h a l f b a k e r yThis ain't rocket surgery.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
It has been suggested to overprint printed documents with white ink, so that the paper may be reused [link].
This is a far simpler approach that saves both paper and ink.
Unneeded documents are sent to a central storage facility. When you attempt to print a new document, your printer queries the
facility's mainframe. If the document is available (a "cache hit", as it were), your printer aborts the print job and the facility mails you the document.
White color ink printer
White_20color_20ink_20printer
Only saves paper; not ink! [the porpoise, Jun 23 2014]
[link]
|
| |
While I personally try not to print much, and
support efforts to reduce paper waste, the thing
to keep in mind is that one of the primary reasons
that people print documents is so that they can
take notes on the hard copy. Whether they keep
the document or just benefit in recollection
because they took notes, when they are don't
with the document, it is likely that the next
person will want a clean copy. |
|
| |
So you'll need to enhance your system to scan all
the pages and reprint any pages with notes on
them before mailing it out. Of course the other
issue is that the recipient probably doesn't want
to wait for the mail. |
|
| |
I think the way to make hard copies obsolete is to
make the electronic viewing experience better
than the paper one. |
|
| |
Might work with signage. Metal street signs. |
|
| |
Right turn, left turn, do not feed the bears, main street, free bikes, and other short phrases are likely to be needed by random folks in random places. |
|
| |
Full length book texts much less likely to be needed. |
|
| |
If people reduced their font sizes by 1pt, trees
sufficient to cover Wales 220 times over would be
saved every year. |
|
| |
Given the desirability of covering Wales to a depth
of 220 trees, I think this warrants further
consideration. |
|
| |