
Printgreen Tiskajzeleno/Facebook
"Print, because it's green."
If you weren’t impressed by the Origami pot that grows with your plant, you’re bound to be inspired by this invention capable of producing living gardens.
Project PrintGREEN is transforming 3D printers into on-demand gardeners after it created what it called the world’s first “Green” 3D printer in 2013. (The “world’s first” label comes from press coverage at the time; My Modern Met describes it simply as a “green” 3D printer designed in 2013 by students at the University of Maribor in Slovenia (My Modern Met, 22 July 2015).) The innovation can produce living prints, customised objects in a variety of sizes and forms; the eco-friendly “ink” is a combination of soil, seeds and water that can be designed to print in any shape or letter.
The project was presented as capable of producing living prints by printing customized objects in a variety of sizes and forms.

Printgreen Tiskajzeleno/Facebook

Printgreen Tiskajzeleno/Facebook
PrintGREEN was created by students Maja Petek, Tina Zidanšek, Urška Skaza, Danica Rženičnik and Simon Tržan, with help from their mentor Dušan Zidar, at the University of Maribor in Slovenia. The team’s goal is to unite art, technology, and nature, creatively producing living designs with the help of technology.
The seed-bearing “ink” is a combination of soil, seeds, and water which can be designed to print in any shape or letter. Once the ink dries, the muddy mixture holds its form and begins to sprout grass from the organic material.

Printgreen Tiskajzeleno/Facebook

Printgreen Tiskajzeleno/Facebook
In addition, PrintGREEN is capable of printing along the z-axis to produce bowls and other sculptural shapes. While the objects don’t contain seeds in their structures, they do incorporate a top layer of grass to grow similar to a potted planter.

Printgreen Tiskajzeleno/Facebook

Printgreen Tiskajzeleno/Facebook
As ModernMet shares, the slogan of the unique project is a twist on the old conservationist motto, “think before you print.” Instead, they’re telling their audience to “print, because it is green.”

Printgreen Tiskajzeleno/Facebook

Printgreen Tiskajzeleno/Facebook
Check out PrintGREEN’s website here, and support their Facebook page here.
Comment your thoughts on this awesome innovation below, and be sure to share this article!
Source: True Activist
For a separate research example involving the fabrication of plant material, read Lab-Grown Plant Material: What MIT’s Research Achieved.
The printer places material; the seeds do the growing
PrintGREEN brings together two processes with different timescales. A machine arranges a seed-bearing growing medium into a designed pattern. Germination and growth then develop over time. It is more accurate to describe the result as a printed substrate that can support living growth than to suggest the machine instantly manufactures a finished lawn.
This distinction explains why the process images matter. A freshly deposited shape shows the material's behavior during fabrication. A later photograph shows how plants developed in or on that shape. To assess the result, keep the time between those photographs visible instead of treating them as interchangeable views of a finished object.
Two tests for a successful living design
The first question is whether the deposited material holds the intended form. The second is whether the chosen planting develops as intended. A crisp shape does not by itself demonstrate successful growth, and healthy growth can change the outline that initially looked so precise. The project's interest lies in allowing a living process to participate in the design rather than expecting it to remain visually frozen.
A useful demonstration would document the mixture, the pattern, the planting conditions and a sequence of dated images. That would make it easier to distinguish a repeatable result from a single attractive example. It would also show whether the object was intended to be a short-lived installation, a planter or something maintained over a longer period.
What “green” would need to describe
The presence of soil and plants gives the project a clear visual connection to nature, but environmental performance is a separate question. A comparison would need to define the alternative, include the materials and energy used, and consider maintenance and disposal. No such life-cycle comparison is established by the gallery alone.
The creative achievement can be appreciated on its own terms: software-directed deposition becomes a starting point for an organic pattern that changes afterward. That is a useful intersection of art and fabrication without requiring an unsupported claim that it is the world's first or that every version is environmentally superior to conventional planting.
More from the archive:
- 3D-Printed Housing: What a Rapid Build Claim Includes
- Aerial Seed Bombing: Planting Trees From the Air
- Everything You Think You Know About Animals Is Wrong
- Aerial Photos of Feedlots and the Environmental Cost of Meat
- Human–Animal Role Reversals in Ethical Cartoons
- 11 Thought-Provoking Images Show What Humans Are Really Doing to the Planet
- You Will Want To Recycle Everything After Seeing These Photos!
- New Zealand’s 2015 Law Recognising Animals as Sentient Beings
- Costa Rica’s 2012 Nationwide Ban on Sport Hunting
- Ecuador’s 2015 Tree-Planting Day Set a Guinness World Record
- Bolivia’s Law of Mother Earth: Legal Rights for Nature
- Jadav Payeng, the Man Who Planted a Forest in Assam by Hand
- A Film About Ocean Plastic and Seabirds
- Carlos Chavira’s Four-Minute Film About Awareness and Change
- A Short Environmental Film About Consumption and Its Consequences
- A Sperm Whale Stranded With Plastic in Its Stomach: A 2013 Warning
- Paradise or Oblivion: The Venus Project's Proposed Social Model

COMMENTS