The Inspired Economist

My recent terrible customer service problem with UPS (an overnight letter, containing my children’s birth certificates, that was supposed to be delivered on January 29th still hadn’t arrived on February 16th…) led me to Google the news on UPS, just to see what other bad things they were up to.  It didn’t take long to uncover UPS’ clandestine efforts to change legislation that would achieve only one thing only: target their largest competitor, Fed Ex.  According the BrownBailout.com (caveat: the campaign is run by FedEx):

UPS lobbyists have buried a short 230-word legislative “bailout” [NOTE: my quotation marks] deep inside the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009 currently before Congress. It’s worth billions to “Big Brown” at the expense of today’s American economy that thrives on next-day commerce, competitive shipping options and ready access to markets around the world.

Why should we care? Because UPS’s service sucks compared to FedEx’s. FedEx argues that those of us who rely on overnight-deliveries – medicines, paychecks, critical replacement parts, essential inventory, and the like – will pay the cost if the legislation occurs. In my case, UPS hasn’t even attempted to deliver the package in 6 days—crying adverse weather. Thank god I’m just waiting for birth certificates (which I need to enroll my kids in public school). If it was medicine I’d be dead. The last thing we want is to give UPS more power than it already has.  Remember: Customer Service is the tangible evidence of its service. Both stink.

I believe in Diane MacEachern’s Big Green Purse concept. So I generally patronize the lesser and the greener of all evils in what I buy. Therefore, I’m generally an advocate of trucking over air freight in terms of sustainability. But, in this case UPS is only marginally more sustainable than FedEx. According to Newsweeks’ 2009 Green Rankings UPS ranks number #85 to FedEx’s #93. They are pretty much equal in terms of sustainability. Which when you think about it is appalling since a trucking company should be far more sustainable than an air company.

In terms of social and economic measures, FedEx seems the better company. Consider that for 12 out of the last 13 years FedEx has landed on Fortune’s list of “100 Best Companies to Work For.” I don’t think UPS has ever made the cut.

FedEx is ranked 91st overall and was recognized specifically for its ability to manage through the economic downtown by taking proactive steps to minimize layoffs and reinstate salary increases and 401(k) match, which the company suspended last year in the midst of the economic downturn.

All in all, it all smells kinda…brown.  I say we vote with our pocketbooks, switch to Fed Ex and act now to say no to taxpayers helping UPS unfairly compete.  Let’s see UPS compete on service.  Then maybe they won’t need a legislative fix.

Photo: anshu mishra at sxc.hu

My last post on questioning conventional wisdom on recycled paper generated some terrific comments. After all, when you look more deeply into some of these issues, they aren’t all they are cracked up to be. Is possible that post-consumer waste (PCW) paper isn’t as green as we think it is? The question was worth asking.

One of the people commenting on the post made this interesting observation: “Post-consumer wastes do consume more energy to recycle than mill-broke or pre-consumer, but if the energy required to reacquire it all is less than producing new paper from trees, then I believe it is still a worthy quest.”

That is a question worth asking, and it generates yet another question. How does the energy to create PCW paper compare to that used to create paper from virgin paper? I did some digging and tried to find out. Here are some of the stats I uncovered: Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve been thinking about postconsumer waste lately (apparently, I have too much time on my hands). What I was wondering was this:

Postconsumer waste is only one of three waste streams for unused paper. There is also mill broke (scrap collected at the mill and recycled back into the same type of paper from whence it came); and there is pre-consumer waste (paper trimmings and other scrap collected at the printing or converting site and recycled back to the mill before reaching the hands of the consumer).

So here’s what I’m wondering. Both mill broke and pre-consumer waste are recycled back much earlier in the process, so they require less energy to transport. They also need less processing in most cases because they have not yet been printed, glued, laminated or otherwise converted. Post-consumer waste, on the other hand, has to be collected from millions of individual homes and businesses around the country. Then it has to be sorted and processed, and sometimes even bleached. The energy and processing requirements are far greater. So why is post-consumer waste considered greener?

Read the rest of this entry »

If you want to “green” your news reading, just go online, right? Ditch that dirty, landfill-clogging paper. Not so fast, argues Sarah Westervelt, environmental expert and activist. In a recent article on The Dead Tree Edition, Westervelt said that she was “too informed about what’s going to happen to my computer when I’m done with it” to feel good about reading Web news and gave a number of compelling reasons that newspapers are actually the greener choice.

Among her reasons for rejecting e-news, as reported by The Dead Tree Edition, the toxic materials contained in electronic devices and a complex waste cycle (including more than a dozen plastics in each), combined with not enough value in re-use to make recycling the parts non-economical. Paper, on the other hand, comes from a renewable resource, doesn’t contain the toxic materials, and is highly recyclable.

The post is a great read, and it certainly makes you think about the consequences of our wired world. (Some of the arguments that have been made against Apple’s new iPad.)

At the same time — and while I cannot disagree with Westervelt’s facts — this argument really only works if it’s an either-or proposition. Read the rest of this entry »

Looking to get a little green into your conference schedule? There are a number of printing, marketing, and paper-related events coming that touch on a variety of business and marketing topics from a sustainability perspective. Some require you to leave your office. Others don’t.

Thanks to What They Think’s Going Green section for this list.

