[dirkman (OP)]

Dirk.Slawinski asked the Naked Scientists:
   
Hi Chris,

A friendly hello from Perth.

I've got a Holiday related question for you.  In these digital times are eCards really as eco friendly as they are promoted.  They do not use paper and so save trees and do not incur a harvest and processing "cost".  They travel via "wire" and so do not impose an air fuel cost.  However, we do spend more time online looking for that perfect card, my last one took about 30 minutes of searching and that takes electricity [ref: the Google search QOTW].  Then there is the server and local storage and transmission time on routers, switches etc etc... These all take electricity, granted not much individually but taken as a whole does it work in favour of the eCard?

TTFN

Dirk  =:>

What do you think?

[CliffordK]

They may be "eco-friendly" if you consider the computer as not requiring extra power. 

But, you do end up giving your e-mail address, and your friend's e-mail address to companies that are "ad-supported".  [] Is that wise?  [xx(]

[dirkman (OP)]

They may be "eco-friendly" if you consider the computer as not requiring extra power. 

The same could be said for the air traffic, the planes fly regardless of your letter.

But, you do end up giving your e-mail address, and your friend's e-mail address to companies that are "ad-supported".  [] Is that wise?  [xx(]

<shrug> hard to say, but it is why many of us have several email addresses in community/social networking/etc sites/services so we can minimize that sort of eAdTraffic to our day to day emails.

- Dirk

[CliffordK]

But, you do end up giving your e-mail address, and your friend's e-mail address to companies that are "ad-supported".  [] Is that wise?  [xx(]

<shrug> hard to say, but it is why many of us have several email addresses in community/social networking/etc sites/services so we can minimize that sort of eAdTraffic to our day to day emails.

Absolutely...
But, I don't require my friends to use my "Junkmail" account.

And, while I might consider sending an "E-Card" from my junkmail account, it would likely go to a friend's "normal" account.

Wouldn't that be rude, hiding behind a spam catcher and exposing a friend to something that I wouldn't want. [^]

Now, I'm sure there are "Legit" E-Card companies.  Perhaps one should just test a few under custom account names.

[dirkman (OP)]

Wouldn't that be rude, hiding behind a spam catcher and exposing a friend to something that I wouldn't want. [^]

Now, I'm sure there are "Legit" E-Card companies.  Perhaps one should just test a few under custom account names.

of course, but then you do not need to use an e-card system, you could just make a nice picture in your favorite graphics software (or scan one in if you have a scanner) and email that to them as you would any other email.  However, the question I posed is still of energy cost regardless of the e-card source.  Is there a cost savings in using a digital card rather than a paper one?  If it takes me 30min to create or find a card to email to my folks in the US is the energy used less than that of a paper card being produced and then airmailed to the US from Western Australia.  On the surface it seems an e-card would use less but internet connectivity is a power hunger infrastructure.

[The Scientist]

Yes, it sure would be in some point. But it also does have its disadvantage if you take a look at another angle.