Design Life-Cycle

Liam Larwood

Adam Geyer & Katy Lawlor

DES040A

Dr. Cogdell

Materials

Button Pins, in today’s climate, are an accessory to clothing, most fabric pieces, and even other accessories. The metal emblems, often with a design etched or engraved on, can help spread advertisements or just be vehicles of self-expression. Initially patented in 1896 by George B. Adams, button pins have seeped into the attire and propaganda of our times, influencing the historical progress of production. Though the energy used in processing button pins is typically small, as is the energy used to extract the raw materials for them, they are not holistically beneficial to the environment. 

Through analyzing the materials utilized by button pin production, small yet popular accessories often used for fashion, advertising, and self-expression, one can conclude that the product has a significant environmental footprint. Additionally, despite their minimalistic appearance, the production, use, and disposal of button pins involve several stages that contribute to their overall sustainability impact. Accounting for the fact that the materials they are composed of are not biodegradable as well as the energy used to process and manipulate their production, one can come to the conclusion that the sustainability of button pins is not an efficient one. Over time, the cumulative environmental impact of producing and discarding millions of these small items becomes significant, contributing to broader environmental challenges.

The initial stage of the button pin life cycle involves the acquisition of raw materials, primarily metals and plastics. Metals such as Zinc alloy and brass (and sometimes stainless steel) are commonly used for the pin and backing, while plastics, including acrylic and mylar, are used for the front cover and protective layers. Brass, an alloy of Zinc and copper, requires the mining of these metals ores while entails activity which can be very detrimental to the environment. The extraction of these metals, both of which have substantial ecological footprints, involves significant environmental degradation. This includes deforestation, soil erosion, and contamination of water sources due to the use of toxic chemicals. Zinc , for example, is synonymous with pollution as the toxic waste produced in its own production and usage often pollutes and hurts the environment and communities around it. Not only does the production (extraction) of zinc produce around 3 tonnes of CO2 per tonne of zinc (Greenspec), but also places like china have detailed reports on the ecological damage on communities caused by excretents like Steel Mill Dust (a byproduct of galvanized steel which uses Zinc)(Xue, Yang et al. 2022). Additionally, the extraction processes have the potential to result in soil and water pollution due to the release of harmful chemicals (such is in the case of China’s SMD). Plastics, derived from petroleum, also pose environmental challenges, including the depletion of fossil fuels and the release of toxic substances during production. The specific surface degradation rate (a metric similar to that of half-lives) of high density polyethylene (plastic often used in button pins) ranges from 58 to 1200 years (ACS). Thus, the raw materials acquisition phase sets a high environmental cost for button pins (especially on such a large scale).

Once raw materials are obtained, they undergo various manufacturing and processing steps to form button pins. The metal components are typically stamped or molded into shape, while the plastic parts are created through processes like injection molding. A typical machine used to mold the metals is button making machine, patented in 1897 by F. J. Kaspar. Initially producing a single product, this machine has been innovated and expanded upon through the growth of consumerism through the past century to become a factory-oriented piece of machinery whose processes are geared towards mass production. These manufacturing processes are energy-intensive, consuming large amounts of electricity and water as well as utilizing large amounts of metal for construction. For one, the production of steel involves smelting and refining, which emit significant amounts of carbon dioxide and other pollutants. Pairing with this production, plastics further complicate the sustainability issue, as plastic production generates hazardous waste and contributes to microplastic pollution. Mylar, a type of plastic typically used for button pins, has been shown to release toxic fumes upon facing high temperature operations (which is primarily what the plastics within pins face when being molded to the metals. Additionally, adhesives and inks used for printing designs on button pins introduce more chemicals into the manufacturing process, which can be harmful if not properly managed. The manufacturing phase significantly amplifies the environmental impact initiated during raw materials acquisition, creating more areas of environmental harm.

