#PaperDirect Papers
15 messages in this thread
There is a real cool service out there for all you laser printer fans.
It is called "Paper Direct"! They carry all kinds of desktop design
papers. This included Greeting Cards, Certificates, Brochures, Mailers
with & without a lift out rotary card, Color Stock, High Gloss Stock, More
Colors, Lables, Media Kits, Parchment, Vellum, ColorFoil… You just got
to call for their paper catalog and see all this stuff.
Call 1-800-272-7377. I should receive my first order in a few days.
Yes, the Amiga can do DPT!
Joe Maulucci >>> AP ENGAGED
Do you know of a good source for a wide selection of recycled paper? I'd
like to offer that to my clients, as well…..Nancy
Pg 81-82 of the Paper Direct Catalog has a section on recycled paper!
Joe Maulucci >>> AP ENGAGED
Nancy,
Paper Direct carries a wide selection of recycled paper along with all
their other goodies. I agree with Joe. You should really check them out!
…AutoPilot Engaged…
-Paul-
Nancy;
I don't want to start a war but: "Recyled paper" is available from Paper
Direct (and if it is like the rest of their stuff, it should be pretty
good).
However, you will be doing a lot more for "PC" ideology than for the
environment. For starters, the trees harvested for paper are grown for
the purpose (these are not "virgin forests"). The oxygen output from
these sorts of trees is somewhere on an order of magnitude greater than
"mature" trees. Thus, while you might be making Amory Lovins and Jane
Fonda happy, you are probably doing the environment a disservice.
-bill
Bill,
You forgot to mention what they do with all the concentrated toxic ink
they get from de-inking the paper being recycled!
73, Kelly
That's even a new one for me! I thought that the chemicals necessary to
"restore" the pulp to a usable matter were pretty toxic but the ink
itself?
This quickly gets to be a pretty touchy emotional issue doesn't it 🙂
-bill
Bill,
Most chemicals in the making of paper are in a closed system – very little
gets into the environment. Course, the militant environmentalists want 0%
discharge, regardless of the cost, which directly translates to mill
closures and thousands of permamently lost jobs. Yes, lots of acids,
bases, and other nasties are used in the making of paper. The local kraft
mill used to use chlorine and caustic soda (base) to bleach (hey, isn't
that somebodies Bix name <grin>) the kraft. Now they have chlorine free –
use chlorine dioxide. Other mills are looking at using oxygen in the
bleaching process. It is mostly the bleaching process that produces the
nasties that get discharged somewhere. People like white paper!
Before paper can be recycled, it must be de-inked. There is no way the
ink coloring can be hidden by bleaching the paper later. Most inks are
very toxic. Some newspapers are starting to turn to vegitable based inks,
but it will be a long time before most inks are non-toxic, if ever. I
doubt that marvelous toner we use in our lasers is very safe stuff.
If people really wanted to be environment friendly, and live in a major
city, they should quit using their cars to go to work every day. The
large cities should invest in better/larger mass transit systems that use
electricity from nice, clean nuclear plants, not dirty coal burning power
plants. They should also quit using plastic where wood or paper
equivalents could be used for disposable items.
Yah, this could get to be an emotional issue, but I think we should leave
that to the militant (blind) environmentalists, eh! <grin>
73, Kelly
Bill,
-> probably doing the environment a disservice.
Say WHAT?! I don't think so. Careful, you WILL start a war!
Malcolm
Malcom;
I didn't start it. The "one sided, irrational view" is almost exclusively
the purview of the "Environmentalists."
They often raise valid questions but equally often propose simplistic
solutions that ignore hugh points of reality. The media campaigns try to
make it sound like recycling paper, aluminum, and glass will magically
solve the world's problems. They totally ignore the significant waste and
energy issues uniquely associated with recycling.
They also pretend that the environmental lobby is the only driving force
for recycling and ignore the fact that industry has been doing serious
recycling since before 90% of use were even born and have continued to
improve in that area.
They also ignore recycling in areas where it can really make a difference.
We throw away 20% of this nation's energy capacity every year because we
do not recycle nuclear fuel. This is not a minor issue, this amount to
more energy than the world has saved based upon "conservation" efforts.
Of course even that is minor compared to what we could do if we would only
use the other 99.95% of the currently available nuclear energy source.
Recycling most things requires more total energy than producing them in
the first place. There are often good reasons to recycle anyway but a
program that recycles only "Politically Correct" materials is an emotional
program and is probably flawed in other areas too.
-bill
Bill,
What 'things' are you referring to here? Aluminum recycling saves 90% of
the energy required to process aluminum from ore (and also eliminates the
problem of toxic substances being released into the water supply from
tailings.) Glass recycling saves 30% on energy.
If we don't recycle materials we still have to do something with them. Is
adding to the landfill or incineration benign?
Ed
Ed;
As I understand it, the 90% number is true only for clean unpainted
aluminum. The number drops rather dramatically for other types. Though I
assume that the soda can recycling program has a net gain, I actually
don't KNOW that to be true. BTW, I would also be very leary of claims
that it was not.
Glass should be a lot worse in that not only is the potential gain lower
but the contamination problem can be worse.
Naturally the total cost of disposal has to be weighed (and is the main
reason that I believe that recycling consummer aluminum is a net gain).
Adding aluminum or glass is pretty benign actually but it does little to
enhance the potential future use of the land by man.
Incineration is potentially one of the best ways to dispose of waste
however it is seldom (never?) done correctly in this country. The correct
process is very energy intensive but it does leave you with materials that
are useable for things other than landfill and are harmless to the
environment.
-bill
Malcolm, In Canada, using recycled paper is a real disservice to the
country and enviroment. The paper industry has to IMPORT the used paper
from the states to recycle because there is not enough domestic supply.
Think about the environment damage to transport all that used paper back
to Canada to get recycled.
Also, recycled paper doesn't have the strength or quality compared to
non-recyled paper. Everytime you recycle paper, the fibers get damaged
more, resulting in weaker paper.
Have you ever asked the enviromental groups what happens with all the
toxic ink removed from recycled paper? Wonder whose back yard they get
dumped in.
Use real paper. Trees grow back, especially when the stocks are
maintained as well as they are in Canada.
73, Kelly
Kelly,
And what happens to all the toxic ink in landfills? Once the ink has been
manufactured it's in the environment and must be dealt with, recycling or
no.
Ed
Joe,
Do you have the normal telephone number of Paper Direct for us deprived
non-U.S.-residents who can't call an 800 number?
thanks
Pete Jones on AutoPilot