I am sad :-) I expected this message to create a furore, especially from
the IPC management. How wrong I was! :-(

Brian

Brian Ellis wrote:
>
> I've just looked through an IPC Review which dropped on my doormat
> yesterday.
>
> I'd like to bring to your attention an anomaly.
>
> In this day and age, IPC specs and suchlike start out their life on a
> computer. From there, it is easy to convert it to a PDF format, burn a
> CD-R and then duplicate it into CD-ROMs for next to nothing. The
> alternative is to print out a set of originals, prepare offset plates
> and print them out, page after page after page after page, staple them,
> trim them, put them into large envelopes and transport the many kg
> (producing CO2), a much more costly operation.
>
> Which is the more environmentally favourable method of distribution?
> (Better still would be to send the PDF file via the Internet.)
>
> Yet the price of receiving a document as a paper copy is much less than
> in an electronically-readable form. Should not this be exactly the
> inverse? Not only because the electronic form is cheaper, but to save
> the trees, the use of polluting inks and the CO2 produced by the energy
> required to make the paper (even recycling paper consumes energy),
> bleach it, package it and mail it. Should not the IPC set an example?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Brian