After manufacturing, button pins must be distributed to consumers, often involving long-distance transportation. It is reasonable to assume that the logistics of moving these small items across the globe rely heavily on fossil fuels, contributing to carbon emissions and air pollution. The packaging used to protect button pins during transit, typically made from plastic or cardboard, requires those materials' own extraction and production which also adds to the waste generated. For instance, a shipment of button pins from a factory in Asia to retailers in North America involves numerous stages of transport, each with its own carbon footprint. The cumulative effect of these transportation stages is substantial, making the distribution and transportation phase a critical component of the overall environmental impact of button pins. While efforts such as optimizing shipping routes and using eco-friendly packaging can mitigate some effects, the current practices largely remain unsustainable. Once button pins reach consumers, their usage phase begins, often characterized by a short lifespan. Button pins are frequently used for specific events or fashion trends and then discarded. While metals like steel and brass are theoretically recyclable, the small size and mixed materials of button pins make recycling challenging. Separating the metal from the plastic components is often not economically viable, leading to low recycling rates. Furthermore, many consumers are unaware of the recycling options for button pins, resulting in most being thrown away. The plastics used in button pins, such as acrylic and mylar, are not biodegradable and break down into microplastics over time, contributing to long-term environmental pollution. Therefore, the use, reuse, and recycling phase reveals significant sustainability issues due to the difficulties in effectively recycling and the predominance of single-use consumption.

At the end of its product life cycle, Button Pins become waste, where discarded pins end up in landfills or incineration facilities. The metals in button pins, like steel and brass, take hundreds of years to degrade, potentially leaching harmful substances into the soil and groundwater. The plastic components, as mentioned earlier, break down into microplastics, which pose a threat to wildlife and ecosystems. These materials all take an extended amount of time to degrade into landscape and pose a serious threat as waste on our planet. Incineration of button pins can release toxic fumes, including dioxins and furans, which are hazardous to human health and the environment. The waste management phase thus highlights the long-term environmental burden of button pins, emphasizing the need for better waste disposal methods and increased recycling efforts. Without significant changes, the disposal of button pins will continue to contribute to environmental degradation and pollution.

In conclusion, the sustainability of button pins is challenged at each stage of their life cycle, from raw materials acquisition to waste management. The extraction and processing of metals and plastics used in button pins incur high environmental costs, including resource depletion, pollution, and energy consumption. The manufacturing and transportation processes further exacerbate these impacts, contributing to greenhouse gas emissions and waste generation. While this doesn’t shut down the idea that Button Pins should be produced, It does raise the question: How can we be more sustainable. What materials can be used to minimize environmental impact, and what practices paired with those materials as well. Despite their small size, the difficulties in recycling button pins and their long-term environmental footprint make them a significant sustainability concern. This concern is amplified by the consumerist, mass producing nature of button-pins for various uses. Without addressing these challenges, Button Pin production becomes an example of unsustainable products which hold high environmental cost. Addressing them requires a comprehensive approach, including the use of more sustainable materials, improved manufacturing practices, and increased consumer awareness about recycling and waste management. Accounting for and optimizing the materials utilized in each of these aspects of production would allow for a much more sustainable product. Overall, the materials utilized in the production of Button Pins are not sustainable. With their low biodegradability, and the toxic waste produced in their acquisition and manipulation, these materials make button Pins a detriment to the environment throughout their life. 

Bibliography

“A SHORT HISTORY OF PIN-BACK BUTTONS”. The Button Guy Blog People Power Press. July 01 2011

https://peoplepowerpress.org/blogs/news/3506742-a-short-history-of-pin-back-buttons-the-button-guy-blog

Adams, George “Badge Pin or Button.” Whitehead and Hoag Company July 21, 1896 

No. 564,356 https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/77/bb/ad/2defd6c4bc539d/US564356.pdf

Carter, Cristen “Message in a Button” Jstor Daily December 26th, 2021 https://daily.jstor.org/message-in-a-button/

Powell, Danny “Look Sharp! A history of Button Badges” Solo Press Blog January 24, 2023

https://www.solopress.com/blog/print-inspiration/look-sharp-a-history-of-button-badges/#:~:text=The%20birth%20of%20the%20Badge&text=In%201894%20and%201896%2C%20a,Round%2C%20Square%20and%20Rectangle%20options.

Kaspar K.J. “Button Making Machine” September 1, 1896 No. 567,102

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/7e/36/73/781e808f32f77e/US567102.pdf

Hepha E studios “What Materials are used to make Custom Pins?” Hepha E-studios 2024

https://hephaestudio.com/en/blog/what-materials-are-used-to-make-custom-pins#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20most%20common,into%20different%20shapes%20and%20sizes.

