Are "acid-free" backing boards truly acid-free? Time to pH test & find out! 13 13

[namisgr]

Not according to the E. Gerber website:

 

Fullbacks -

Genuine acid-free, cellular fiber.

Meets strict U.S. Government standards for archival storage.

3% calcium carbonate buffer throughout, maintains a neutral pH.

 

I'm curious as to the source of your information on the E. Gerber fullbacks, particularly since you're suggesting that E. Gerber misrepresents the composition of their boards.

The information came directly from E. Gerber, and we did not suggest that E. Gerber has misrepresented their products. As for the quote from the E. Gerber web site, where does it state that full-backs and half-backs absorb any acid?

 

It doesn't state it. It states that they contain calcium carbonate. It is a law of chemistry that calcium carbonate will neutralize acids in liquid or gaseous form.

 

Indeed, calcium carbonate is a human physiological buffer stored in high concentrations in the bone that is used to counteract states of metabolic acidosis.

[Hawkman]

Great post. I remember FFB did a post like this years ago

[Darth Corgi]

seems the best longterm solution might be the totally inert (Gerber) boards, plus microchamber paper (swapped out periodically) to NOT add acid to the environment and absorb the acid from the comic. Better this way than adding an acid releasing boars in a closed space plus an acid releasing comic, and better than than a board with a 3% (temporary) coating to absorbs acids from the comic AND the board, as it will be acidic too soon.

 

do I get a B+ at least?

 

This makes a ton of sense to me.

 

Let the backing board be just that. A non-acidic backing board used for support. Then use microchamber paper for the removal of the acidity and off-gasing of the book. Let each one do their job well.

 

I don't want to change out the boards in my entire collection every 3-5 years. It seems very wasteful and expensive. I don't mind changing out microchamber paper in the older books of my collection every 6-9 years though.

 

I prefer Fullbacks in mylar with microchamber paper added to the older books. (thumbs u

[namisgr]

The backing board with calcium carbonate has much more buffering capacity than microchamber paper. You need the board to neutralize acidic gases from the comic.

[FFB]

Exactly. BCW is flat out wrong about the utility of its coating vs. the Gerber board, which has fully 3% of its total content being calcium carbonate (CaCO3). It would take a highly acidic book decades to neutralize enough CaCO3 to render a Gerber Half Back acidic, whereas the BCW board is already acidic except for the thin coating of CaCO3 sitting on top of one side of the board and will turn acidic on its own without any external acid being introduced (which cannot happen to the Gerber board).

We have been able to confirm that E. Gerber full-backs and half-backs are made from Archival Mat Board which is pH neutral and inert. By design, Archival Mat Board will not absorb the residual acid that migrates from the pages of a comic book. It should be noted that nowhere on their web site or packaging does E. Gerber state that their full-backs or half-backs will absorb acid. E. Gerber claims only that their product will not contribute to the deterioration of comic books. E. Gerber full-backs and half backs are intended to be an archival safe stiffener and nothing more.

 

What worries me most of all is that BCW does not seem to understand how an alkaline reserve actually works, and yet they are making erroneous representations that collectors might rely on in making purchase decisions.

We are well aware of how an alkaline reserve works. As vacantpassenger has stated, the calcium carbonate is a Lewis base. A Lewis base is any species that donates lone pair electrons. When a Lewis base reacts with a Lewis acid it forms a Lewis adduct by sharing the electron pair. This concept should be familiar to anyone who took (and paid attention in) a high school chemistry class. What concerns us is that there are individuals who are making erroneous claims about our products and our company that collectors might rely on in making purchases.

 

Where do you get the notion that "archival mat board" impregnated with 3% calcium carbonate won't absorb acid migrating from a comic? It will absolutely absorb and neutralize acids from a comic book.

 

It is clear that you have no idea what you're talking about. Why don't you wait until you get some of those paper experts on the phone before you post more incorrect information.

