SUNY – College of Environmental Science and Forestry recently joined Two Sides as an Allied Organization.  So when we found out that the Papyrus Club at SUNY-ESF and the Syracuse Pulp and Paper Foundation were designing and producing T-shirts to promote the great environmental story of paper products, Two Sides was happy to help.

We provided a small grant to help with the initiative and also sent some facts and information for consideration to print on the T-Shirts.  The end result was this:

Front of T-shirt

Back of T-shirt

renewable

• Paper comes from trees; one of our most renewable resources.
• The paper industry helps curb the loss of private forestland to development by providing landowners with an income-producing alternative.
• In the United States, we grow more trees than we harvest.  The amount of forestland has remained essentially the same – 750 million acres – over the last 100 years.

recyclable

• In 2012, over 65% of the paper produced in the U.S. in 2012 was recovered for recycling.
• Paper is more recycled than any other commodity including plastics (8%), glass (27%) and aluminum (50%).
• For every ton of paper recycled, 3.3 cubic yards of landfill space is saved.

 remarkable

• Energy generated and consumed in US paper production comes from renewable, carbon-neutral biomass.
• Paper continues to store carbon throughout its lifetime and has a low carbon footprint.
• The forest products industry leads all other manufacturing sectors in onsite electricity generation, meeting more than half of its own energy needs.
• The print and paper industry accounts for only 1.1% of global carbon dioxide emissions; while the electronic communications sector accounts for over 2%, and this is expected to double by 2020.

Students at SUNY-ESF proudly wearing their new “choose paper” T-shirts

Who knows how to inspire us on paper more than National Geographic magazine?  With gorgeous photography and compelling articles, Nat Geo brings the earth’s natural wonders and most fascinating people into lives with the turn of a page. 

On the world beat page in the June issue of the magazine, you’ll also see the ad shown below – another in Two Sides’ No Wonder You Love Paper ad campaign (click here for our recent press release). The campaign was created to reinforce printed magazines and newspapers as an appealing and sustainable way to read, so we’re especially excited to be featured in National Geographic, whose commitment to sustainability is known worldwide.

Be on the lookout for more ads in the coming months, and don’t forget to check out the No Wonder You Love Paper website.  It’s filled with fun activities and great information on the sustainability of print on paper, and it has a downloadable Paper Myths and Facts brochure you can share with your family and friends.

 Throughout the coming year, Two Sides will continue to seek free advertising space in U.S. newspapers and magazines. Any publication interested in donating ad space should contact Phil Riebel at pnr@twosides.info or (855) 896-7433 (toll free).

Two Sides ad

June 2013 National Geographic Cover

World Beat page showing Two Sides ad at bottom

When it comes to the environment, one great American success story that’s often overlooked is the dramatic increase in paper recycling over the last two decades. As awareness of paper recycling has grown and a sound, market-driven recovery and recycling infrastructure has evolved, the amount of paper recovered annually for recycling has increased 75% since 1990!   There’s no better example of how consumer education and public-private collaboration can lead to true environmental improvement.  Not only are we continuing to extend the use of a valuable natural resource – wood fiber from sustainably managed forests – but we’re also sending 50% less paper to landfills.

Think about this:  In 2012, more than 51 million tons of paper products were voluntarily recovered for recycling in the U.S. – that’s 65.1% of all paper produced.  Break that down into a number we can relate to individually and you get roughly 323 pounds recycled for every man, woman and child in the country.   When you consider that one ream of 8.5” x 11” office paper weighs about 5 pounds … well, you get the picture.

In fact, paper is leading the way when it comes to recycling.  According to the latest statistics from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, paper-based products are recycled more than any other commodity in the United States, including steel at 33.8%, glass at 27.1%, aluminum at 19.9% and plastics at 8.2%.

