This is inspired by a PR piece I read (online) about saving the planet with some eco-books: Dorling Kindersley turns back on gloss for green book range
These go under 'Better than nothing... but...'
Nice little bit of CSR PR , but 'a' range of 'a number of titles'.
Hmnn.
Any numbers on what % of total this is?
And, in devil's advocacy mode, what in the great scheme of things is the actual enviROI- impact of the usual non-ultra 'green' stock/ink, etc vs. the other stuff still involved, namely shipping, etc.
One presumes even non-recycled stock is from managed forests, etc. I have often wondered if these might not be argued as having a carbon sink value that in some way might equate to the processes involved in recycling.
My 'poser' is the last part. Though I am keen to find out more about the totality of the paper industry impact, and what's doing the most in terms of enviROI-, and what can be done to pump up the enviROI+.
I personally love reading paper bound in a form I can look at in my hands. I'd just liek to be sure that waht I do enage with is really that bad... or good.. as is bing made out.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I believe in freedom of speech. But I also don't like bullies on blogs, even verbal ones, as they can drive away those with something valid to say... or offer.
Subjective is fine, but well argued and substantiated is even better. Calm and polite tops. Anything that crosses my personal line will not go up. There may be reasons given, but not guaranteed.
I'm not too keen on 'Anon' as a handle (and the content usually explains why), so if that's what you opt for it may not make it. Sorry.