Life-Span of a CGC Archival Case

[InvstmntComcSuply]

Again, the LOC study showed that there was NO difference between open and sealed once you add microchamber paper or other alkaline reserve. And the results with both Mylar and alakaline reserve were far superior to the control group of paper alone.

 

Do you remember when we had that discussion? I searched for it in the Resto forum last night and again this morning and can't find it. I think we did it in threads related to people complaining about the "seven year tune-up" from around the time when CGC first started recommending reholdering books every seven years to change out the microchamber paper back round 2004 or 2005, but I can't find the threads. I'm starting to think they've been deleted. I'm also looking for the study from the LoC site we were talking about a few years ago but haven't found it yet.

 

I have rarely posted in the Resto forum so it was probably in CG.

 

It appears that the LOC eliminated that page with the study. It obviously was too helpful.

 

I'll have to get into your next paragraph a little later, you said a lot, but it needs more of my stern adjustment.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

While it's a great method, it's not perfect and I associate that tanning at the top with it.

 

I doubt it's tanning. Only way I know to tell for sure is to look at both sides of the paper--dust shadows only affect one side, whereas tanning is visible on both sides since it's deterioration of the paper. Tanning comes from high heat and humidity.

 

Just a quick note:

 

You are disregarding the effects of oxidative and acid gaseous pollutants which probably accounts for many of the collections where the owner swears that they were always kept in a cool dark environment.

[DiceX]

While it's a great method, it's not perfect and I associate that tanning at the top with it.

 

I doubt it's tanning. Only way I know to tell for sure is to look at both sides of the paper--dust shadows only affect one side, whereas tanning is visible on both sides since it's deterioration of the paper. Tanning comes from high heat and humidity.

 

Just a quick note:

 

You are disregarding the effects of oxidative and acid gaseous pollutants which probably accounts for many of the collections where the owner swears that they were always kept in a cool dark environment.

 

Whatever the reason, it can and does happen.

I've bought collections that were stored in poly bags for 30 years in sweltering heat. The bags were even...slimy. The books inside were fine.

 

I've seen books that were stored in open top mylars for decades and the top inch of every book was brown.

 

Account for that.

 

 

[InvstmntComcSuply]

 

....Have you seen evidence that full-backs or half-backs from Gerber or Thin X-Tenders and Time X-Tenders from Cole serve as alkaline buffers? I never have, and neither seller claims that those boards serve that function. They're laced with the LoC recommended amount of calcium carbonate to prevent the board itself from being acidic,

 

Yes, it is in the Library of Congress study. Gerber and Cole do not have to "claim it" past their existing claims of "the boards containing a 3% calcium carbonate buffer throughout and a minimum pH of 8.5". That is their claim that the board is alkaline. The LOC study used a sheet of alkaline paper as the alkaline reserve. The Gerber/Cole board is the same thing, only of significantly more mass, and thus more buffering capability, than a sheet.

 

Obviously the further from the alkaline reserve, the greater the chance of acidic decomposition, thus the recommendation of microchamber paper especially behind the front cover of prized books.

 

 

 

Gerber doesn't sell anything that is a competitor to microchamber paper as an alkaline reserve that I've seen so far, but Cole sells something he calls "Life X-Tenders Plus" that is intended to be interleaved between the pages of a comic. Glancing at his current price list, looks like they're just under a buck apiece.

 

The Life X-Tenders Plus is a sacrificial sheet of copper that I believe is bonded to a poly base. The copper oxidizes in the presence of acidic gases. I do not know if it also scavenges pre-acidic by-products of deterioration, such as aldehydes. Aldehydes are important because they are the precursor to acetic acids, the most common acids formed in the aging of pulp paper. Aldehydes are also unaffected by buffered boards, because they do not react with the alkaline reserve. Microchamber paper WILL neutralize aldehydes.

[Arkham]

If you meant to ask how often the Microchamber paper will last for, then 5-100 years depending on the acidity level in your paper is the correct answer.

 

Its a hard question to answer as Microchamber paper absorbs acids & pollutants. The less pollution that the paper is exposed to, the longer it will last

 

What are your thoughts on Moderns? Say, in the last couple of years, where the books are on chemical pulp rather than ground wood?

 

Russ posted that years ago. But he was exactly right.

 

As far as moderns printed on the high quality paper of today, microchamber paper will likely last closer to the 100 year time frame than the 7 years CGC recommends.

Unless you live in Florida next to a factory and are storing your comics in your garage where you keep your car, all your cleaning supplies, lots of paint, other volatile organics and you smoke in there.