But that doesn’t mean we can’t do better.  The paper industry has set a new goal to recover more than 70% of all U.S. paper produced by 2020.  While the industry can provide resources and promote paper recycling, it’s up to the rest of us – communities, businesses and individuals – to make it happen.   For inspiration, check out the stories behind the winners of the American Forest & Paper Association’s 2013 Paper Recycling Awards:

Business Leadership Award Winner – Edwards Brothers Malloy

Community Award Winner – City of Guntersville, Alabama

School Award Winner – Bishop Watterson High School, Columbus, Ohio

Remember, every magazine, newspaper, catalog or piece of paper you throw away is a resource wasted.  If you don’t already recycle, get in the habit!   And if your community, company, school or other organization doesn’t have a paper recycling program in place, don’t ask why … ask why not!

For recycling program guides, statistics and other helpful information, visit the Recycling Resources page at www.paperrecycles.org

Kathi Rowzie is a Two Sides guest blogger and a sustainability communications consultant with The Gagliardi Group in Memphis, Tennessee.

Dear Blog Followers,

This matter has been addressed and is no longer an issue.  Thank you all for your support and attention.

If you’re interested in what research has to say about the value of paper, don’t miss this just-released report from the American Forest & Paper Association.  It provides a terrific review of studies, reports and scholarly articles that show how paper enriches and improves many dimensions of our lives. 

Even as the demographic scale tips toward the new generation of digital natives, paper remains an important and essential component of multichannel communication.

Paper informs, creates a permanent record of milestones in life, provides secure documentation, reaches customers and offers a sustainable communication option that no other medium can match. 

While the coexistence paper and digital communications continues to evolve, the reasons for choosing paper are as strong as ever … paper offers value that just can’t be beat!

You can download Documenting the Value of Paper: Literature Review here.

]]> http://twosidesus.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/documenting-the-value-of-paper/feed/ 0 twosidesus vluaepaper http://twosidesus.wordpress.com/2013/04/29/two-sides-no-wonder-you-love-paper-ad-runs-in-inc/ http://twosidesus.wordpress.com/2013/04/29/two-sides-no-wonder-you-love-paper-ad-runs-in-inc/#comments Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:25:31 +0000 Two Sides U.S. http://twosidesus.wordpress.com/?p=723 ]]> What better way to emphasize the value of print and paper?  Advertise in a popular digital magazine!

This also reinforces our Two Sides position that print and digital media can co-exist and have many synergies.

Inc. magazine’s digital edition recently featured this ad – one of several designed for the Two Sides No Wonder You Love Paper ad campaign.  Created to reinforce printed magazines and newspapers as an appealing and sustainable way to read, the ads feature people enjoying magazines for education, business, play and relaxation in their daily lives.

The campaign also features a companion consumer website, http://www.youlovepaper.info/US/ with fun activities like the Environmental Guru Quiz and a video contest.  There’s also a downloadable Paper Myths and Facts brochure and a short, animated video on U.S. forest and paper facts.

Two Sides is seeking free advertising space in U.S. newspapers and magazines to appear over the next year, so be on the lookout for more to come!  Any publication interested in donating ad space should contact Phil Riebel at pnr@twosides.us or (855) 896-7433 (toll free).

I am ticked off at my bank, utilities and telecom providers for saying “go green – go paperless.”

I’ve had it with my bank and all the other companies that are bashing paper products to promote electronic billing, statements and other e-services.  Yes…I’ve finally lost it.

I have decided to be diplomatic and not name you…but we all know who you are.

To my bank and other providers out there who are doing this:

You are damaging my livelihood and you are misleading people with greenwashing so that you can cut costs.  Please be honest.

I am your customer and I have spent the last 25 years of my life working in the forest and paper industry.  This industry has allowed me to lead a good life, raise a great family together with my wife, and provide a good education for my children.

My youngest son standing on a beaver dam on our forest property. This was taken during a weekend adventure several years ago. He’s 17 now and graduating from high school in a few months.

I buy your products and services: banking services, cell phones, TV services, electric and water services.  I spend my money to make you more profitable – money that comes from the pulp and paper industry.

Not only are the green claims making me upset, it makes many of your other customers upset as well.  In fact, millions of them.

It may come as a surprise to you but 8.4 million Americans make a living in the print, paper and mail value chain that generates 1.3 trillion in revenues (EMA 2012 Job Study).  I bet you’re getting a lot of this money in your coffers.

