PDF

[Bob Sneidar]

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 at 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? ;)