Louis, Elleanor. “What Is the Difference between a Button and a Pin?” Sticker Mule, https://www.stickermule.com/support/what-is-the-difference-between-a-button-and-a-pin Accessed 23 May 2024. 

Materiotek Mercerie “About the buttons of materiotek-mercerie” Materiotek Mercerie 2017

https://www.materiotek-mercerie.com/en/content/16-history-buttons#:~:text=Prior%20to%20the%20emergence%20of,as%20steel%2C%20and%20aluminium%20alloys.

“Custom Buttons.” Busy Beaver Button Co., www.busybeaver.net/products/custom-buttons/#:~:text=Custom%20buttons%20are%20made%20of,form%20a%20custom%20wearable%20item. Accessed 4 June 2024. 

“Metal Buttons.” pinliLAbel, 20 Feb. 2023, pinlilabel.com/metal-buttons/#:~:text=Metal%20buttons%20can%20be%20made,aluminum%20buttons%20are%20also%20popular. 

Xue, Yang, et al. “Recovery of Zinc and Iron from Steel Mill Dust-an Overview of Available Technologies.” Materials (Basel, Switzerland), U.S. National Library of Medicine, 10 June 2022, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9228750/. 

Degradation Rates of Plastics in the Environment | ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acssuschemeng.9b06635. Accessed 4 June 2024. 

Lu, Sijin, et al. “Heavy Metal Pollution and Ecological Risk Assessment of the Paddy Soils near a Zinc-Lead Mining Area in Hunan.” Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, U.S. National Library of Medicine, 15 Sept. 2015, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26373302/. 

“Zinc Production & Environmental Impact.” Greenspec, www.greenspec.co.uk/building-design/zinc-production-environmental-impact/#:~:text=and%20W%20J%20Rankin)-,%E2%80%A2,These%20heavy%20metals. Accessed 4 June 2024. 

Mylar Material Safety Data Sheet Ekfdiagnostics, www.ekfdiagnostics.com/res/205 MSDS Mylar Capillary Tubes.pdf. Accessed 4 June 2024. 

Adam J Geyer

Katy Lawlor & Liam Larwood 

DES040A

Dr. Cogdell

Energy Consumption of Button Pins

The button pin (also known as the pin-back button) is a marketing staple that dates back to the beginning of mainstream manufacturing processes. First manufactured with wood in the 18th century, these pins have been used to promote everything from Abraham Lincoln’s presidency to my friend’s high school graduation party last year. When beginning this project I wanted to focus on a widely-used product that had rarely had its environmental impact measured, so I landed here. The energy consumption throughout the extraction, manufacturing, and transportation processes in the life cycle of button pins are relatively miniscule when looked at per pin, but holistic analysis highlights the environmental impact of small-scale manufacturing and underscores the need to adopt more sustainable energy sources and practices. 

What is a button pin? A button manufactured in 2024 usually is a “round button with a hard metal or plastic backing that features a pin or latch mechanism for attaching it to clothing.” The front of the pin consists of a thin layer of Mylar plastic to “keep it waterproof and scratch-resistant” (Smith). These are not made with acrylic like the pins you get from Disney World (Louis). 

