![]() |
2009-06-09
, 21:16
|
Posts: 479 |
Thanked: 641 times |
Joined on Dec 2007
@ Switzerland
|
#2
|
let's say i use 100% post-consumer recycled paper notepads, so i'm not supporting deforestation. wouldn't the carbon footprint be lower for using real paper than using CPU cycles?
![]() |
2009-06-09
, 22:18
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#3
|
let's say i use 100% post-consumer recycled paper notepads, so i'm not supporting deforestation. wouldn't the carbon footprint be lower for using real paper than using CPU cycles?
![]() |
2009-06-09
, 23:14
|
|
Posts: 1,635 |
Thanked: 1,816 times |
Joined on Apr 2008
@ Manchester, England
|
#4
|
![]() |
2009-06-10
, 00:58
|
|
Posts: 698 |
Thanked: 129 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ CA
|
#5
|
![]() |
2009-06-10
, 01:04
|
|
Posts: 1,635 |
Thanked: 1,816 times |
Joined on Apr 2008
@ Manchester, England
|
#6
|
![]() |
2009-06-10
, 02:54
|
Posts: 99 |
Thanked: 63 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
|
#7
|
i mean, going paperless is all the rage these days, but i'm not sold....
let's say i use 100% post-consumer recycled paper notepads, so i'm not supporting deforestation. wouldn't the carbon footprint be lower for using real paper than using CPU cycles?