About 10 million Americans own private forestland (US Forest Service) and many of them rely on the income from their properties to make a living (ex: lumber for construction and pulp used for papermaking – yes PAPER).

I am one of those forest owners.  My family owns 200 acres of woodlands and we manage it responsibly for economic and recreational benefits as well as biodiversity.

How do you think I and the millions of other family forest owners feel about your “save a tree” claims?  I think they are very misleading because I believe we are the ones saving forests for the long-term by managing them responsibly and making sure our society can benefit from forest products (like paper) that are highly renewable, highly recyclable and store carbon for their useful life.  These inherent environmental features make paper quite a sustainable product compared to all the other things that surround us, including electronics.

Most of us are well aware of the massive infrastructure and environmental impacts of electronic media that you forget to mention in your green claims.

All products and services have pros and cons.  To bash one product in favor of another is an easy game to play when you have no verifiable facts or evidence that consider all the economic, social and environmental benefits of our forest resource and products like paper.  I believe your green claims fall short of many rules and guidelines for environmental marketing.

Paper and electronic can happily co-exist and I need both…so do most other people I know.  I use e-billing and on-line banking regularly, but I need a paper copy to remind me to pay the bills.  I also keep the paper copy, or print the e-statements for accounting and record-keeping.  It’s more secure and won’t get lost.

All my paper gets printed on both sides and gets recycled.  I also buy paper that has been made with fiber from forests certified to the Forest Stewardship Council or the Sustainable Forestry Initiative.

Paper is far from being a “bad” product as your marketing suggests.  I believe that the majority of people see paper as a sustainable way to communicate as long as it is produced and used responsibly, including recycling it.

It’s time to gather your marketing team in a room and tell them to stop greenwashing the millions of people who earn a living from the print, paper, mail and forestry value chain.  Please focus your message on the true benefits of e-media: speed, convenience and maybe a few others.

Remember…we are your customers and most of us care about the environment just as much as you do.

Now it’s time for me to shut down my computer and cell phone for the day and go for a walk in the forest.  Happy Earth Day!

Phil Riebel
Family Forest Owner and Proud Paper Supporter

Background

Shortly after its beginnings in 2008, Two Sides launched a campaign in the UK to challenge negative environmental claims about print and paper being made by many companies in order to promote electronic statements (ex: e-billing).  You’ve all seen them: Go green – Go paperless.  Save trees.

Two Sides made this a focused initiative with a strategic approach to get the claims removed or changed.  The reasoning behind this is:

• The “go green – go paperless” message is damaging to the print, paper and mail value chain and millions of jobs rely on this value chain.
• Print on paper has unique environmental features that many other products and materials do not.
• The “saving trees” and “go- green” messages create a false impression that forests and trees are a finite resource that is being lost instead of a renewable resource being replenished based on sustainable forest management practices.
• Corporations must follow best practices for environmental marketing.  Claims should be based on sound and peer-reviewed scientific evidence (ex: CSR Europe guidelines, UK CAP, US FTC Green Guides and ISO14021)
• The full impact of switching to e-media are often not properly considered and sometimes ignored.
• The life cycle of e-statements is not paperless because many people print e-statements at home or at the office for record-keeping and other uses.

Although the process was time-demanding and required many discussions and exchanges, our success was more than what we had expected.  In total, 80% of the companies (27 out of 34) we engaged changed or removed their anti-paper claims, including several large corporations.

In July 2010, we launched the same campaign in the US with a strategic approach and focus to engage the top banks, utilities and telecoms that are currently using similar environmental claims.  We looked at over 100 companies and discovered that half of them are using misleading claims.  We are now systematically addressing these.  The “list” is growing weekly and our database now includes about 250 companies in many different sectors.

Thanks to all of you who have been sending us claims of concern.  If you see one, just email it to us at inquiries@twosides.us

Our goal is an 80% success rate in getting claims changed or removed.