[BCW Supplies]

 

You're wrong on two fronts.

1. No matter what E. Gerber fails to claim about acid absorption by their fullbacks, it remains a stated fact that they contain calcium carbonate, a buffer that will react with acidic gases that come in contact with it.

 

2. Because the E. Gerber boards are buffered, their pH will not decline to an appreciable degree as they absorb acidic gases given off by a comic. It is instead the boards with a poor buffering capacity that will change in pH after being exposed to an acidic comic book.

In Mike's study he noted that both the E. Gerber and BCW boards have a 3% buffer of calcium carbonate. If the buffer reacts with acidic gases that come in contact with it as you state, how does the E. Gerber board remain pH neutral?

[FFB]

Not according to the E. Gerber website:

 

Fullbacks -

Genuine acid-free, cellular fiber.

Meets strict U.S. Government standards for archival storage.

3% calcium carbonate buffer throughout, maintains a neutral pH.

 

I'm curious as to the source of your information on the E. Gerber fullbacks, particularly since you're suggesting that E. Gerber misrepresents the composition of their boards.

The information came directly from E. Gerber, and we did not suggest that E. Gerber has misrepresented their products. As for the quote from the E. Gerber web site, where does it state that full-backs and half-backs absorb any acid?

 

It doesn't state it. It states that they contain calcium carbonate. It is a law of chemistry that calcium carbonate will neutralize acids in liquid or gaseous form.

 

Indeed, calcium carbonate is a human physiological buffer stored in high concentrations in the bone that is used to counteract states of metabolic acidosis.

 

P.S. I believe namisgr is the only biochemist currently involved in this thread.

[FFB]

 

You're wrong on two fronts.

1. No matter what E. Gerber fails to claim about acid absorption by their fullbacks, it remains a stated fact that they contain calcium carbonate, a buffer that will react with acidic gases that come in contact with it.

 

2. Because the E. Gerber boards are buffered, their pH will not decline to an appreciable degree as they absorb acidic gases given off by a comic. It is instead the boards with a poor buffering capacity that will change in pH after being exposed to an acidic comic book.

In Mike's study he noted that both the E. Gerber and BCW boards have a 3% buffer of calcium carbonate. If the buffer reacts with acidic gases that come in contact with it as you state, how does the E. Gerber board remain pH neutral?

 

They actually maintain a pH of about 8.0+ which is alkaline, not neutral. The Gerber board in mschmidt's examples looks to be 8.5 or so to me, despite his rating of 7-8. An 8.5 pH on a Gerber board is generally consistent with my own tests - I have the same pH pencil kit that mschmidt used and have tested them in the past.

 

Unless exposed to a lot more acid than a typical old comic book is going to be offgassing, the pH of the Gerber boards might eventually drop to some marginal degree, but it is going to take a very acidic book a very long time to lower the pH of a Half Back or Full Back below 7.0 (neutral pH).

[namisgr]

In Mike's study he noted that both the E. Gerber and BCW boards have a 3% buffer of calcium carbonate. If the buffer reacts with acidic gases that come in contact with it as you state, how does the E. Gerber board remain pH neutral?

 

How? The buffer.

 

Here's a simple analogy to help you understand.

 

1. Let's take 3 solutions all at pH 7.0: (i) distilled water (which has no buffer); (ii) 0.01% Tris-Hydrochloride (a chemical buffer at a relatively low concentration dissolved in water); and (iii) 10% Tris-Hydrochloride (a chemical buffer at a relatively high concentration dissolved in water).

 

2. Let's add a drop of vinegar (5% acetic acid) to each and measure the pH.

 

3. Result? The water, which is unbuffered, will drop to the very low, highly acidic pH of the vinegar.

The weak buffer will drop below pH 7.0, but not to nearly the same degree as the water.

The strong buffer will maintain very close to pH 7.0.