To analyze the energy currently used to meet the demand for these pins, we can first consider the extraction process for the raw materials needed to construct the pins. This begins with hauling huge equipment to the extraction sites. These vehicles are typically fueled by gasoline, which is itself a creation made from fossil fuels. Once all of the vehicles and equipment arrive at the site, metal extraction begins. Drilling and blasting are the main means of extraction when it comes to metal; both of these processes require giant amounts of energy, around 220 mj/kg for aluminum and 15-20 megajoules per kilogram for steel, both of which make up the alloy from which a typical button pin is made (Bernard). Extracted ore is then carried into large trucks or containers with machinery and taken to refineries to be processed further, transportation uses additional energy (amount varies on the distance between extraction and processing sites). Once the ore reaches the processing site, it is crushed, smelted, and refined (Martelaro). Smelting uses very large amounts of energy as does refinery done by electrolysis or other methods. Plastic extraction is another substantial factor in the creation of button pins. Beginning the same way, large trucks and machinery arrive at sites that extract crude oil. Extraction of crude oil, a fossil fuel, is done by drilling and fueled by other fossil fuels. The energy output from drilling for fossil fuels is extremely high, around 148.2 megajoules which is just as much energy as it takes to make the food for someone to eat for over 2 weeks; this amount will only be able to process around 200 pins (Bawlinder). Once the crude oil is extracted it is brought to a refinery adding even more energy used in transportation. Once it arrives at the refinery it is refined into polyethylene terephthalate, also known as Mylar: a strong and durable plastic (Katz). Refinery also uses huge amounts of fossil fuels yielding very high energy usage. Some changes that could be made to the extraction processes of metals and crude oil for button pins include electric means of transportation and power for machinery, more intense laws regarding extraction energy consumption, and even green-chemistry which can produce results extremely similar to typical extraction through the use of sustainable chemistry that avoids using hazardous chemicals. (Pell)(Whitworth). 

Next, the manufacturing process of button pins proves to be even more energy consuming than the extraction process. Once the refined metal arrives at a manufacturing site, it is loaded onto an automated line where it begins to be rolled into sheet metal. This involves heating and compression which both involve large amounts of energy. The metal is then cut into a circular shape using hydraulic and mechanical presses. Both of these machines are usually powered by electricity but still require  great amounts of energy. The metal then goes through a deburring process where it is smoothed with sanders and other polishing equipment, also powered by electricity. The final optional step for the metal circles is a process called electroplating which adds another layer of metal to the top to ensure durability; this takes additional heating and machinery energy use. The Mylar plastic (polyethylene terephthalate) goes through a similar manufacturing process. It begins with injection molding where plastic pellets are heated to extreme temperatures and put into a molding machine; again, very high energy consumption occurs at this phase. The plastic that has been molded is then cooled to ensure no impurities which, consistent with the pattern you are no doubt observing, also uses extremely high amounts of energy, varying according to how many pins are being created. Then comes the trimming and assembly phases where energy is used to cut, trim, and shape the plastic and metals into the perfect shape. As the buttons are being created, quality control done by humans also requires air conditioning, lighting, heat in cold areas, and of course, equipment energy usage.

There are a few things that can be done within the manufacturing process of button pins to minimize their energy consumption. The first involves more reports on how much energy manufacturers are using to increase accessibility for researchers looking to reduce energy usage in manufacturing processes. Second, the transition away from anything powered by fossil fuels within the manufacturing processes of products are absolutely necessary for the future of the earth (Despeisse). 

The transportation in all aspects of the production of button pins adds to their overall energy consumption immensely. Since the transportation in the extraction and manufacturing processes have already been described above, the transportation energy consumption after the pins have been made will be discussed in this paragraph. Beyond transportation, preparation for transportation with boxes, tape, and other packaging supplies all use their own amounts of energy unless they are recycled. Aside from that, machines are also used to load boxes of product onto large trucks to then be shipped to warehouses and retailers. The trucks can also take the product to airports where they are put on planes and then again onto trucks to reach their final destinations. Depending on what kind of fuel these forms of transportation use, energy consumption can vary a lot in this phase of production. A solid rule of thumb for large shipping trucks is that if they use diesel fuel they use about 5.1-6.7kW/mile, natural gas around 5.2-7.3kW/mile, and electricity around 2-3kW/mile depending on the trucks. For planes, they use around 79-198kW/mile depending on the size of the plane (Kaza). A simple solution to the transportation energy use regarding button pins would be to change all gas forms to electricity. 

Last, unfortunately the reuse and recycling of button pins is nearly impossible. Due to the durability of Mylar plastic and the unique aluminum alloy, even if a button pin makes it to a recycling plant, it is rarely recycled. The machinery and practices to recycle something like a button pin is simply too expensive and time consuming. So, the pins usually end up in landfills, on the rare occasion that they are recycled, the recycling process uses unfathomable amounts of energy in sorting, cleaning, shredding, and reprocessing, causing it to be counterproductive. One solution to the lack of recyclability of button pins would be a plastic casing that allows the image inside of the button pin to be exchanged depending on what it is being used for.