• SFI and FSC Certification in North America – A Summary Comparison (Webinar)
  Feb. 4, 2010
• State of Green Business Forum
  Feb. 4 & Feb. 10, 2010
• Forming and Facilitating Sustainability Teams: Engaging and Training Employees
  Feb. 5, 2010
• INK on Paper: Beyond Your Line of Sight (Webinar)
  Feb. 11, 2010
• MiaGreen 2010 Expo & Conference
  Feb. 25-26, 2010

State of the World 2010 is on book stands, just in time for President Obama’s State of the Union address, though I’m not sure he’s read it given his talk of economic growth to create more jobs in businesses that require more stimulus spending and more government oversight.

I’ve regularly blogged on our state of the economy, an economy inexorably based on the same life support systems that sustain every creature on Earth. At its root, the economy should be about caring for our planet in much the same way that Pope Benedict has recently proclaimed that we must care for Creation. “The different phenomena of environmental degradation and natural catastrophes, which unfortunately occur all too often, remind us of the urgency of dutiful respect toward nature, recovering and valuing a correct relationship with the environment each day,” said Pope Benedict (as quoted by the Catholic News Agency).

Our economy should be about sustainability and restoration of our fragile planet, not greed and never-ending growth. Our sense of fulfillment or happiness is rarely found at America’s Mecca (the mall). Nor will we be able to charge it on our credit card. When it comes down to it, we can buy what’s no longer available: clean water and air, healthy soil, a vibrant local community, a safe place to raise a family.

Pope Benedict’s message is along the same lines as the perspectives shared in Worldwatch Institute’s latest, authoritative flagship book, State of the World 2010: Transforming Cultures: From Consumerism to Sustainability (W.W. Norton). Without an intentional cultural shift – one that values sustainability not consumerism — no pledges from government or advances in technology will be enough to prevent the preventable calamity of climate change and ecological collapse, destined to forever change how we live on this planet. We must rediscover a story of living and working, quite different from the present consumption and material wealth-driven one that often defines meaning, satisfaction and acceptance for so many of us, with dire consequences for ecological systems and the billions of people who have been called the “have-nots” in the so-called developing world.

Read the rest of this entry »

Last week Bill Gates entered the digital publishing world by establishing the Gates Notes – an online evolution of his now annual January letter sharing his thoughts and learnings on the progress of the issues central to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. It’s interesting and symbolic that the next chapter of his life story would include an “open source” platform for sharing IP on social innovation.

It’s not that he’s such a great writer or that this will yield hints for the release of a revolutionary cause-related software program. But rather he’s put out there an experimental platform for sharing insights that might be absorbed and advanced by others. Read the rest of this entry »

I did something a little nuts today. I have run a small niche publishing business since 2000, and I learned very quickly that when you print books on demand and sell them retail, you either lose nearly all your profit margin by buying packing boxes or you have to charge a lot more than you might be comfortable doing. My goal was to charge less for shipping than Amazon and the others, so charging full shipping cost to cover the mailers defeated the purpose. So I looked at the stacks of envelopes and boxes in the corner, waiting to go into the trash, and thought, “Recycle!”

Now, the Strong Tower Publishing titles page has a little disclaimer:

Did you know? Strong Tower Publishing recycles. While we sell directly to the public, our direct sales are relatively small, so you may find your book packed in a recycled box or with recycled paper. This allows us to protect the environment and keep our shipping prices extremely low.

This morning, however, when I went to look for a used padded envelope or box, I was completely out of them. There was an unopened bag of yellow mailing envelopes, but I hesitated. Then there it was, the empty envelope box. Perfect! So I cut along the seams, turned it inside out, and it fit perfectly around the book. A few staples, some tape, and a mailing label. Done!

Granted, it took me 15 minutes to get it together, so I’m not suggesting that companies trade in their efficiency so every piece of scrap can have a second life. It’s the premise I think that is relevant here. We too easily trade convenience for environmental responsibility. Read the rest of this entry »

For marketers looking to improve the sustainability of their print marketing programs, there is almost nothing more important than the role of the paper. For this reason, Wausau Paper has launched a new online community, Digital Space, for designers, printers, and other experts in digital print technology and applications.

The site includes both a collaborative, social media aspect and a blog community featuring experts on paper, printing, and sustainability. Among those experts is, well, me. I will be a regular contributor on topics related to digital printing and the greening of print marketing.

Read the rest of this entry »

While the U.S. Postal Service bleeds red with billions of dollars in financial loses ($3.8 billion in 2008), they keep earning environmental accolades for their green roofs and energy conserving initiatives. Today, some post offices are even LEED certified by the US Green Building Council. As I wrote about last week, the US Postal Service has always been on the leading edge with respect to experimenting with fuel efficient vehicles – even if they’ve been unsuccessful in garnering the widespread adoption of these alternatively fueled vehicles outside their test markets.

So what gives? How could the US Postal Service be in such dire straits with all their green initiatives and their “fleet of feet” making deliveries door-to-door on foot?

Failing to Adapt to Change

This shouldn’t be new news: For years, Americans have been moving away from hard copy to electronic forms of communication. Many of us have gotten fed up with the piles of unwanted mail solicitations and catalogs by the pound by getting our names and addresses on “Do Not Solicit” lists with the Direct Marketing Association. We’ve opted out of banks’ direct marketing schemes for credit cards and insurance. We’ve signed up for electronic bill pay. So, I would have thought that US Postmaster John Potter would have recognized these changes, having grown up with the US Postal Service and having been at the helm since 2001.

Read the rest of this entry »