The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Life Sciences
  3. The Environment
  4. How does electronic publication compare with colour-printing in terms of environmental impact?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

How does electronic publication compare with colour-printing in terms of environmental impact?

  • 1 Replies
  • 6115 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline thedoc (OP)

  • Forum Admin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 510
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 21 times
How does electronic publication compare with colour-printing in terms of environmental impact?
« on: 15/12/2016 01:53:01 »
Thapelo Ramosana asked the Naked Scientists:
   
Hi, I would like to know the impact colour printed pages have on the environment, in temrs of the number of trees that would have to be chopped to create a book, e.g Looking at a 35 page double sided printed magazine, as compared to using electronic devises to transmit the same information contained in a magazine, newspaper, brochures, etc?
What do you think?
« Last Edit: 15/12/2016 01:53:01 by _system »
Logged
 



Offline evan_au

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • ********
  • 11033
  • Activity:
    8%
  • Thanked: 1486 times
Re: How does electronic publication compare with colour-printing in terms of environmental impact?
« Reply #1 on: 15/01/2017 09:14:11 »
There are a lot of variables here!
- If the glossy magazine ends up in landfill after looking at 50% of the pages, then it is fairly inefficient
- I have heard that a majority of digital photographs taken today are never looked at again. Printing them on glossy paper would be a total waste (as is taking them in the first place!)
- Of the few images that are viewed by other people on social media, digital distribution is more efficient than distributing a 35 page magazine to all the interested parties.
- However, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc consume lots of storage and electricity keeping all these rarely-accessed photos accessible within seconds from anywhere in the world.
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 1.836 seconds with 30 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.