Conclusively, button pins are nowhere near environmentally friendly. They use roughly 0.1kWh to 0.5kWh per button pin: enough to charge your phone several times to put it into perspective (Cell Press). Throughout extraction: drilling, blasting, transportation, and machinery all contribute very large amounts of energy to the life cycle of button pins. Similarly, in manufacturing: transportation, refining, rolling, stamping, hydraulic pressing, mechanical pressing, cutting, shaping, trimming, molding, deburring, electrolysis, sanding, assembly, and working conditions for warehouse employees also contribute unnecessary amounts of energy to the life cycle of button pins. Lastly, transportation at the end of the production processes of button pins needs some environmental awareness in order to decrease their contribution to global warming. In the extraction process, electric powered machinery and green chemistry are two applications that could decrease energy usage, in manufacturing, energy reports by factories and moving away from fossil fueled machinery could contribute to a carbon neutral button pin. Lastly, in regards to transportation throughout all processes, the move to electric powered vehicles and planes would make a huge step toward an environmentally friendly product everyone knows and loves.

Works Cited

“Alloy Definition & Meaning.” Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alloy. Accessed 23 May 2024.

Bawlinder, Nimana. “Energy Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the Recovery and Extraction of Crude Bitumen from Canada’s Oil Sands.” Applied Energy, Elsevier, 30 Jan. 2015, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261915000306. 

Bernard, Jeffrey. Basics of Energy Balance, archive.nptel.ac.in/content/storage2/courses/113104060/lecture1/1_5.htm. Accessed 3 June 2024. 

Despeisse, M., et al. “The emergence of sustainable manufacturing practices.” Production Planning & Control, vol. 23, no. 5, 4 May 2011, pp. 354–376, https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2011.555425. 

Home: Cell Press, www.cell.com/joule/pdf/S2542-4351(20)30093-3.pdf. Accessed 23 May 2024. 

Katz, Jordan. “Mylar®, Plastic Sheet, Polyester Film Sheet and Sheet Properties.” Grafix Plastics, www.grafixplastics.com/grafix-plastics/plastic-film-plastic-sheet-faq/mylar_what/mylar_prop/. Accessed 23 May 2024.

Kaza, Nikhil. “Urban Form and Transportation Energy Consumption.” Energy Policy, Elsevier, 25 Oct. 2019, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421519306366. 

Louis, Elleanor. “What Is the Difference between a Button and a Pin?” Sticker Mule, www.stickermule.com/support/what-is-the-difference-between-a-button-and-a-pin?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&src=GOOG&cid=362721247&gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjwltKxBhDMARIsAG8KnqV5kukRMFg7eLP7Qr1lkReAbcdG8jMgh3dfSupPSjclqV5KctTaEA8aAtzHEALw_wcB. Accessed 23 May 2024.  

Martelaro, Nikolas. Energy Use in US Steel Manufacturing, large.stanford.edu/courses/2016/ph240/martelaro1/. Accessed 23 May 2024. 

Pell, Robert, et al. “Towards Sustainable Extraction of Technology Materials through Integrated Approaches.” Nature News, Nature Publishing Group, 21 Sept. 2021, www.nature.com/articles/s43017-021-00211-6. 

Smith, Anthony. “Difference between Enamel Pins and Button Pins.” Custom Pins Now: Fast Delivery & Best Pricing, www.custompinsnow.com/post/what-is-the-difference-between-an-enamel-pin-and-a-button-pin#:~:text=Enamel%20pins%20are%20stamped%20on,two%20kinds%20of%20pins%20apart. Accessed 23 May 2024. 

Technical Data Sheet Mylar®, laminatedplastics.com/mylar.pdf. Accessed 23 May 2024. 

Whitworth, Anne. “Review on Metal Extraction Technologies Suitable for Critical Metal Recovery from Mining and Processing Wastes.” Minerals Engineering, Pergamon, 12 Apr. 2022, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0892687522001479. 

