IT -v- Paper

Victor · 21-01-2002 10:37pm #1

So, one of the big things pushing computers is the creation of the 'paperless office' (or school or whatever). One of the stated advantagees is the benefit to the environment in reducing paper consumption. But is this reduction balanced by the use increase in enegy consumpion and the increase in non-reusable computer parts (although there are current efforts to increase the number of computer parts being re-used / re-cycled)?

azezil · 21-01-2002 11:12pm

Less paper -> less trees being cut down -> many benefits to environment, e.g. 1. Trees reduce level of CO2 in the atmosphere and produce Oxygen. 2. They provide shelter, food and habitats for flora and fauna.

Most computer parts are recyclable.

Investment in new technologies and sources of energy is ongoing, I don't have exact figures but I would imagine over a computers lifetime, say aprox 5 years alot of paper could be saved.

It'll take time and hopefully by then new and indeed more viable sources of renewable energy will be developed.

Typedef · 22-01-2002 1:18am

Deforestation is a massive issue and paper is one of the major forces that spurs deforestation. Deforestation undermines the very basis of biodiversity and thus the very base of human existance, thus human activity is itelf undermining itself. Humans need not give up modern convienance in order to coexist with the environment and the ebook is a perfect example of this. Think about it, if all of human text and pictorial media where transferred to the pc then the need for paper would dwindle and one of the major factors of deforestation would be placated to a massive degree. I get sort of annoyed when I open up a book and the paper is obviously not recycled why couldn't the book have been distrubuted over the net or on a cd ot at least printed on recycled paper? Right now some estimates put the total amount of lumber being cut down that goes to be used as paper at a quater, paper, my god, most of it is thown away, so that more trees can be cut down to make more paper, what's worse is that the majority of trees that are cut down to make paper simply stay cut down, electronic media and reforestation could play a major part in balancing out the damage that deforestation has done to the environment.

DadaKopf · 22-01-2002 2:17am

It's a very interesting predicament. The real problem is which is the best trade-off? Of course, the problem is strictly evironmental but implicitly it's an argument involving technologisation but more than that, the monster that is the myth of sustainable growth.

Paper demands that trees be cut town (this is fine in controlled forests but patently laws aren't observed) but paper-mills also require power to create paper. Potentially, reducing paper consumption reduces overall deforestation and energy consumption. The threat, of course, is that overall power consumption would increase because the original energy required to produce one product (paper) would be used to actually produce yet more power consumption.

Perhaps a more conscious attitude to paper would be better - it's a useful tool but greater recycling should be done and people should decide to waste less paper. This is a commitment particularly directed at offices.

However, the real problem facing us is largely economic. Sustainable growth theories are quite simply causing the rapid increase of consumption on all fronts but especially in the industrial, electronic and raw resourse recovery (moning etc.). The more 'growth' that occurs, the more pollution destroys our environment. The more 'growth' that occurs, the less resources are used conservatively, with due care. The only sustainable growth is paper.

Sure, reducing paper consumption in offices is desirable but we have to think of the bigger picture. I wouldn't be surprised if these paper-free offices are tricks invented by electronics firms! Xerox famously attempted the paper-free environment back in the 80s. The bigger picture is that the whole thing causes pollution and environmental destruction.

What we should be addressing, which this whole debate prompts, are ways that we can reduce over-consumption sensibly in a way that is in line with progression and development but ways that don't give a green card to the blind technological raping of the planet. Otherwise, we're already extinct.

Saruman · 28-01-2002 2:29pm

OK firstly why trees? There are many ways to make paper, trees are only a mid 20th century way to produce paper.. in fact up until the 1930's I believe trees were not use for paper! Hemp was.. know what I mean by that? Most obvious form is the cannabis plant, apparently an Chicago businessman got the patent for paper using trees and had cannabis made illegal under the guise of the drug aspect.

OK basically I do not support drugs, I dont even drink alcohol but you can grow industrial hemp.. it has no narcotic effect at all, you get a bigger buzz from coffee! Anyway fact is 4 acres of trees will produce the same amount of paper as 1 acre of hemp, trees take a LONG time to grow and hemp matures in 16 months or something and grows ANYWHERE in the world.. why use paper? who knows.. even though industrial hemp has no narcotic its still illegal in the US.. why??? hmm someone is getting rich and fat I think...

Victor · 28-01-2002 7:56pm

Not necessarily so. Most paper today is made from trees. All the machinery is geared for timber-made paper. It will take time to change. Also, changing directly to hemp merely reduces the waste in cycle (less land and timber resources are used for making the paper), it does not eradicate the waste in the cycle. you still need reduction, reuse and recycling. And seeing as the hemp and cannibis plants are the same species, you can't easily have one without the other.

Saruman · 29-01-2002 10:34am

I agree with what you say Victor.. personally I almost never use paper.. in fact im the sort who if someone wants to give me something like a 6 digit number or something like serial number of a PC or whatever and they dare to try and hand me a scrap of paper I will say "send me that in an email you muppet" or something along those lines.. basically I dont see the need for paper to be used and besides.. much easier to copy and paste from an email and attempt to read someone's handwriting..

though the but about not having one without the other.. well you can as industrial hemp has been available for years.. does not even need to be GM, the old fashion splicing works a treat.. though no doubt you could have a load of this stuff in a field and some muppets trying to smoke it even though its not narcotic!!

IT -v- Paper

Comments