We are collaborating  with some member companies as well as with the AF&PA in this initiative to avoid duplication of efforts and discuss how we can best address the numerous claims being made.  The PrintMediaCentr has been very supportive in spreading the message.  PIA and PIASC have also greatly supported the cause by sometimes issuing their own letters and press releases to draw attention to this issue.

 Progress to Date

Our current success rate is only 13%…but the night is young!

First, we would like to thank to the companies who have taken the time to listen to us, those that are currently working with us, and those that have corrected their claims.

We are now in the process of sending a second letter to companies who have not responded and to those who have decided to keep their existing environmental claims.  The letter lists specific actions that Two Sides will take in the near future to draw attention to these companies.

Our view is that misleading environmental claims about print and paper products require a strong response due to the potential damage to the paper, print, publishing and mail value chain which supports 8.4 million U.S. jobs and generates $1.139 trillion in sales revenue (1).

Phil Riebel
President and COO
Two Sides US, Inc.

I would add: “it depends on the situation”.  I say this because generalizing the benefits of recycled fiber use can be misleading due to the many environmental and economic factors at play in the life cycle of paper products.  In other words, wood-based paper grades can be equally or more sustainable if they are being produced responsibly.

We do need to talk about sustainability in this case because buying paper to make printed products involves both economic and environmental considerations. (1)

Recovering and recycling paper products is a good thing.  It reduces waste to landfill and extends the use of a valuable raw material.  In turn, recovered paper should be re-used as a raw material in products in the most sustainable way possible.  That may or may not include high-end printing papers (ex: catalogs and magazines).

There are industry arguments on both sides of the coin.  There are many who say that one of the most sustainable ways to use recovered paper is in lower quality grades of paper (ex: carton board, paperboard) where less processing and no de-inking is needed.  This typically also means less cost and less environmental concerns.  Others point out that high quality recovered paper (if available) should be re-used to make printing papers due to its high content of long (Kraft) fibers.  In either situation, the right conditions must be in place to make it environmentally and economically sustainable.

The environmental footprint of a grade of printing paper depends entirely on its specific life cycle (forestry practices, environmental performance of pulp and paper mills and suppliers, transportation, etc.).  In our industry, many of the environmental indicators associated with this life cycle are measured and reported in terms of emissions to air, water, soil and solid waste to landfill, among many others.  For companies committed to sustainability, tracking these indicators and improving performance is a key method used to reduce the overall environmental footprint of their paper products.

The environmental performance of the pulp and paper industry varies widely between countries, between companies and between manufacturing facilities.  This is because environmental performance depends on the use of best available technology and the commitment to sustainability of a given company or facility.

Each product life cycle is also associated with other elements such as forest biodiversity and the ecosystem services of a well-managed forest (water filtration, air purification and carbon sequestration), recreational benefits, jobs created and community spin-offs from forestry and manufacturing, the cost of de-inked pulp, paper quality considerations, the distance needed to transport recovered paper and de-inked pulp for processing, and more.

Although Life-cycle Assessment (LCA) studies can be useful tools to help understand the environmental footprint of paper products, they have limitations and they cannot consider many of the environmental and economic considerations listed above.  Results should be communicated with caution across product categories and they should not be seen as an indication of overall “sustainability”.

The two graphs below show the variability in solid waste generation from two different types of integrated printing paper mills: ones using wood-based mechanical pulp (left) and ones using de-inked pulp (right).  Each data point (squares and circles) represents a pulp and paper mill site.

The range, from low to high, is similar in both cases and it is very possible to have an integrated mechanical pulp and paper mill site with better performance than an integrated recycled mill site.  Based on industry benchmarking studies I have participated in, the same is true for other environmental indicators as well.

Another example would be an increased carbon footprint of an office paper grade due to switching from a low-carbon Kraft pulp supply to a de-inked recycled pulp supplier that relies heavily on fossil fuels.  Kraft pulp can have a relatively low carbon footprint due to low reliance on fossil fuels and use of renewable, carbon-neutral energy (biomass and black liquor).  Sappi’s most recent eQ Journal, Rethinking Recycling, also discusses this topic.