 

4. The lesson? The stronger the buffer, the less the pH changes by the addition of an acid or a base.

[BCW Supplies]

Where do you get the notion that "archival mat board" impregnated with 3% calcium carbonate won't absorb acid migrating from a comic? It will absolutely absorb and neutralize acids from a comic book.

According to Mike's study there was no change in the pH level of the E. Gerber boards at all. Therefore, either Mike's data is incorrect, or the E. Gerber board does not absorb any acid even after 2 years of use.

 

It is clear that you have no idea what you're talking about. Why don't you wait until you get some of those paper experts on the phone before you post more incorrect information.

One of the industry professionals that we have contacted is a representative of E. Gerber. It was this representative who stated that E. Gerber full-backs and half-backs are made of Archival Mat Board. Further, the representative stated that E. Gerber makes no claim that their full-backs or half-backs will absorb the residual acid that migrates from the pages of a comic book. The only claim that they make is that it will not contribute to the deterioration of a comic book.

 

Wood pulp is naturally acidic but can be buffered with calcium carbonate to temporarily shift the pH balance to alkaline. However, it will return to being acidic and start to harm the your comic book in about five years. No matter how free of acid a paper or board may be immediately after its manufacture, over time the presence of residual chlorine from bleaching, aluminum sulfate from sizing, and pollutants in the atmosphere may lead to the formation of acid unless the paper or board has been buffered with an alkaline substance. As noted in Mike's study, both the E. Gerber and BCW boards have a 3% buffer of calcium carbonate. Also noted in Mike's study is the fact that the 3% buffer of calcium carbonate is distributed throughout the board in the E. Gerber product, whereas the 3% buffer of calcium carbonate is concentrated in the form of a coating on the BCW product. Given that both products are made from wood pulp, how does the E. Gerber product absorb so much more residual acid that the change in the pH level is undetectable after 2 years of use?

 

Perhaps the statement by both E. Gerber and BCW that the E. Gerber board doesn't absorb any residual acid is technically incorrect. However, based on Mike's data, one could deduce that so little of the 3% buffer of calcium carbonate is in contact with the comic book that the change in the pH level of the surface of the E. Gerber board is virtually undetectable.

 

Please keep in mind that, as previously stated, we all have a common goal; to determine, beyond any reasonable doubt, the facts regarding the use of solid bleached sulfate for comic backing boards. It is not our intention to mislead our customers. We do not try to hide the fact that the board is solid bleached sulfate which is not suitable for long term storage of your comic books. This is why we recommend that you change your bags and boards every 3 to 5 years.

[namisgr]

Where do you get the notion that "archival mat board" impregnated with 3% calcium carbonate won't absorb acid migrating from a comic? It will absolutely absorb and neutralize acids from a comic book.

According to Mike's study there was no change in the pH level of the E. Gerber boards at all. Therefore, either Mike's data is incorrect, or the E. Gerber board does not absorb any acid even after 2 years of use.

 

Or....

 

 

You're incorrect. I repeat: the stronger the buffer, the less the pH changes upon addition/absorption of an acid.

 

I'm done here. As a good friend of mine likes to say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.

 

 

[SharpComics.com]

Where do you get the notion that "archival mat board" impregnated with 3% calcium carbonate won't absorb acid migrating from a comic? It will absolutely absorb and neutralize acids from a comic book.

According to Mike's study there was no change in the pH level of the E. Gerber boards at all. Therefore, either Mike's data is incorrect, or the E. Gerber board does not absorb any acid even after 2 years of use.

 

It is clear that you have no idea what you're talking about. Why don't you wait until you get some of those paper experts on the phone before you post more incorrect information.

One of the industry professionals that we have contacted is a representative of E. Gerber. It was this representative who stated that E. Gerber full-backs and half-backs are made of Archival Mat Board. Further, the representative stated that E. Gerber makes no claim that their full-backs or half-backs will absorb the residual acid that migrates from the pages of a comic book. The only claim that they make is that it will not contribute to the deterioration of a comic book.

