I can’t agree more with Kenya Hara on this: ‘a situation in which we awake one day to find that what is active is not our senses but only software, is not some kind of science fiction tale; it’s already here, and it is prevalant’. Thus to agree that google is making us stupid as well as digital technology, so let’s hope that there is no end to print despite the pulping problem it causes. Why is there such a thing as freesheets (Stylist, Shortlist)? They only pollute our environment, they can easily exist as digital. I guess that’s same with free newspapers.
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
LCC MAGD GROUP V 
Where is the Kenya Hara quote from? If it’s from Designing Design I’m just curious to know the page 🙂
I don’t think people would download these free papers if they could. The point of freesheets is that they are free and easy to access. I can read them on the train or tube just because they are there and I’m bored but I rarely bring them home with me. These magazines exists entirely of the money they get from their ads and therefore I rarely find the content that good or interesting.
I’ve studied both printing technology, paper making, also from an environmental point of view, i.e. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and the impact a printed product (and especially paper) make on the environment is not that big at all. (Or at least so I’ve been told for the last three years, but then of course, the magazines have to be transported from paper mill to printer to various points of distribution. And maybe you don’t have the same “recycle thinking” as we have in Sweden where practically every newspaper is recycled.)
I think the making of an ipad is much more environmental unfriendly than the making of magazines and books.
I think that’s a really good point you are bringing up, I’ve been thinking quite a bit about the argument of traditional books vs. digital, and one of the main factors of course is the impact on the environment. Quite a few people have been arguing that books are not sustainable, but it makes me wonder whether this is actually the case when you consider ipads and kindles etc. A book is a one-off process, you buy a copy and read it as many times as you want without additional costs. Whereas with an ipad or kindle there is the initial cost of production, but then the cost of charging it, and wireless/3G purchases and so on. At the end of the day, how much of a kindle/ipad is actually recycleable or re-usable? And does this process perhaps cost more then it would for recycling a book even?
It would be really intersting if we could find some statistics on this.
I think what you say about Sweden, that every newspaper is recycled, is a valid point for people in other countries who complain that too many printed newspapers/magazines/books do not get recyled and therefore digital books are more environmentally friendly. In that case it’s a matter of implementing a proper recycling process for printed material. As you said, changing the ‘recycling thinking’ of the people.
There are no easy solution to environmental problems, and the kindle/ipad is not a magic solution. In fact it may end up taking a greater toll on the environment then traditional printed books, but in a different way. You may not be able to picture trees being chopped down but the costs are there.
I know I’ve seen some statistics somewhere before. I’ll try to find it again. Paper is mostly made from nature (and new trees are planted where the old ones were chopped down and the energy and water is also recycled as much as possible) and easy to recycle or dispose as burning it does not cause any dangerous smoke (I think).
Whereas screens may contain hazardous chemicals and are much harder to recycle or dispose.
And another thing that’s interesting is that paper (and other wooden products) contain/store CO2, i.e. having a lot of books or building a wooden house could cut down global warming. But when you burn it you’ll release the gas again… So it’s a pretty pointless fact I guess, but fun.