American Polymath 7 - February 2010

Current Issue

Past Issues

Authors

Mission Statement and Submissions

Politics

Use More Paper

Clayton Trutor

American Polymath 7

You will be listening to Willie Nelson's rendition of "Always on My Mind" over a grubby old pair of headphones on your office computer. An email will pop up from a friend of yours on the other side of the continent. After you click onto the link your friend sent you to a measured, yet still clever editorial in the New York Times, you will scroll down to the bottom of the email, all while thinking wistfully of all the little things Willie should have said or done. Beneath the emailer's signature will be a suggestion that you "please consider the environment before printing this message," as if you are likely to print out this link to Frank Rich's column.

You will respond to this person in the form of an actual letter written on actual lined paper, folded twice and placed in a hand addressed envelope and delivered by the hard-working, though often maligned men and women of the United States Postal Service. You will press down hard on the page with the stubby number two pencil with an elementary school grip you found on the bus the other day.

Dear Environmentally Conscious Friend of Mine,

I admire your enthusiasm for protecting our planet's natural resources. This is one of the great challenges facing humanity during the twenty-first century. You are evidently taking the threat to our natural resources seriously and attempting to respond to it with decisive action in your everyday life.

Unfortunately, your crusade against paper is misguided. It is an example of the penny-wise, pound foolish mentality of many in the contemporary environmentalist movement. The war on paper does not make sense ecologically or economically, at least for regular folks. It amounts to a fashion statement, one which favors sleek, steely contemporary technologies like the laptop and the iPhone over the hardcopy of yore. Like several generations of Americans before you, you value efficiency above all else, its social consequences be damned. The moment a technology falls behind, you demonize it, you portray as dangerous. In the contemporary moment, you have transformed the use of paper into a threat to the very existence of our world.

If you haven't already balled this letter up and thrown it in the trashcan, let me take this opportunity to educate you on the wonders of paper, particularly when compared to the disastrous consequences of the computer's approaching monopoly on print culture. Computers and, by extension, the internet are remarkable tools for the communication and expression of ideas, but they should not be the only means by which education, business, and entertainment get carried on. Countless critics have pointed out the social and cultural consequences of the Golden Age of Computing, so I won't dwell on those concerns. I am concerned by the environmental and economic consequences of the replacement of paper with electronic documents.

Many environmentally conscious folks like yourself point to the environmental consequences of the overconsumption of paper, particularly deforestation. Thankfully, forests are a renewable resource. Trees grow. Responsible forest management, both in North America and abroad, can mitigate the consequences of deforestation. The recent track record on forest conservation in North America is quite strong. Public and private entities in North America, as well as the paper industry itself, have succeeded at preserving and renewing tens of millions of acres of forests across the continent over the past forty years. Compare this to the computer. How many renewable resources are being tapped in your average PC? The only renewable resource associated with a computer is the cardboard box it comes in.

If you are concerned about recycling, you should stick with paper. People have long understood the need to recycle paper rather than allowing it to pile up in landfills. Participation in home and office-based paper recycling programs is widespread across the country. Virtually every municipality in the United States offers either curbside pickup of recyclables or a recycling drop-off program Over the past twenty years, a broad consensus has emerged which recognizes the benefits of recycling paper.

Compare this to the track record on recycling computers. Programs for recycling computers are few and far between. Only a fraction of the 70 million personal computers sold since 1980 have been reused in any form, let alone disposed of properly. Every discarded computer contains a buffet of toxins all more harmful than the dyes in commercially sold paper. If people and institutions make the choices to rely more heavily on paper, to put less strain on their computers, and to avoid the temptation to switch computers every time a new and shinier product comes on the market, then we will surely be on track to reduce our collective ecological impact on the planet.

The ecological argument on behalf of paper usage, when compared to our ever-expanding reliance on computers, extends beyond the issue of recycling. Millions of tons of greenhouse gases are produced annually by individuals and businesses who leave their computers and monitors on even when they are not in use. I've yet to see an office where the majority of employees actually go to the minor inconvenience of turning off their computers in full at the end of each day.

The transportation of personal computers and laptops from their primary manufacturing sites in China, Malaysia, and Taiwan deepens the carbon footprint of a technology lauded as an eco-friendly alternative to cutting down more trees. Our computers are being produced in nations not exactly known for their strict environmental standards on industry. Say what you will about the United States' unwillingness to ratify the Kyoto Protocol or the ability of American corporations to manipulate both lawmakers and regulators on environmental issues, but I'll take the standards and enforcement of our environmental policies over those of China any day.

The mere fact that paper is a domestic industry while the vast majority of personal computers are manufactured abroad makes the environmental, not to mention economic, impetus to use more paper and fewer computers all the more pressing. The fossil fuels consumed in the shipping of computers across the ocean add an extra layer of environmental degradation to the process.

More than one million Americans rely on the paper industry for their employment. These good paying jobs in extraction, manufacturing, shipping, printing, and recycling account for only a portion of the paper industry's financial impact. Clerical workers, postal employees, and warehouse laborers rely on paper for their continued employment. While many in the aforementioned fields have engaged in high-tech training to make themselves more competitive in an ever-automating corporate environment, computers have rendered these workers increasingly expendable with each passing year. Computers have worked like a magic wand for America's perpetually downsizing, outsourcing corporations. Tasks which one employed fifteen full-time clerical workers in an office building now require the efforts of one tech savvy temp who may as well live halfway around the world.

Give your computer some rest. It will be there when you need it. Try using more paper in your daily life. Quit going paperless with your phone bill, light bill, bank statement, and credit card payment. Send someone a postcard instead of an email. Handwrite one letter a week instead of a long email. Instead of emailing me another Frank Rich column, buy a newspaper, cut his next column out, and mail it to me. Get on as many junk mail lists as you can. Think of all the jobs junk mail creates. I know you'll recycle all their catalogs and fliers. Just try to use more paper.

Sincerely,

Clayton Trutor

***
Clayton Trutor is the Editor-in-Chief of American Polymath.


* * *
Your comments on this piece or any others in American Polymath can be emailed to:
americanpolymath@gmail.com.


Copyrights reserved to the respective authors