Comments on: Questioning Conventional Wisdom on PCW Paper

By: Heidi Tolliver-Nigro

Heidi Tolliver-Nigro — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 22:26:35 +0000

Keith, I agree with your comment. However, the point here isn’t the use of recycled paper. It’s the importance of post-consumer (PCW) content vs. pre-consumer content. PCW is touted as more important, but the question we need to ask is why? Is it really greener? Or is it more important for other reasons?

By: Keith Bax

Keith Bax — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 21:32:59 +0000

The Energy Information Administration claims about a 40% reduction in energy when paper is recycled versus manufacturing new paper from virgin pulp. If you accept this as fact, and assume on average, that the energy required to move recycled products to market is about the same as it is to move virgin wood products to market, energy savings alone would seem to justify the recycling of paper.

By: David Elovich

David Elovich — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 20:43:44 +0000

The critical question is which process has the smaller carbon footprint?
I have read studies that show the manufacturing of 100% PCW recycled paper produces less carbon emissions than manufacturing virgin papers!
In fact, the Cascades Mill in Canada produces 100% recycled papers with 94% less carbon emissions than a North American competitor producing virgin paper.
A good resource with regards to this question is http://www.environmentalpaper.org

By: Sabine Lenz

Sabine Lenz — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:07:11 +0000

Very valid questions…
80% of the paper we (as in the end consumer) recycle is actually used in building materials, so does not go back into the paper making process.

On another note, pre-consumer waste also includes magazines that have been sitting on newsstands and did not sell. So, not necessarily less ink and glue…

By: Joe Rego

Joe Rego — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:00:45 +0000

I’ve been wondering lately if paper recycling makes that much environmental sense.
Since most paper mills are located near forests and not end users, you need to use fossil fuels to get the paper to the mill. Then there’s the sludge that results from the de-inking process.
If you are interested in “carbon capture,” well, cellulose is almost 45% carbon by weight–carbon which is removed from the atmosphere by photosynthesis. Also, young, growing trees remove more CO2 from the atmosphere than old growth forests.
So if we started burying or re-purposing paper instead of recycling it, we would increase demand for more forest land, which would be good for the environment, wouldn’t it?