I was thinking about the statement that we rarely kill trees to read anymore, 
but I think that we do. Decent paper cannot be recycled paper, at least from 
the perspective of copiers and other printers in general. Pushing recycled 
paper through a copier can cause all kinds of problems from excessive dust to 
regular paper jams. Lots of trees are harvested JUST for producing paper, but 
these are usually from tree farms using trees that have a rapid growth cycle, 
and not old growth forests as used to be the case. 

Also, there is great resistance in the corporate market to paperless or nearly 
paperless workflows. We have customers that could vastly benefit from a 
document management system, but they simply don't want to. Even when we can 
demonstrate the benifits, faster location of documents you need, freed up space 
in the office, less wear and tear (and so lower costs) on copying and printing 
equipment and more, businesses are simply reticent to go paperless. It's not 
just a few offices, and I'm talking about health care, property management and 
real estate, legal offices etc. Not businesses we deal with just want something 
to hold in their hand. 

While we have made great strides in cutting back the usage of paper, I think 
that "rarely" may be overstating (or understating as it may be) your case. 

Bob S


> On May 14, 2018, at 09:24 , Richard Gaskin via use-livecode 
> <use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> 
> Bob Sneidar wrote:
> 
> >> On May 12, 2018, at 13:08 , Richard Gaskin wrote:
> >>
> >> But times have changed.  We rarely kill trees just to read anymore,
> >> so the bounds of a printed page are approaching meaninglessness.
> >
> > https://www.quora.com/How-much-trees-are-cut-down-for-paper
> >
> > You may need to think again.
> 
> Maybe, but I have to admit I'm missing the point there.  That's a discussion 
> of the tonnage of trees needed to produce a smaller tonnage of paper.  It 
> does not suggest the number of trees needed is zero, and doesn't address at 
> all the degree to which reading electronic media has displaced many 
> formerly-print-only venues.
> 
> Or are you saying you printed my post before reading it? ;)


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
      • Re: PDF Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
        • Re: PDF Mike Bonner via use-livecode
  • Re: PDF Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
    • Re: PDF Mike Bonner via use-livecode
    • Re: PDF Alex Tweedly via use-livecode
      • Re: PDF Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
        • Re: PDF Mark Waddingham via use-livecode
          • Re: PDF Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
    • Re: PDF Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
      • Re: PDF Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
        • Re: PDF Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
  • Re: PDF Dr. Hawkins via use-livecode
  • Re: PDF R.H. via use-livecode
    • Re: PDF Mike Bonner via use-livecode
      • Re: PDF Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
    • Re: PDF Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
    • Re: PDF Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
  • PDF R.H. via use-livecode
    • Re: PDF Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
      • RE: PDF Ralph DiMola via use-livecode
        • Re: PDF Richard Gaskin via use-livecode

Reply via email to