garment is labeled "dry-clean," you opt to have it wet cleaned, and the garment is damaged, the clothing manufacturer likely would not be liable. I had no idea you could hold a garment manufacturer liable once something has been cleaned, did you?

Then there is liquid carbon dioxide cleaning. I was sceptical of this method at first, because I wondered if more CO2 is created during the process. But according to the Co-op America website, While CO2 is a main greenhouse gas, no new CO2 is generated with this technology, so it does not contribute to global warming... Liquid CO2 companies recapture the CO2 that's already a by-product of several manufacturing processes, and they then recycle it into the liquid solvent for cleaning clothes. The main drawback is that, while the CO2 itself is both cheap and abundant, the cost of a CO2 dry cleaning machine is very high—a new machine costs around $40,000. Few dry cleaners are adopting this technique for this reason. However, in the long run, these machines will save money by eliminating the disposal and regulatory costs associated with perc. Consumer Reports found this to be the best method of all of the methods tried in terms of preservation of the look and feel of the clothing tested.

The Co-op America website warns that you should ask the business whether they use a Solvair machine. In this case, the machine also uses glycol ether, which is a suspected neuro-, respiratory, and kidney toxin, and a possible hormone disrupter, according to the EPA. Another way to tell is to find out if the business is a member of the Carbon Dioxide Dry Cleaners Alliance (I couldn't find a website for them), which does not admit those who use Solvair machines.

To find out if there is a professional wet-cleaner or liquid carbon dioxide (glycol-ether-free) cleaner in your neighborhood, plug your zip code into this website. According to the website, there are none within 25 miles of my Brooklyn neighborhood. I heard about a CO2 cleaner that just opened in TriBeCa. I wonder if they are not listed because they are too new, or because they use a Solvair machine?

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well, based on this, I'd definitely choose liquid CO2 cleaning over wet-cleaning. The Consumer Reports write-up seems to say that wet-cleaning will quite likely destroy your clothes (and leave you without the possibility of compensation from the manufacturer... which I didn't know was possible even with "normal" dry cleaning.)

The liquid CO2 sounds interesting. I wonder if the machines will become cheaper if more cleaners adopt them. Maybe there could be some kind of tax break for businesses that convert to liquid CO2?

I noticed on the UEPI "Find a Greener Cleaner" website that there is a disclaimer: "At this time, the majority of the cleaners listed in our database are located in California. However, our list is growing daily, so we encourage you to check back." There is also a link to their full list; and there are currently only a few outside California. If anyone knows of one in their neighborhood, be sure to contact the UEPI through the link on the search page...!

Denise said...

California ia offering subsidies to those cleaners who switch to wet-cleaning or CO2, since the state has passed a law phasing out perchloroethylene by 2023.

I wet-clean my clothes all the time (by hand) and I am quite satisfied with the results, especially the price!

Anonymous said...

I am a 100% professional wet cleaner and I can assure you that the wet cleaning results in Consumer Reports is not accurate to what can be accomplished in wet cleaning. Since converting to profoessional wet cleaning from a traditional solvent cleaner nearly a year ago, we processed around 120,000 garments in the wet cleaning method with about half of those containing a "dry clean only" label. There are good and bad wet cleaners just as there are good and bad dry cleaners. A quality professional wet cleaner can return your fine wools and silks to you in a condition that is no different, and in many cases better than, traditional solvent dry cleaning.

Anonymous said...

The CO2 machines actually cost over $160,000.00 per machine not $40,000.00 as mentioned in the above article. I am a drycleaner and we have a CO2 machine on order.

I believe that the professional drycleaner who uses pure CO2 with non toxic additives will truly be the only process that can make this claim. All other processes, including home washing,use soaps and additives that may be toxic. Also washing clothes with powdered soap adds to waste treatment costs of most municipalities.

The CO2 that drycleaners would use is from industries that produce C02 as part of their process. So in this respect the drycleaner would actually be recycling the C02.

There are many other dry cleaning processes that are promoted as "Green" but all have issues with hazardous waste. Perc is the most toxic, and is a "possible" carcinogen, but if handled properly while using todays perc equipment there is no danger to the employees or the public.

I predict that the liquid CO2 process will be the cleaning solvent of the future. It is non-toxic and with newly developed additives that are also non-toxic it is a viable alternative to Perc. It will have some of the excellant cleaning properties of Perc, including extended garment life, but none of the drawbacks.

Consumers do not have to worry, if theie favorite cleaner uses perc, as long as they operate with newer perc machines and are responsible with their handling of the perc. Many of these smaller dry cleaners are not able to afford the current $160,000.00 price tag. But if the consumer rejects perc, even if it is handled in a perfectly safe manner, then these shops will have no choice but to go out of business or switch.

Jay Cleary Sr.
Cleary Cleaners
New Hampshire

Unknown said...

Excellent post! I must thank you for this informative read. I hope you will post again soon.Dry Cleaning Machine Manufacturers