Life Cycle: All That's Fit to Print

Life Cycle is a series of posts on the extraordinary lives of everyday things.

Ah, the daily rag. Where coffee revives and cigarettes embolden, newspapers round out the holy breakfast trinity, infusing us with knowledge, blackening our fingertips as though they've touched the fires of wisdom.

(OK, it's just newsprint. But we journalists tend to get excited about it.)

Folks like you probably read the Gray Lady (and, of course, Lady HuffPo) on the Internet. Yet, more than 50 million newspapers hit stands and porches every morning in this country (double that in China).

If you're like Sarah, you get the scoop from web sources around the clock but continue a love affair with the printed word. (Simran sticks to the e-word not only because it's greener but because she's cheap and most e-news is free. By "greener" we don't mean impact-free.) To read the news is good, Sarah says, but to hold it in one's hands is divine. Over breakfast, on the train, at the coffee shop--the tactile newspaper experience is one that many would be remiss to give up.

(By now, you might realize here is where we insert some overwhelming, perhaps depressing information. One reader recently posted a comment to that effect, yearning for tips on how to lead a greener life. We hear you, man, but view our task as solidifying what, for most people, is a vague grip on the environmental domino effect of mass consumption and delineating a host of questions you can ask yourself in order to be a more conscious consumer).

So, newspaper subscriber, when she is delivered to your door, pick up your inky friend and ponder her amazing journey:

A tree falls. Many trees, really--200 million per year, just for newspapers. These aren't ancient rainforest trees but rather young, fast-growing woods, such as the eucalyptus pictured above, planted for the purpose of harvesting (often replacing native eco-systems).

The trees are transported to a paper mill for cleaning and pulping, a 150-year-old process involving heat and a lot of grinding. The pulp is washed, bleached and literally goes through the ringer. The resultant waste winds up in landfills or your local bodies of water. The entire process of refining trees into smooth, lightweight paper comes at a high energy cost and produces serious carbon dioxide emissions (that contribute to global climate change).

Finally, the paper is baled, transported and stored until a newspaper press covers it in black carbon ink.

The fair newspaper consumer then does or doesn't read the pages, and then does or doesn't recycle them.

Happily, the EPA reports that 88% of newspapers are recycled--a high-energy process (transporting, de-inking, re-bleaching, shredding, pulping) but certainly preferable to altogether junking them. Newspapers still comprise 6.3% (13.1 million tons, about a fifth of which is pesky ad inserts) of our solid waste, with paper products in general accounting for more than a third of our total waste stream.

According to the Environmental Defense's online "paper calculator," 2,600 Sunday papers (say, to supply a town of 10,000 where one in four residents reads the paper) taxes Planet Earth 16 trees, 54 million energy BTUs (enough to power your home for 6 months), 10,135 pounds of carbon emissions (a year's worth for most cars), 27,562 gallons of water and 3,434 pounds of solid waste.

Those numbers are assuming the paper has 50% recycled content, which is mandated or voluntarily adopted by about half of the country. Such state mandates, along with local recycling efforts, more eco-friendly ink resources, tougher (though inadequate) government standards on waste dumping and other efforts have made progress toward cleaning up the newspaper publishing biz. And the longtime downturn in circulation, while a conundrum for the industry, is good news for the environment.

So, what can be done at the personal level, aside from relying solely on web versions of your must-reads? A while back, Sarah decreased her newspaper delivery from daily to weekends-only--her employer gets a paper delivered, easily providing a weekday fix for the whole office. At home, she doesn't waver on recycling newspaper and makes sure to suspend delivery service when going out of town. Simran reads it online and borrows the hard copy from her neighbor when she needs a paper fix.

What about you? We'd love to know who here still "takes the paper."

Next up: Toilets, toilet paper and asses who love them.

This post was written by Sarah Smarsh and Simran Sethi. Thanks to the University of Kansas School of Journalism and Lacey Johnston for research assistance. Eucalyptus photo courtesy of Tony from Sydney.

Comments

[mamacat]

Hi Sarah,

you asked for some input? I used to love to read newspapers, with a cup of coffee, when I had the time. For 40 years or so I read the papers. Now, I just use the internet. I still read the NYT and LA Times, and German, Canadian, and Japanese (and sometimes others) online newspapers, but do not pay for them.

I do still get some magazines, as well as their online editions. Something about reading a journal with it in my hands that is more reassuring than only reading it online. Maybe it is a psychological thing, I do not know.

[mamacat]

My apology.

Hi Simran, not Sarah.

[alicel]

Oh lord. Maybe I'm just really old. But thinking about newspapers got me to thinking about books, and the fact that if we REALLY want to save paper, we should all just invest in a Kindle. I am an avid reader of the NYT and WashPo websites for "news as it happens." But honestly, I LOVE the rarified smell of newsprint with coffee. It is a completely different experience to take your laptop outside (you can steal your neighbor's hot connection to the internet!), and sit there squinting at the screen.

Simran and Sarah have a good point, though, about paper SHARING. There are a million places around any town-subways, libraries, coffee shops, hotel lobbies, etc.-where preread papers are easily accessible. Maybe when my 'scrip runs out.

But don't even think about asking us to give up toilet paper. What, are you nuts?

[smallball]

alicel,

I don't think Simran and Sarah are going to ask you to give up toilet paper- rather just switch to leaves :-)

As a parent of a 3 year old who is being potty trained, next post should be fun!

[Ajita]

I do spend hours in front of the computer feeding my news needs, so I wonder how it compares. I heard somewhere that the internet is one of the major causes of global warming because the servers need to be cooled (?). In any case, I can't get the same information from the MSM that I can online. Somehow 200 million trees doesn't seem too bad if they're not from old, diversity-rich forests, but the energy and environmental costs seem like such a waste.
Is there any good news at all? Like, drinking OJ is good for migrating birds, for example? TP next! I can think of a Vonnegut drawing in the book that would go well with it.

[Simran Sethi - Huffpost Blogger]

There is good news, Ajita. We are actually making smarter choices all the time. And some of them are super-easy (as the next post will reveal).

The energy question is an important one. Chris Anderson from Wired opines that the deadwood edition of his mag is actually "greener" because the carbon stays sequestered and breaks down slowly but, in truth, the devil is in the details.

After researching the inputs in a traditional newspaper (trees, inks, bleach, etc.) and the energy required to manufacture, ship, and recycle them, I still think e-news is the better option.

[smallball]

another very informative piece and more food for thought. We've seen so much advancement in energy efficiency in a number of products (electronics, home constructions, light bulbs, etc.) and this piece made me wonder what's better (greener) about the newspaper industry over the last century- is using more recycled content it?

I know hemp and I think bamboo can be alternatives to trees for various paper products and wondering what about that as an option instead of trees? I admit I don't know a lot about this but just wondering out-loud. Would the process of using these products be any better?

[Sarah Smarsh - Huffpost Blogger]

Smallball, industry progress beyond recycled content includes moving away from petroleum-based inks and greater regulation of waste disposal among paper mills. As for alternative paper-making materials, the plants kenaf and hemp are both excellent, proven contenders for achieving "tree-free" newsprint. Of course, shifting production methods would require the creation of new systems and infrastruc­tures--inv­estments that won't be made until demand for tree-free paper products increases. Thanks for reading!

[smallball]

Sarah,

Thank you for your informative reply! Now I have a more educated response or alternative solution when talking about paper production­s/newspape­rs.