This article is part of the Verdigris series of stories about understanding the environmental impact of print. The Verdigris project is supported by founder members Agfa Graphics, Canon Europe, Digital Dots, drupa, HP, Kodak, Ricoh and Unity Publishing, and associate members EFI, Pragati, and Xeikon.

This is the second volume of Verdigris's look at some of the misconceptions and myths of going green. Developing an environmental strategy for a printing business is really no different to developing one for any other kind of business. However, the printing industry has been particularly vilified by some lobbyists, with the result that many misconceptions and myths abound in the industry. We have addressed the misconceptions in part one of this article and here we take a look at some of the myths.

Paper is made from a sustainable and commercially

viable crop, and it is unquestionably green

Myth 1: Recycling is good

Recycling media, silver and aluminium is generally recognised as a good thing. But there are some studies that have shown that the environmental impact of paper recycling processes may not be altogether positive. Consider, for instance, the collection of polluted waste which must then be discarded. We believe that recycling is definitely a good thing, but it must be managed effectively.

Myth 2: Recycling is bad

This is, of course, a nonsense for materials that can be reused such as the aluminium in plates. The reuse of aluminium means a reduction in the amount of bauxite that must be mined and processed into aluminium. Recycling old aluminium requires only 5 percent of the energy required to produce new aluminium. Aluminium is one of the few infinitely recyclable materials because its quality doesn't degrade with reuse.

When it comes to paper, however, it may not be such nonsense, depending on the processes involved. Paper and its production are part of the planet's carbon sequestration processes, so there are some who would argue that recycled papers sequester no new carbon, which makes virgin fibre a preferable choice. This is one myth that is not easy to understand or dispel, but it is certainly worth considering particularly in regions where methane is captured from landfill and reused as a fuel. In Malm?, Sweden, for example, the city's buses run on natural gas processed from methane captured from landfill waste sites.

Myth 3: Print on paper is more harmful to the environment than digital media

The argument that digital media have less impact than print is not easy to disprove, however there are a number of isolated studies that have compared the impacts of electronic and print media. There are difficulties with proving the question either way. For instance, how are emissions allocated in a media supply chain, or how long is the media kept. Books stay on the shelves for decades, quietly but effectively storing carbon and having no negative environmental impact unless they are read using artificial light. An e-book on the other hand requires a digital infrastructure to support and access it, plus upgrades to the technology required to deliver and use it.

But how do we compare production scenarios for the two alternatives? This is one of the goals for ISO 16759 (calculating the carbon footprint of print media products), which is currently under development. Conducting a carbon footprinting study is complex and requires a standard framework, in order to produce studies that can be reasonably compared. This framework is what ISO 16759 seeks to provide. However, with comparable frameworks it should be possible to use carbon calculators compliant with ISO 16769 to compare the carbon footprint of different media across geographies and market sectors. This includes electronic and paper-based media.

Myth 4: Paper and print destroys trees

For every tree harvested for paper in Europe, three are planted. Paper is made from a sustainable and commercially viable crop. Forests and plantations capture carbon and provide amenities that benefit wildlife and local citizens.

When it comes to environmental impact reductions in manufacturing, the pulp and paper industries have lead the rest of industry because their raw material is a harvested crop that can also be recycled. They have made tremendous improvements over the last couple of decades. Waste has been considerably reduced and recycling is commonplace. The industry has consolidated to become far more energy efficient. This has mainly been in response to market pressure, however, the gains are tangible. UPM-Kymmene, for instance, has published an annual environmental report, plus individual environmental reports for each of its mills, since 2007. Details are verified by EMAS auditors.

Click here to read volume two, part two.