 

 

Thanks buddy. I'm glad. Doing a re-holder for all my books every 7 years from here would be a total pain in the A.

 

I wrap my slabs in mylar anyway.

 

Speaking of which - I need to finish some business with you. Will complete that discussion we started very soon - just invoicing some clients at the moment.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

No worries. (thumbs u

[fantastic_four]

....Have you seen evidence that full-backs or half-backs from Gerber or Thin X-Tenders and Time X-Tenders from Cole serve as alkaline buffers? I never have, and neither seller claims that those boards serve that function. They're laced with the LoC recommended amount of calcium carbonate to prevent the board itself from being acidic,

 

Yes, it is in the Library of Congress study. Gerber and Cole do not have to "claim it" past their existing claims of "the boards containing a 3% calcium carbonate buffer throughout and a minimum pH of 8.5". That is their claim that the board is alkaline. The LOC study used a sheet of alkaline paper as the alkaline reserve. The Gerber/Cole board is the same thing, only of significantly more mass, and thus more buffering capability, than a sheet.

 

Obviously the further from the alkaline reserve, the greater the chance of acidic decomposition, thus the recommendation of microchamber paper especially behind the front cover of prized books.

 

Just found that it isn't just the LoC that recommends the calcium carbonate buffer, the ANSI Z39.48 standard defines that to ensure the "permanence" of paper, it needs a 2% calcium carbonate-equivalent buffer built into it. That standard is particularly interesting because it appears to confirm something Cole told me about a decade ago that I was skeptical of--that his 3% boards never need replacing. But note that the 3% buffer in the boards is just for ensuring the board itself doesn't become acidic--it's not enough for it to act as something to soak up the acid released from the comic. The comic itself is still going to become acidic and eat at itself in a closed environment without a separate alkaline reserve. That's what I was saying Cole and Gerber don't claim--they claim the board is non-acidic, but they don't claim the board soaks up the acid of the comic. Cole does, however, claim his "Life X-Tenders" do that.

 

On Cole's web site, I've seen references in the past to a "Life X-Tender" backing board that has far more than the 3% calcium carbonate buffer to soak up acids from a comic, but yesterday I checked the site again and couldn't find that board being for sale anymore. He still does sell the "Life X-Tender Plus" inserts though. But I can see why he may have stopped selling the acid-absorbing board. He claims that his 3% CaCO3 "Time X-Tenders" never need to be swapped out--which the "permanent paper" ANSI standard I mentioned above seems to confirm--but if his "Life X-Tenders" need replacing every 10 years, he probably realized they seemed like more effort and expense to the permanent Time X-Tender board combined with the Life-X-Tender inserts he sells now.

 

The Life X-Tenders Plus is a sacrificial sheet of copper that I believe is bonded to a poly base. The copper oxidizes in the presence of acidic gases. I do not know if it also scavenges pre-acidic by-products of deterioration, such as aldehydes. Aldehydes are important because they are the precursor to acetic acids, the most common acids formed in the aging of pulp paper. Aldehydes are also unaffected by buffered boards, because they do not react with the alkaline reserve. Microchamber paper WILL neutralize aldehydes.

 

Someone could ask Cole whether or not his Life X-Tenders absorb aldehydes. In the past he's answered several specific questions about the preservation quality of his products when I asked. I suppose I've become biased towards microchamber paper now that CGC uses it, so I wouldn't see myself buying Cole's inserts now anyway unless he were able to list some advantages of his product.

[Samcro-migration]

No. I have noticed this with books that I've owned for 10-25 years. I put my nicest books in open-top Mylars (based on recommendations of some dealer or other way back when) and they now have slight darkening along the top edge (although I wouldn't call any of them brown quite yet). They were in a cool, dark closet with limited air circulation, otherwise they'd probably be worse. Other, lower-dollar-value books that I didn't bother to transfer out of the polybags or flapped mylites they came in are still as fresh as the day I bought them.

 

At worst these would have to be dust shadows, not tanning. CGC allows dust shadows at least up to the 9.6 grade, possibly higher. Most high grade guys hate them, though, so if open-topped Mylars are vulnerable to them, avoiding them would be desirable. Did you have a top on the box the books you're mentioning were in?

 

I'm a page quality junkie and there is no doubt that storing books in an open-top Mylar will result in a darker shading along the top edge. Regardless of the grade and what CGC allows it will probably not get a White page designation. I put my raws inside a sealed Mylite, then I put them into an open top Mylar. THis way there is less movement of the

book and prevents accidental damage from thumbing through the books.

