Statistics have become suspect: Every time a new piece of research appears, there are cynics who looks to see which vested interest has paid for it. Just as, despite the tragic natural disasters of the last month, there are still those in denial over global warming ... that – as industry environmentalist Phil Lawrence told Australian SWUG members some years ago, there are and will be more and more extreme weather events in years to come. That said many have heeded the wake-up call, from the giant News Corporation – with its commitment to being carbon neutral by next year – to much smaller, family-owned businesses. In the graphic arts industry, one such is the South Australian printer which now calls itself Finsbury Green, where national environmental and technical manager Rodney Wade leads an initiative which is not only good citizenship, but also good marketing. Its impressive sustainability report for 2008 – replete with photographs of plant-festooned presses and computer terminals – is supported by seasonal newsletters. One such makes the case for print, debunking the myth that electronic media leaves less of an environmental footprint than printed material. It’s a theme which was supported by a presentation at last October’s Ifra conference in Amsterdam: Swedish researcher Asa Moberg reported on studies in conjunction with the Royal Institute of Technology and Swedish Newspaper Association which had found that there was little to choose between spending half an hour with internet newspapers and ‘consumption’ of a printed edition. There are assumptions here, of course: That 2.4 readers might share a 40-page printed copy, for example. Not only production stages, but also the impact of energy production and waste management were considered. And of course, if you cut the online use to ten minutes a day and consumption is greatly reduced ... as it is for an ‘e-paper’ tablet. Assuming assumptions about how it’s made (and of what) and how it is used, are correct. For a crack at your own personal assessment, try the carbon calculator developed by News Digital Media – itself already ‘carbon neutral’ following an offset of the 498 tonnes of its 2007 footprint by investments in wind farm energy projects in India – for its Australian parent (see www.1degree.com.au/carbon_calculator). News websites including the local www.1degree.com.au provide some transparency to the publishing and entertainment giant’s methodology ... the ‘control method’ of including all the emissions associated with businesses it directly controls, including directly-used fuel and power and the impact of business air travel. And as those who have heard News Limited environmental evangelist Tony Wilkins will know, the initiative extends to working with suppliers and educating its publishing audience. A nice touch is the preference, where available, for taxi operators with a fleet of Toyota Prius hybrids. The concept of global corporations working to ‘look good’ is not a new one, but whether you work for News ... or for Fairfax, APN or a much smaller publisher, there are lessons to be learned from their experience. One is that the routinely-accepted components of day-to-day business – such as energy and water consumption – are often where the biggest savings can be made. One example is that building design can contribute to reductions in the use of airconditioning (or its elimination, as it is doing at the GXpress office). At Fairfax Regional Printers near Newcastle, NSW, an early discovery was that small things – such as a flow-restricting washer in taps and toilets – could make a big difference. Wilkins’ presentations show that electricity use accounted for three-quarters of greenhouse gas-producing activities, with travel and transport another 20 per cent. Operations in Australia, incidentally, caused 28 per cent of the emissions, almost three times as much as in the UK, and rather more than half those in the USA. If we may have emphasised the importance of good practice in offices, washrooms and other building areas, it’s not to suggest that good practice in the pressroom is not critical. Almost every improvement in efficiency, productivity and waste reduction will have a favourable environmental impact. Guides from the Web Offset Champions Group and PrintCity emphasise the ‘four Rs’ of waste reduction: To redesign, reduce, reuse and recycle, as well as a focus on control and disposal. The aim is to “systematically conserve resources through redesign, reducing waste, reusing materials where practical, collecting and separating leftover materials for recycling”. Air and water emissions need to be controlled and any residues disposed of correctly. Redesigning processes can make them more resource and cost-efficient ... for example, CTP eliminates the use and processing of film; direct drives reduce energy consumption; and closed loop colour controls and automation can reduce makeready and running waste. Less material in and less waste out ... that’s the ‘reduce’ message: Continual attention to waste streams and processes can reduce emissions, energy use and waste. Says the WOCG report, “A waste reduction plan is an opportunity to improve overall business efficiency by reducing manufacturing and waste disposal costs without compromising quality. “Waste is not just solids and liquids that require disposal, it is also wasted time and costs.” Reuse what might otherwise be waste for further savings: “Identify waste materials that can be reused for another purpose to reduce purchase and disposal costs, or find ways of converting waste energy into reusable energy,” says the report. Recycle waste, treating it as a valuable secondary material (ink, plates, paper and plastics) to be transformed into other products that typically use less energy and resources than for products made from fresh materials. But the report warns that in some cases, the viability of recycling-to-reuse may be an issue if significant additional energy is needed. Resources that cannot be redesigned, reduced, reused or recycled should be disposed of responsibly and, preferably, in a sustainable way (biodegradable, or for non-fossil energy generation, for example). If all of this seems overwhelming or inaccessible, take the advice of FRP Beresfield plant manager Dave Davies to “go for the low-hanging fruit” ... to build enthusiasm for environmental projects by beginning with those which are easier to achieve. And remember, even small things can make a big difference. SOME SOURCES: Sometimes you need inspiration as much as perspiration, and we think if you browse the excellent Finsbury Green book – from which these illustrations are taken) you’ll agree. ‘You reap what you sow: 2008 Sustainability report’, Finsbury Green Practical sources for newspaper printers include the following: ‘Sustainability, energy & environment’, PrintCity 2008 ‘Energy Efficiency: Optimisation for web offset printers’ PrintCity 2008. ‘Ecologic: Economy through ecology,’ manroland2008 ‘Environmental considerations’, Web Offset Champions Group, 2005 Some web resources: www.printcity.de www.wocg.info www.newscorp.com/energy www.1degree.com.au www.finsbury.com.au