The above examples illustrate the potential risks of generalizing the benefits of using recycled fiber without looking into the environmental performance of specific paper products and manufacturers. For certain grades of paper, it can lead to over-stating the environmental benefits of one raw material (recycled fiber) over another (wood fiber) and this appears to contravene the US Federal Trade Commission Green Guides.

My point is that wood-based paper grades can have a lower environmental footprint than grades containing recycled content just because of the specific situation and life cycle that surrounds each paper grade, and vice-versa. One can also be more economical to produce than the other depending on the situation (ex: proximity and cost of fiber).

Recycled fiber and wood fiber from well-managed forests can be equally sustainable raw materials for papermaking.  If we want to evaluate environmental performance, we should be spending less time debating about which fiber type to use and more time measuring real product-specific environmental performance indicators.  Several tools, such as environmental scorecards and declarations, are available to collect specific data on companies, mill sites and paper grades (ex: Environmental Paper Assessment Tool, Paper Profile, WWF Paper Scorecard or customized scorecards).

(1) Sustainability involves three pillars: economic, environmental and social demands.  The simple definition is: “sustainability is improving the quality of human life while living within the carrying capacity of supporting ecosystems” (Wikipedia).

Additional recommended reading:

• www.thepaperlifecycle.org
• Sustainable use of recycled fiber
• Sustainable Procurement of Wood and Paper-based Products
• WRI interactive website on sustainable procurement
• Two Sides Myth and Fact on this topic
• Two Sides detailed fact sheet on this topic

Phil Riebel
President and COO
Two Sides US, Inc.

Challenging and correcting misleading environmental claims related to print and paper has been a focus of Two Sides in Europe for a number of years and more recently in the US after we launched our campaign in July 2012.  Since then, we have approached over 50 US companies to engage with them and discuss best practices for environmental marketing related to print and paper.  Although Google was not on our list, the start of Paperless 2013 in January this year required our quick response.

What followed was unexpected.  Our letter received a lot of coverage, perhaps in part because it was addressed to the Chairman of Google.  Others also became engaged with their views regarding Paperless2013, including PIA who also sent a letter.  PrintMediaCentr was very active on social media and this had a major impact in engaging people to the point where the Twitter feed for Paperless2013 was dominated with tweets in favor of paper!

The good news is: changes have been made.  There are no longer any environmental claims on the Paperless2103 site or Twitter home page and all pictures of trees or forests have been removed.  The main tag line now is “Take the paper out of paperwork”, instead of “Save money. Save time. Save trees”.   The screenshots before and after are shown below and in more detail here.

For this we would like to thank the Paperless 2013 coalition.  It is all we were expecting and we appreciate the positive actions taken.

The “paperless” message may never go away because it is a fact that paper, in some cases, can be replaced with electronic media.  Depending on the situation digital can be more practical, faster and cheaper.  But it is not always more sustainable, when considering the life-cycle of both forms of communication, including their environmental and social pros and cons.  The temptation of marketing departments to include environmental claims to promote digital services is often misleading and unnecessarily damaging to the print, paper and mail value chain.

The term  ‘Paperless’ is also  deceptive. Our own recent pilot survey of consumers reveals that more than 55% of people print some of their e-bills at home or at the office, and about 25% of people print more than 30% of their e-bills.  Other research tells us that print on paper is still the medium of trust and 70% of consumers prefer to read from paper instead of  from a screen. So, instead of encouraging users to ‘go paperless’, organizations should  be enabling a choice of outputs – if they really want to consider their customers preferences.

Furthermore,  let’s not forget that 20% of US adults and 20% of UK households do not have access to the Internet.  In fact, 45% of Americans over the age of 65 don’t own a computer. Mail and paper-based communication is a vital service for this segment of the population.

Two Sides will continue its initiative to engage with companies regarding environmental claims. Our approach to date has been to engage 1-on-1 and encourage open discussion.  Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn’t.  Some ignore us or don’t respond…so other tactics may be needed.

Phil Riebel
President and COO
Two Sides US, Inc.