 

Dude, wanna thank you for the tip. Just finished goin thru my collection and rebagged my books and put em back in the Mylars. Lookin' good. Thanks again

[mschmidt]

On Cole's web site, I've seen references in the past to a "Life X-Tender" backing board that has far more than the 3% calcium carbonate buffer to soak up acids from a comic, but yesterday I checked the site again and couldn't find that board being for sale anymore. He still does sell the "Life X-Tender Plus" inserts though. But I can see why he may have stopped selling the acid-absorbing board. He claims that his 3% CaCO3 "Time X-Tenders" never need to be swapped out--which the "permanent paper" ANSI standard I mentioned above seems to confirm--but if his "Life X-Tenders" need replacing every 10 years, he probably realized they seemed like more effort and expense to the permanent Time X-Tender board combined with the Life-X-Tender inserts he sells now.

 

What you're referring to is the old Life-X-Tender:

 

 

It had an activated charcoal layer on the inside which would actively help with acid absorption. It's one of my all time favorite comic book conservation supplies, but, unfortunately, he stopped manufacturing them due to rising costs.

 

The Life-X-Tender-Plus that he sells these days is basically his version of micro-chamber paper. I've found the product to be relatively unusable due to its thickness, though - I'm just not comfortable putting multiple 9 mil sheets inside a comic book.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

....Have you seen evidence that full-backs or half-backs from Gerber or Thin X-Tenders and Time X-Tenders from Cole serve as alkaline buffers? I never have, and neither seller claims that those boards serve that function. They're laced with the LoC recommended amount of calcium carbonate to prevent the board itself from being acidic,

 

Yes, it is in the Library of Congress study. Gerber and Cole do not have to "claim it" past their existing claims of "the boards containing a 3% calcium carbonate buffer throughout and a minimum pH of 8.5". That is their claim that the board is alkaline. The LOC study used a sheet of alkaline paper as the alkaline reserve. The Gerber/Cole board is the same thing, only of significantly more mass, and thus more buffering capability, than a sheet.

 

Obviously the further from the alkaline reserve, the greater the chance of acidic decomposition, thus the recommendation of microchamber paper especially behind the front cover of prized books.

 

Just found that it isn't just the LoC that recommends the calcium carbonate buffer, the ANSI Z39.48 standard defines that to ensure the "permanence" of paper, it needs a 2% calcium carbonate-equivalent buffer built into it. That standard is particularly interesting because it appears to confirm something Cole told me about a decade ago that I was skeptical of--that his 3% boards never need replacing. But note that the 3% buffer in the boards is just for ensuring the board itself doesn't become acidic--it's not enough for it to act as something to soak up the acid released from the comic. The comic itself is still going to become acidic and eat at itself in a closed environment without a separate alkaline reserve. That's what I was saying Cole and Gerber don't claim--they claim the board is non-acidic, but they don't claim the board soaks up the acid of the comic.

 

I see where you are going now, and maybe wherein the confusion lies. An alkaline reserve in a mylar will not halt degradation of comics entirely. It does not make "acid-free" paper out of pulp stock. Of course neither Gerber/Cole make that claim.

 

However, Gerber/Cole boards are equivalent to the alkaline reserve used in mylar in the LOC study and all the results of the study still apply. Including, that it makes no difference whether the mylar is open or closed as far as aging through elevated temperature/humidity is concerned.

 

[fantastic_four]

Just found that it isn't just the LoC that recommends the calcium carbonate buffer, the ANSI Z39.48 standard defines that to ensure the "permanence" of paper, it needs a 2% calcium carbonate-equivalent buffer built into it. That standard is particularly interesting because it appears to confirm something Cole told me about a decade ago that I was skeptical of--that his 3% boards never need replacing. But note that the 3% buffer in the boards is just for ensuring the board itself doesn't become acidic--it's not enough for it to act as something to soak up the acid released from the comic. The comic itself is still going to become acidic and eat at itself in a closed environment without a separate alkaline reserve. That's what I was saying Cole and Gerber don't claim--they claim the board is non-acidic, but they don't claim the board soaks up the acid of the comic.

 

I see where you are going now, and maybe wherein the confusion lies. An alkaline reserve in a mylar will not halt degradation of comics entirely. It does not make "acid-free" paper out of pulp stock. Of course neither Gerber/Cole make that claim.