 

Wood pulp is naturally acidic but can be buffered with calcium carbonate to temporarily shift the pH balance to alkaline. However, it will return to being acidic and start to harm the your comic book in about five years. No matter how free of acid a paper or board may be immediately after its manufacture, over time the presence of residual chlorine from bleaching, aluminum sulfate from sizing, and pollutants in the atmosphere may lead to the formation of acid unless the paper or board has been buffered with an alkaline substance. As noted in Mike's study, both the E. Gerber and BCW boards have a 3% buffer of calcium carbonate. Also noted in Mike's study is the fact that the 3% buffer of calcium carbonate is distributed throughout the board in the E. Gerber product, whereas the 3% buffer of calcium carbonate is concentrated in the form of a coating on the BCW product. Given that both products are made from wood pulp, how does the E. Gerber product absorb so much more residual acid that the change in the pH level is undetectable after 2 years of use?

 

Perhaps the statement by both E. Gerber and BCW that the E. Gerber board doesn't absorb any residual acid is technically incorrect. However, based on Mike's data, one could deduce that so little of the 3% buffer of calcium carbonate is in contact with the comic book that the change in the pH level of the surface of the E. Gerber board is virtually undetectable.

 

Please keep in mind that, as previously stated, we all have a common goal; to determine, beyond any reasonable doubt, the facts regarding the use of solid bleached sulfate for comic backing boards. It is not our intention to mislead our customers. We do not try to hide the fact that the board is solid bleached sulfate which is not suitable for long term storage of your comic books. This is why we recommend that you change your bags and boards every 3 to 5 years.

 

 

Hello. Would you be so kind as to give us your name sir?

[BCW Supplies]

How? The buffer.

 

Here's a simple analogy to help you understand.

 

1. Let's take 3 solutions all at pH 7.0: (i) distilled water (which has no buffer); (ii) 0.01% Tris-Hydrochloride (a chemical buffer at a relatively low concentration dissolved in water); and (iii) 10% Tris-Hydrochloride (a chemical buffer at a relatively high concentration dissolved in water).

 

2. Let's add a drop of vinegar (5% acetic acid) to each and measure the pH.

 

3. Result? The water, which is unbuffered, will drop to the very low, highly acidic pH of the vinegar.

The weak buffer will drop below pH 7.0, but not to nearly the same degree as the water.

The strong buffer will maintain very close to pH 7.0.

 

4. The lesson? The stronger the buffer, the less the pH changes by the addition of an acid or a base.

The problem with your example is that both the BCW and E. Gerber products have a 3% buffer of calcium carbonate. In your example the 10% solution of Tris-Hydrochloride has a concentration that is 1,000 times greater than that of the 0.01% solution of Tris-Hydrochloride. If the E. Gerber board had a 3,000% buffer of calcium carbonate then your example would apply. However, that is not the case.

[BCW Supplies]

You're incorrect. I repeat: the stronger the buffer, the less the pH changes upon addition/absorption of an acid.

Both the E. Gerber and BCW product have a 3% buffer of calcium carbonate, so the buffer of the E. Gerber product is no stronger than the buffer of the BCW product. They are both 3% calcium carbonate (by weight, to be specific). How can you suggest that the E. Gerber buffer is stronger?

[namisgr]

I repeat: the stronger the buffer, the less the pH changes upon addition/absorption of an acid.

Both the E. Gerber and BCW product have a 3% buffer of calcium carbonate... How can you suggest that the E. Gerber buffer is stronger?

 

Because the experimental data in the first post in this thread demonstrate it.

[BCW Supplies]

Hello. Would you be so kind as to give us your name sir?

The identity of the person or persons making the statement has no bearing on the validity of the statement itself. We have registered as BCW Supplies because we represent the company, not an individual. In Mike's study he didn't refer to an individual. He referred to BCW as a company and we are responding as such.

[Timmay]

Hello. Would you be so kind as to give us your name sir?