Katy Lawlor

Adam Geyer & Liam Larwood

DES40A

Dr. Cogdell

The Overlooked Environmental Harm of Button Pins

Oftentimes, button pins are gimmicky modes through which an image or text is presented, be it for a business, campaign, or aesthetics. Made for weddings, parties, campaigns, concerts, accessories, and more, button pins are seemingly tiny trimmings that have been present and successful ever since their invention in the 19th century. These modes of decor and promotion can be distributed, worn, collected, and more at utmost ease. They have become so customary that people do not tend to give them or their creation much thought, let alone the processes of their waste and ultimate pollution. Unbeknownst to many, button pins possess a layer of zinc alloy, topped with printed paper and lastly covered in a thin layer of plastic. Between the layers of zinc alloy, printed paper, and plastic, the waste and pollution that stems from the processing and disposal of button pins significantly impacts the environment due to their environmentally demanding production process and their general inability to be recycled. 

The first layer of a button pin is made of zinc alloy which in itself is taxing to the environment both through its extensive extraction and manufacturing processes. Zinc alloy production begins with zinc mining, a type of mineral processing activity to extract zinc ore from the earth. As machines disturb the ground in which the zinc ore lays, several types of harmful minerals and metals spew into the surrounding environment, polluting nearby water, soil, crops, and air. The comprehensive study “Impacts of lead/zinc mining and smelting on the environment and human health in China” by researchers Xiuwu Zhang, Linsheng Yang, Yonghua Li, Hairong Li, Wuyi Wang and Bixiong Ye examines the impacts of zinc mining in China, for China is one of the top countries containing zinc reserves. The study revealed that zinc mining both directly and indirectly damages human health via the environment. Water bodies that lie close to zinc mining sites tend to have insufficient water quality as well as sediments contaminated by major pollutants, both of which are sources of significant pollution (Zhang et al. 2263). Not only do the water and sediments become polluted, but fish and other animals that may reside within the water bodies can consume pollutants and transfer them up the food chain, ultimately negatively affecting a broad range of organisms. More severely, soils that surround the mining areas contain high concentrations of heavy metals, rendering them toxic (Zhang et al. 2264). Lastly, mainly due to aforementioned water and soil pollution, crops that grow in surrounding areas often do not meet national health standards as pollutants accumulate within them (Zhang et al. 2264, 2266). The byproducts introduced by zinc mining and smelting undoubtedly prove damaging to both the surrounding environment and its inhabitants, humans and animals alike. Simply extracting and manufacturing zinc alloy is harmful to the environment in itself, but when the topic of recyclability is considered, implications grow even more complicated.

In terms of zinc alloy, recycling is possible though difficult, resulting in a relatively harmful though not detrimental end-of-life process. According to Canadian recycling centre Manville Recycling, zinc is often mixed with other metals and thereby must undergo a separation process to refine it back to its original form. This separation process involves placing the alloy into a furnace and heating it until the zinc becomes a volatile gas. Once it becomes a gas it is treated to transform it into dust form which is then placed in a kiln and finally returned back to its pure state (Manville Recycling). Though this process requires much energy and effort, it is a highly reliable way to reuse the nonrenewable resource that is zinc. At the end of the process, the zinc has mostly the exact same properties as it had at its extraction. Furthermore, this recycling process is timely and energy-consuming but ultimately cheaper and less environmentally taxing than zinc mining. Regardless of this, zinc recycling is a practice that is still in need of growth as zinc mining remains to be a large industry in which habitats continue to be damaged significantly. Additionally, limited information is available regarding the separation of zinc alloy from other materials like paper and plastic in button pins’ case, so it is unclear whether or not this relatively positive recycling process would be assistive in the case of button pins. After discussing only the zinc alloy component, it is evident that button pins damage the environment, and unfortunately the following layers of printed paper and plastic may do similar damage.

