Tivi
by Warren McLaren, Sydney 
on 07.10.05
Treehugger fan, Kathleen F, writes a blog on sweat-shop free manufacturing practices (as an aside, go see her photo of a hydrogen and biodiesel powered Hummer Limo - we kid you not!) and came across this handbag, made from wood, of all things. The timber panels appear to be of Swedish birch, with a veneer of either zebra or ebony wood. No mention is made of any sustainability issues, regarding the forests from which the wood is sourced, but classy accessories, like this, are certainly a better use of timber resources than are disposable chopsticks or junk mail catalogs. The stainless steel hardwear components are machined in the States. The gussets are goat skin leather, which won’t endear them to some of our readers but at least the sewing and assembly is undertaken by workers on Tivi’s home soil. $280 USD. ::Tivi
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Green Glossary: Lyocell
- Cooking on a Budget: Use Everything
- Chipotle Goes Green, Plus Recipe for Hormone-Free Braised Pork with Chipotle Peppers
- Your Old Cutting Board = Perfect Country-esque Wall Art
- Mini Blinds are Boring—Craft Them into Chic Fabric Shades
- Green Glossary: Nature Deficit Disorder
Well, I know you don't like critique. But I really feel that this is an extreme stretch. A product that conveys an idea of greenness on account of its appearance is not by definition sustainable. This glosses over too many invisible costs. For example: tropicals like zebrawood and ebony don't quilify as green, even in veneer form; this goes beyond "the forests from which the wood is sourced". I speak from direct experience: tropical woods like these require huge amount of solvents to veneer them to the plywood substrate, and the epoxies are simply appalling. Never mind the fact that no one in their right mind would use such woods for disposable chopsticks, when the trees go to the highest international bidder to be made into luxury goods. If you want to emphasize the positive (besides the bags' obvious formal beauty), I'd pay more attention to the manufacturing practices you mention.
Thanks Dawn, Appreciate your considered comments.
Firstly, I'd like to clarify the notion of "Well, I know you don't like critique." I actually believe highly in critique as my friends would attest. As many readers have pointed out, it can if used adroitly, rightly question assumptions. My specific beef is against criticism being an end point. And being reactionary, without offering a better alternative. I guess I favour the principle of "judge me by what I do, not what I say."
Secondly, in this instance, I concur with your criticism. Rereading the post, I see that I neglected to expand on my comment "No mention is made of any sustainability issues, regarding the forests from which the wood is sourced, ..." I agree with you that if these timbers are tropical in origin, then it would be far from sustainable. However, there are many veneers these days which are from European managed plantations of tree species like Poplar. Such veneers are 'engineered' to have the appearance of many old growth and tropical species, reducing pressure on the real thing. Examples are exhibited here: http://www.newageveneers.com.au/gallery/gallery_frameset.htm
Such plantation grown timber is also used (regretably) for disposable products, the like of matchsticks and chopsticks.
Your call on the adhesives is a fair cop. This is true of many laminated timber products. But again the Europeans, particularly driven by the Germans, have very strict guidelines on formaldehyde content and emissions from engineered timber products. (And while soy based adhesives have been developed in the US, most of these are derived from genetically modified soy crop).
So, Yes, I should've expanded more on these points. I take your observations on the chin and thank you taking the time to make them.