 

However, Gerber/Cole boards are equivalent to the alkaline reserve used in mylar in the LOC study and all the results of the study still apply. Including, that it makes no difference whether the mylar is open or closed as far as aging through elevated temperature/humidity is concerned.

 

I neither explicitly said nor silently assumed that a CaCO3 backing board somehow deacidfies a comic. What I said was that the CaCO3 in the Cole and Gerber boards are enough to act as an alkaline reserve for the acidity of the materials in the board itself, but they're not enough to absorb acids from the comic. If it acted as a reserve for the comic, Cole and Gerber would definitely advertise that fact as Cole indeed does for his Life X-Tenders. Gonna need a link to the study you're alluding to that a 3% CaC03 backing board would act as an alkaline reserve for an acidic paper artifact such as old comics are, because the ANSI standard I linked above suggests that what you just marked out as false is actually true. That standard suggests that a minimum of a 2% CaCO3 buffer is needed just to absorb a paper product's own acidity, which directly implies it can't do the double duty of additionally absorbing off-gassing from something like an older comic made from acidic ground pulp paper.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

Just found that it isn't just the LoC that recommends the calcium carbonate buffer, the ANSI Z39.48 standard defines that to ensure the "permanence" of paper, it needs a 2% calcium carbonate-equivalent buffer built into it. That standard is particularly interesting because it appears to confirm something Cole told me about a decade ago that I was skeptical of--that his 3% boards never need replacing. But note that the 3% buffer in the boards is just for ensuring the board itself doesn't become acidic--it's not enough for it to act as something to soak up the acid released from the comic. The comic itself is still going to become acidic and eat at itself in a closed environment without a separate alkaline reserve. That's what I was saying Cole and Gerber don't claim--they claim the board is non-acidic, but they don't claim the board soaks up the acid of the comic.

 

I see where you are going now, and maybe wherein the confusion lies. An alkaline reserve in a mylar will not halt degradation of comics entirely. It does not make "acid-free" paper out of pulp stock. Of course neither Gerber/Cole make that claim.

 

However, Gerber/Cole boards are equivalent to the alkaline reserve used in mylar in the LOC study and all the results of the study still apply. Including, that it makes no difference whether the mylar is open or closed as far as aging through elevated temperature/humidity is concerned.

 

I neither explicitly said nor silently assumed that a CaCO3 backing board somehow deacidfies a comic. What I said was that the CaCO3 acts as an alkaline reserve for the acidity of the materials in the board itself, but not the comic. If it acted as a reserve for the comic, Cole and Gerber would definitely advertise that fact as Cole indeed does for his Life X-Tenders. Gonna need a link to the study you're alluding to that a 3% CaC03 backing board would act as an alkaline reserve for an acidic paper artifact such as old comics are, because the ANSI standard I linked above suggests that what you just marked out as false is actually true.

 

No, it does not.

 

You are mixing two different things. The ANSI standard for permanent papers, which requires for them to be buffered (clearly newsprint comics are not) and the LOC study of aging paper in mylar enclosures.

 

The alkaline reserve in the LOC study was not sprayed on the paper (comic) it was a simple sheet of alkaline paper, just like the Gerber/Cole boards. The term "alkaline reserve" as used in the context of the LOC study simply means a separate sheet of alkaline paper. I really don't know how I can be clearer?

 

 

[fantastic_four]

The alkaline reserve in the LOC study was not sprayed on the paper (comic) it was a simple sheet of alkaline paper, just like the Gerber/Cole boards. The term "alkaline reserve" as used in the context of the LOC study simply means a separate sheet of alkaline paper. I really don't know how I can be clearer?

 

By telling me what's in an "alkaline paper". You appear to be claiming that the acidic absorption potential of microchamber paper, Bill Cole Life X-Tenders, "alkaline paper" and Cole or Gerber 3% CaCO3 backing boards are equivalent. I'm telling you that they're not equivalent because Cole and Gerber make no claims that their boards absorb acid from comics, which is my understanding of what would be necessary for an "alkaline reserve" to do. Cole and Gerber 3% CaCO3 boards are only alkaline reserves for themselves, not the comic. Having stated that point three times in three consecutive posts in three slightly different ways, I can't be any clearer about that, either.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

The alkaline reserve in the LOC study was not sprayed on the paper (comic) it was a simple sheet of alkaline paper, just like the Gerber/Cole boards. The term "alkaline reserve" as used in the context of the LOC study simply means a separate sheet of alkaline paper. I really don't know how I can be clearer?

