UKC

A first in the history of indoor climbing, ArtLine is marketing recyclable and recycled holds!



A green sport, but a dirty industry

Indoor climbing has its roots in nature, and this is reflected in the ecological awareness of even the most urban climbers. Despite this, climbing holds are...

Read more

In reply to UKC Gear:

Suprised this has gone under the UKC radar.. didn’t realize all the plastic climbing holds we are currently climbing on aren’t recyclable!
 

Kudos to these guys for tackling the problem 

In reply to Garethza:

It is a bit of a green wash selling point though. Holds last a long time, thousands of uses. Translate the km driven per hold figure into km driven per use and it might be more realistic.

How much energy is required to reprocess each hold?

Will the company still be around in 25 years when the first batch are ready for reprocessing?

For really green holds, drill stones or use wood.

In reply to UKC Gear:

I read this as:

GEAR NEWS: Shaped To Be Recycled By Airline Holds

I thought it would be about baggage handlers damaging climbing gear.

In reply to Ennerdaleblonde:

There’s a statement on sustainability on the Beastmaker site: https://www.beastmaker.co.uk/pages/sustainability

In reply to Ennerdaleblonde:

Why so cynical!? Jeez, someone comes along with an attempt to changes things just a little bit for the better.

Doesn't matter if you calculate km per hold or km per use,  it just scales the metric differently. However, the former is very easy and transparent to calculate, whereas the latter is almost impossible.

PU holds don't last more than a handful of years (these guys claim 1-2 years), so not sure why you're assuming they'll be waiting 25 years for the the first batch.

In reply to paul_in_cumbria:

That is much better, hats off to beastmaker. If only I could hang on to their holds.

In reply to salad fingers:

I am sceptical that this makes things better. My 25yr assumption comes from the Kendal wall cast off on my board, some from the original mid 90s routes still going strong. 

A 25yr+ commercial life, followed by the same in private use Vs a 1 to 2 year reprocessed life. It is pretty obvious which is greener.

But, yeah, put a green sticker on it and mark the price up. It's the modern way. All the cool kids are doing it.

A cynic is what an idealist calls a realist.

In reply to Ennerdaleblonde:

I also have some mid-90s holds going strong on my board, but they are not PU holds, nor will yours be, so you're not comparing like with like. And how many home boards do you think the world would need to hoover up the old cast-offs from commercial facilities?

Sorry, you don't really come up with any sound reasoning. Obviously, there is some greenwashing out there, but it's a matter of fact that the many outdoor manufacturers are improving their performance and, whether you like it or not, telling us about it, but that's not greenwashing.

I really don't understand why you have to be so negative about things getting better. Not perfect, but better.

In reply to salad fingers:

This is negative improvement though (good political speak there).

Manufacture of holds generates a product and effluents. Assuming a 25 yr life (which we can both evidence) for PE holds, this compares with 12 life cycles of PU holds (at best) with associated energy costs, effluents and transport costs, holds are heavy things.

A simple cost/benefit analysis shows which is greenest.

Sometimes recycling is the preferred option, aluminium and paper for example, other times it is not, glass and climbing holds.

In reply to Ennerdaleblonde:

I gave away a load of resin holds from the ‘90s when I sold my previous house, not knowing if I would have space for a home wall in the new one. They were 25 years plus old, and still in good order. I’ve been picking up some plastic holds again, but mostly it’s wooden holds which I’ve had for quite a while. That Beastmaker 100 has seen some action, and a few house moves. Just needs new mounting holes drilling in it and it’s fine!

In reply to paul_in_cumbria:

Nice, good work.

Where in Cumbria are you? PM me if you wish to try wall swapping sometime.

No car keys or pampas grass involved.

In reply to Ennerdaleblonde:

You're kind of missing the point here. I agree that there's a discussion to be had about the relative merits of different kinds of holds, although your comparison is beyond simple. However, this new product is a different kind of PU hold, so the comparison needs to be between this product and the other PU holds on the market, and in this way it appears to be superior, at least by some measures.

I think we probably agree that longer lasting products and/or more natural materials would be preferable, but, whether you like it or not, there is a huge market for PU holds.

In reply to salad fingers:

I don't think I am, PU is the wrong material and recycling it is the wrong methodology. It is being claimed as an advertising strategy, it is far from green.

In reply to UKC Gear:

Great concept to finally start to produce holds from recycled materials. The execution though...

There doesn't seem to be any financial incentive to buy these over "ordinary" PU or PE holds, nor any kind of refund or money off scheme for returning them (think Germany's Pfand system). It would be more cost effective and possibly more environmentally friendly to have old holds retextured, such as Contact and others are doing, to extend their life (functionally indefinitely). I've personally seen PU holds exceed 5 years, albeit a bit more slippery than brand new, and then get a whole new lease of life with a single retexture.

In reply to Ennerdaleblonde:

The car key reference I get, but am flummoxed by pampas grass??

In reply to Olaf Prot:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2017/may/31/pampas-grass...

In reply to FactorXXX:

Ah, I see...that would explain Mrs Prot's numerous trips to the garden centre and subsequent stream of frankly dubious callers...

In reply to UKC Gear:

Wading in here because I think it's an interesting subject! I've chatted to Dan from Beastmaker about this in the past - regardless of whether you think a hold should be used for 25 years, currently they are not and large volumes of climbing holds and volumes from commercial walls are making it into landfill at an unfortunate pace.

The folks at Beastmaker have been experimenting with sealing wooden holds so that they can be properly washed without ruining the wood - I am not aware as to the status of these experiments, if I recall, the bolt hole or screw holes was the consistent point of failure.

I'm also not sure that Ghold hold sole claim to the 'first recycled holds' thing as Greenholds (https://www.greenholds.eu/) have been doing it at least for a while. Honourable mention to Contact Holds who have been offering a retexturing service for macros for a few years as well. At the ABC conference in 2022 they had this neat offering where climbing wall owners could bring in a macro or hold and they'd fix it up brand new by the next day of the conference. There are different challenges between PU, fiberglass, wood, polyester, and the 'modern style' of setting has moved away from more hard wearing polyester holds to larger more eye-catching PU and fiberglass creations which generally last much less.

I guess I'd draw a comparison to resoling shoes. Some people still climb in shoes they first wore 25 years ago and don't care they're tatty, they do the job. Others burn through pairs quickly and will always be going for the next shiny new thing. Others just want a pair that does the job well and are happy to save some cash and some carbon on a resole job.

This kind of innovation, while not directly relevant to walls and woody lovers (myself included) who are happy to climb on the same holds for years and years, it does meet the needs of the market as things currently stands. There may be room for a broader discussion on whether the trend of constant resets and inflow of new holds can be met in other ways (hold rotation between centres? I saw that 'no tex' holds are in the comp circuit now, maybe we can embrace the polish..?).

I've spoken to other NGBs about their issues with waste and while we're relatively lucky by some standards (a not-to-be-named elite sports organisation told me they shredded hundreds of thousands of pieces of sport clothing at all participation levels due to a change of sponsor, as a contractual obligation), I think it's cool that people are racking their brains to solve these problems or at least partially address them!

In reply to tomlloyd:

Great point on incentives. I suppose the benefit to a wall for buying them would be the PR boost of being seen by your generally very environmentally conscious (despite our globe trotting habits) community. Lots of walls are developing and publicly sharing sustainability strategies now, too. The Castle down in London leading the way.

In reply to Olaf Prot:

Assuming that you're Mr Prot, then I'm surprised that Mrs Prot didn't at least let you watch and/or perhaps allow you to see the videos & photos, etc.
Are you sure she hadn't also visited B&Q and bought a red bulb?