We have become accustomed to the traditional cleaning methods. To clean properly the material must be clean. Therefor mops and cloths must be washed. To control the amount of cleaning chemicals and save time for the cleaning staff the mops are prepared in advance in connection with the laundry. The handling cost is high and the washing process affects the environment. Transportation and handling will take considerable time to complete. We would rather not talk about the alternative to washing. It consists of a swab or mop that seldom or never will be washed. Instead they are soaked with large amounts of cleaning agents to mask odors. The cleaning effect is only for the eye and excessive moisture, loose dirt and bacteria is left behind. However, it requires no groundwork in the form of washing or pre-dampened mops. The mops are dampened at site in a relatively heavy, manual process.
Cleaning with unwashed material is not functional, but nevertheless an alternative when other solutions are too cumbersome and expensive. To wash the cleaning material after each use is considered rational and environmentally friendly because the cleaning material is re-used and despite that large amounts of polluted water is released in the washing process. Moreover, transports and worn out washing machines that actually in itself constitute a substantial waste will affect the environment.
Both of these solutions have been the rational answer to the conditions that existed. Cleaning methods have been what they have been simply because the technology set limits.
The disposables have, for sure, not worked as well as the traditional and heavier mops until now. Where environmental argument that the washing saves the environment has come from is more difficult to understand. Maybe it came because it sounds good, but nobody actually checked if it was true. The technology has set the limits and we have created a system that over time has become a truth. These truths often live longer than the underlying technology and often obscure visibility when new opportunities are opening up.
And now it has happened. New technology has given us new opportunities.
A mop no longer need to weigh 150 grams for cleaning. A feather-light mop can have the same ergonomic features as a 35 times more expensive mop. It is suddenly not only more gentle to the environment to use disposables. it is actually cheaper. Suddenly we have the opportunity to use cleaning chemicals in a rational way. Previously, we started to clean with a too damp mop to finish with an over dry. Now we can take into account where the cleaning liquid is really needed. ONEMOP is a full microfiber mop that costs less than the wash cost of a normal mop. The solution exists. It is up to us to take it to us.
The concept can be modified and adapted in many ways. If you want, you can actually wash ONEMOP thousands of times at 15 times lower cost / environmental impact than regular mops. In principle, you can use ONEMOP as a normal mop and wash it. It will save on materials, environment and costs. But you miss the big upside if you do not change the entire system.
Should we take full advantage of the concept ONEMOP the system shall be used in its entirety. Mops shall be distributed dry. The surface should be dampened where necessary. ONEMOP shall be energy recycled by incineration after use. No sorting, no transport from and to wash. No preservatives to maintain a pre-wetted material free of bacteria. No laundry. ONEMOP consumes 99% less water. Use only clean materials and make a clean performance.
To fulfill the circle disposable cloths should be used. ONEWIPE is based on the same patented construction as ONEMOP. The design gives the fabric a core of stability and volume in which the microfibers get maximum function and material consumption is minimized.
Water is a limited natural resource. Transport affects the environment in several ways. Even time can be considered a limited resource, at least in a human perspective.
Play with the idea that the current cleaning system was already one-off and that we recovered the material in the form of energy. Even the dirt was recycled into energy. A minimal transport, water and chemicals was consumed. Preparations went lightning fast. No costs for the handling and washing.
What could make us use more material, more water, more chemicals and more time without getting better results and without saving neither money and time? Why should we accept dirty materials and wet floors? Why would we build laundries and creating transport systems for holding pre-wetted materials damp? Surely material is also consumed in a disposable system, but if you include detergents, mops, peripherals and hard ware the washing system consume more. Would this trend feel alright?
The answer is as simple as it is difficult to absorb. Conditions have changed. We face new truths. We have new opportunities to increase efficiency and at the same time save on our resources. It is up to everyone to seize the opportunity. What will we say in five years? What is obvious then, but we have so desperately hard to realize today?