Next, the second layer within button pins is usually printed paper which continues to add to the pins’ devastating impact on the environment. Paper is sourced from the cutting down of trees, a resource that is technically renewable yet struggles to keep up with the demand of paper production, thereby damaging habitats. Not only do over 300 million acres of habitats become disturbed annually by paper production, but the chemicals and pesticides used within the process significantly pollute surrounding air, water, and soil, according to Washington University in St. Louis’s article “Reducing Printing: an Important Sustainability Strategy.” In disturbing habitats, animals become displaced and populations decline, damaging the earth’s biodiversity. Additionally, polluted air, water, and soil may harm wildlife as animals breathe, drink, and eat, ultimately adding to the decline of biodiversity. In addition to paper processing, printer ink harms the environment further. Printer management company PaperCut claims that most printer ink is made of petroleum and other chemicals which is largely harmful as petroleum is a nonrenewable resource and its extraction disturbs habitats and pollutes surrounding. Extraction of nonrenewable resources like petroleum and aforementioned zinc is sure to damage surrounding environments by disturbing habitats, polluting surroundings, and depleting natural resources. Additionally, according to a study done on health impacts of volatile organic compounds in the oil extraction industry by researchers Ladan Khajeh Hoseini, Reza Jalilzadeh Yengejeh, Maryam Mohammadi Rouzbehani, and Sima Sabzalipour, petroleum processing plants are significantly prone to releasing harmful volatile organic compounds into the environment, harming both human and animal health via pollution of air and water. Between deforestation, habitat disruption, oil depletion, pollution, and more, paper and ink processing take a consequential toll on the environment. Since paper and ink are arguably the most essential design element of button pins, it is important to consider the environmental impacts of the grand scale production of the two as well as potential affordances of their perceived positive recycling processes. 

Though the processing of paper and ink is largely disturbing to the environment, recycling printed paper is far more sustainable yet may not be positive in the context of button pins. While recycling printed paper is a practice that many are committed to as a staggering 50 million tons are recycled annually according to the American Forest and Paper Association, the composition of button pins diminish the paper’s recyclability almost completely. An essential reason why recycling printed paper is so easy is due to its straightforward process in which it need not be separated or purened from anything else. However, since button pins top their printed paper with a layer of plastic, recycling simply the paper layer becomes unachievable. Printing company Printing for Less claims that while paper with ink on it is recyclable, once add-ons like plastic are added, separability becomes unreasonable and causes the paper to be unrecyclable. Since the layer of printed paper is between metal and plastic, its recyclability is unfortunately sure to be impossible. In the end, since the environmental impacts of paper and ink production are not alleviated by possible recyclability, the second layer of button pins continues the pattern of environmental harm. Between the damages of zinc alloy, paper, and ink, button pins already are significantly environmentally taxing, even without consideration of their final layer of plastic.

The third and final layer of button pins is most often made of mylar plastic which is expensive and difficult to recycle and therefore mostly sent to landfills, contributing to certain environmental harm. The specific type of plastic used is known as mylar plastic, characterised by its thinness and malleability. Since it is made mainly of polyester, mylar plastic does not break down with ease but rather remains on earth for hundreds of years. The type of polyester by which mylar plastic is made is called polyethylene terephthalate, or PET (Xometry). According to an article focused on PET plastics written by ForestNation, chemicals from the extensive process that is PET manufacturing often leak into nearby air, water, and ground, contaminating the earth. This process alone harms both humans and animals as they are forced to live within an environment saturated with unnatural chemicals from plastic processing. Amidst the implications of the toxic chemicals leaked into the environment by PET manufacturing, button pins’ existence prove even more damaging. Once again, while mylar plastic manufacturing is clearly destructive to the environment, the go-to idea of recyclability is regrettably a faithless solution and thereby not a reliable mode to make up for such environmental destruction.

While recycling is a plausible solution to most types of plastic waste, when it comes to mylar plastic, successful recycling is significantly less likely to occur. Its soft and flimsy nature can prove problematic as it goes through recycling equipment, claims educational site MylarMistake. Because of its malleability, it can get caught up in equipment and end up clogging or halting the process altogether, so it is infamous in the recycling industry. Because of this, many recycling companies tend to reject mylar plastic altogether so as to protect their equipment and save repair funds. As a result, much of mylar plastic ends up in landfills or in the ocean, regardless of its discarder’s possibly positive intentions in recycling it. Once the plastic reaches landfills and oceans, the environment faces extensive damage. According to the United Nations Environment Programme, plastic in landfills eventually breaks down into smaller parts that end up seeping into soil, harming residing species and polluting groundwater sources. Additionally, when mylar plastic ends up in the ocean it is often consumed by marine animals, damaging both their health and that of their consumers, such as bigger fish and even humans. Overall, since mylar plastic is expensive and problematic to recycling centres and is thereby sent to landfills and the ocean, it is undoubtedly one of the most irremediable materials involved in button pins. They take hundreds of years to decompose in these environments, allowing plenty of time for microplastic to leak and contaminate soil, water, and animals. Considering its lack of recyclability as well as its forceful binding to paper and zinc alloy in the context of button pins, mylar plastic greatly damages the environment, furthering the unsustainable properties of button pins.