The identity of the person or persons making the statement has no bearing on the validity of the statement itself. We have registered as BCW Supplies because we represent the company, not an individual. In Mike's study he didn't refer to an individual. He referred to BCW as a company and we are responding as such.

 

So for all we know you could be the janitor at BCW.

[mschmidt]

According to Mike's study there was no change in the pH level of the E. Gerber boards at all. Therefore, either Mike's data is incorrect, or the E. Gerber board does not absorb any acid even after 2 years of use.

This has been adressed by numerous people on multiple occasions already. But, just in case, I'll repeat it for good measure: the reason the 2-year old Gerber board didn't show a change in its acidity was because of the 3% calcium carbonate buffer throughout the board.

 

 

One of the industry professionals that we have contacted is a representative of E. Gerber. It was this representative who stated that E. Gerber full-backs and half-backs are made of Archival Mat Board. Further, the representative stated that E. Gerber makes no claim that their full-backs or half-backs will absorb the residual acid that migrates from the pages of a comic book. The only claim that they make is that it will not contribute to the deterioration of a comic book.

And, again, Gerber doesn't need to make any claims as to acid absorption - that they state that the board has a "3% calcium carbonate buffer throughout, maintains a neutral pH" makes it a scientific fact that their backing board will help absorb the off-gassing that occurs when paper ages.

 

 

As noted in Mike's study, both the E. Gerber and BCW boards have a 3% buffer of calcium carbonate. Also noted in Mike's study is the fact that the 3% buffer of calcium carbonate is distributed throughout the board in the E. Gerber product, whereas the 3% buffer of calcium carbonate is concentrated in the form of a coating on the BCW product. Given that both products are made from wood pulp, how does the E. Gerber product absorb so much more residual acid that the change in the pH level is undetectable after 2 years of use?

Because, as EffEffBee said earlier, 3% of the total content of the Gerber board is calcium carbonate (and the rest of the board is an archival-safe mat board). The BCW board, on the other hand, is made from SBS and has merely a thin coating of calcium carbonate on just one side.

 

It blows my mind that somebody who's supposedly a representative of a company that manufactures comic book supplies could be so ignorant of the science behind the very items they sell.

 

 

It is not our intention to mislead our customers. We do not try to hide the fact that the board is solid bleached sulfate which is not suitable for long term storage of your comic books. This is why we recommend that you change your bags and boards every 3 to 5 years.

Quoted from your website:

"BCW offers a variety of different Acid Free Comic Backing Boards."

"Certified Acid Free - Independent Lab Tested."

"Buffered with 3% calcium carbonate."

 

That's not misleading?

[FFB]

Where do you get the notion that "archival mat board" impregnated with 3% calcium carbonate won't absorb acid migrating from a comic? It will absolutely absorb and neutralize acids from a comic book.

According to Mike's study there was no change in the pH level of the E. Gerber boards at all. Therefore, either Mike's data is incorrect, or the E. Gerber board does not absorb any acid even after 2 years of use.

 

Or....

 

 

You're incorrect. I repeat: the stronger the buffer, the less the pH changes upon addition/absorption of an acid.

 

I'm done here. As a good friend of mine likes to say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.

 

 

This horse doesn't want to drink, because it might cost him some business and make him look even dumber than he already does.

[BCW Supplies]

Because, as EffEffBee said earlier, 3% of the total content of the Gerber board is calcium carbonate (and the rest of the board is an archival-safe mat board). The BCW board, on the other hand, is made from SBS and has merely a thin coating of calcium carbonate on just one side.

Both the E. Gerber board and the BCW board are 3% calcium carbonate by weight and both are made from wood pulp. If we were to perform TAPPI T 435 on both products we suspect that the result would be a pH level between 7 and 8 for both (which is a hypothesis your preliminary data supports). Assuming that we are correct, and the results come back as we expect, what would your conclusion be at that point?