 

By telling me what's in an "alkaline paper". You appear to be claiming that the acidic absorption potential of microchamber paper, Bill Cole Life X-Tenders, "alkaline paper" and Cole or Gerber 3% CaCO3 backing boards are equivalent.

I don't see where I was telling you what is in an alkaline paper?

However, the above are equivalent for our purposes. (In reality the boards will likely have a significantly greater buffering capacity than the sheet of paper due to mass, but that is beside the point) The microchamber paper also meets the alkaline paper standard, however it has significant additional advantages such that i would class it far above "equivalent". I can't speak for the Cole product that is no longer manufactured.

 

I'm telling you that they're not equivalent because Cole and Gerber make no claims that their boards absorb acid from comics, which is my understanding of what would be necessary for an "alkaline reserve" to do.

 

They already claim their board is alkaline on the website. A claim of "an alkaline sheet/board functions as an alkaline reserve inside a mylar enclosure and slows the aging of comics" is not required. The LOC study proves it.

 

The last time we had this discussion with the BCW guy, it was clear that Gerber/Cole were not going to provide a science lecture or a technical brief on how alkaline buffered boards function inside a mylar enclosure. The LOC has already done that and look what good it has done them. We have had several threads explaining the results and how they apply to comic books over the last few years and still we get all kinds of "if this" and "but that". We can have PhDs come on and explain how it works and we will still have others make wild claims with zero basis in fact and people will take those claims and run with them. Gerber/Cole have their composition information on the website, and that is it. You can take their information along with the LOC study and prove everything I have stated.

 

One marketing reason why they are hesitant to address this further is because although their boards are better than any other board commercially available, they do not completely prevent acid hydrolysis from occurring within a comic. Since they only slow the process and it will vary from comic to comic and by storage conditions, it does not behoove Gerber/Cole to make claims, other than that of board composition. Society is biased to favor an all or nothing result. To say "we slow down the aging process of paper in mylar enclosures better than no board at all. And, Oh, by the way, coated SBS boards are a lousy product that are worse than no boards at all" simply doesn't have a great "ring" to it.

 

Again the LOC study did not find that a sheet of alkaline paper halted the deterioration of pulp paper within a mylar enclosure. It found that with the alkaline paper in the mylar, the pulp paper aged slower than pulp paper alone and there was no difference between sealed and open mylar enclosures.

[fantastic_four]

Bumping the thread so I don't lose it--got busy last night and want to do some more research. If any alkaline paper including the Gerber and Cole acid-free boards are enough to absorb off-gassing from a comic in an enclosed space, I'll be a happy man since that's how I'm storing my comics. I'm particularly interested in the topic because I'll probably be buying more bags and boards within the next few years--bought enough Gerber Mylites, Mylars, and Full-Backs back in 2001 to last for over a decade.

 

It seems counterintuitive that they'd be sufficient. The main puzzling thing would be why would microchamber paper and Cole's Life X-Tenders purportedly have a 7 or 10 year expected usefulness according to CGC and Cole, but the less-buffered CaCO3 boards supposedly absorb acid indefinitely if the LoC "artifical aging" tests are to be believed (assuming grinin is remembering them correctly)?

 

[mschmidt]

It's a complete myth that micro-chamber paper only remains active for 7 years.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

Bumping the thread so I don't lose it--got busy last night and want to do some more research. If any alkaline paper including the Gerber and Cole acid-free boards are enough to absorb off-gassing from a comic in an enclosed space, I'll be a happy man since that's how I'm storing my comics. I'm particularly interested in the topic because I'll probably be buying more bags and boards within the next few years--bought enough Gerber Mylites, Mylars, and Full-Backs back in 2001 to last for over a decade.

 

It seems counterintuitive that they'd be sufficient. The main puzzling thing would be why would microchamber paper and Cole's Life X-Tenders purportedly have a 7 or 10 year expected usefulness according to CGC and Cole, but the less-buffered CaCO3 boards supposedly absorb acid indefinitely if the LoC "artifical aging" tests are to be believed (assuming grinin is remembering them correctly)?

 

They are not less buffered. All of those likely have the same buffering. The proprietary part of the microchamber paper is the SPZ zeolite molecular traps. None of the above last indefinitely. If the acid/pollutant load is extreme, you will need to change them. With a modern comic it is unlikely to happen in our lifetime. For a brown and brittle golden age book that is already highly acidic, it may only be seven years.

 

Send me a PM when you need more supplies, I generally keep all of the M2s, all the microchamber and a few different size boards in stock and my cheery personality is only a plus!