To conclude, between air pollution, water pollution, soil pollution, food pollution, habitat destruction, biodiversity depletion, and more, button pins are an unassuming detriment to the environment. Not only do the processes and waste that stem from zinc alloy, paper, ink, and mylar plastic cause physical harm to the environment via pollution, they also result in health impairments for earth’s inhabitants, animals and humans alike. The extensive variety of pollution that ensues from button pin production permanently damages populations, habitats, and the wellbeing of the natural world. Though recycling can be somewhat plausible between the layers of button pins, it is important to consider how they may be treated when bound together. While the antecedent information proves the intense environmental affliction done by button pins and their materials, it is utmostly important to consider the implications that come with the fact that the materials are durably attached to one another. In considering this attachment, button pins grow even further unsustainable as their components can hardly even attempt to be individually recycled. Overall, in taking information about the undeniably detrimental impacts of the waste and pollution impacts of button pins, it is essential that the future manufacturing and disposal processes of button pins be performed with sustainability in mind. By seeking alternatives and supporting innovations in environmentally friendly design, the damage caused by these seemingly innocuous items can be relieved effectively and a healthier environment can be achieved.

Works Cited

American Forest and Paper Association. “U.S. Paper Recycling Rates Continue to Hold Strong.” AF&PA, https://www.afandpa.org/news/2023/us-paper-and-cardboard-recycling-rates-continue-hold-strong-2022. Accessed 1 June 2024.

ForestNation. “PET Plastics Release Hazardous Chemical Pollution at Every Stage of Their Lifecycle.” ForestNation, 25 July 2023, https://forestnation.com/blog/pet-plastics-release-hazardous-chemical-pollution-at-every-stage-of-their-lifecycle/.

Khajeh Hoseini, Ladan, et al. “Health Risk Assessment of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in a Refinery in the Southwest of Iran Using SQRA Method.” Frontiers in Public Health, vol. 10, Sept. 2022, p. 978354, doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.978354.

Manville Recycling. “Why Is Zinc Recycling Different?” Manville Recycling, 21 Aug. 2018, https://manvillerecycling.com/zinc-recycling-different/.

MylarMistake. “Recycle.” MylarMistake, 22 Mar. 2020, https://mylarmistake.com/recycle/.

PaperCut. “Why Eco-Friendly Ink Matters When It Comes to Print Sustainability.” PaperCut, https://www.papercut.com/blog/insights/why-eco-friendly-ink-matters-when-it-comes-to-print-sustainability/. Accessed 1 June 2024.

Printing for Less. “Can You Recycle Paper With Ink On It?” Printing for Less, 1 Oct. 2022, https://www.printingforless.com/blog/can-you-recycle-paper-with-ink-on-it/.

United Nations Environment Programme. “Plastic Planet: How Tiny Plastic Particles Are Polluting Our Soil.” UNEP, https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/plastic-planet-how-tiny-plastic-particles-are-polluting-our-soil. Accessed 1 June 2024.

Washington University in St. Louis. “Reducing Printing: An Important Sustainability Strategy.” Sustainability, 6 Feb. 2023, https://sustainability.wustl.edu/reducing-printing-an-important-sustainability-strategy/.

Zhang, Xiuwu, et al. “Impacts of Lead/Zinc Mining and Smelting on the Environment and Human Health in China.” Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, vol. 184, no. 4, May 2011, pp. 2261–73, doi:10.1007/s10661-011-2115-6.

Xometry. “What Is Mylar®? Definition, Properties, and Uses.” Xometry, 9 Mar. 2023, https://www.xometry.com/resources/sheet/what-is-mylar/.