Which is more damaging to the environment: reading a newspaper on a PC for thirty minutes or a hard copy?

Question

Reading a newspaper on a computer is damaging to the enviorment as electricty is necessary for the computer to function. That electricty (most of it at least) comes from sources that emit carbon into the atmosphere.

Reading a newspaper in print is also damaging to the enviorment. It takes paper that takes energy and trees to make--and recycled paper can only be used so many times. Also a paper has to be delivered by truck or car; this also emits carbon.

So which method of reading a newspaper is more enviormentally friendly? Why?

Answer 1

Hard to say.

If you RELIGIOUSLY recycle the hard copy, that is probably the best, but most people don't, so it becomes part of the collective "dump."

Which is worse, dumping waste into the air or soil? Probably 6 of one and a half dozen of the other...

Answer 2

Definitely reading the paper electronically is less damaging. Beside the whole manufacturing process of paper and ink there is also the fact that trees are a biological sink for carbon, clear the water/air and prevent erosion.
But there is a an argument that can be made that the copy of the newspaper you read on-line wouldn't exist without the paper copies anyway. Would the Times or Globe or whatever newspaper be on-line if it didn't have paper distribution? I think the answer is that it wouldn't be; perhaps in the future but not yet. So the question may be academic.

Answer 3

I would say the hard copy even though it cuts down trees you can share it with other people. say you office only orders 1 paper and all of you read it.