{"id":1750,"date":"2010-02-18T14:27:24","date_gmt":"2010-02-18T14:27:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ietransfer.wpengine.com\/?p=1750"},"modified":"2010-02-18T14:27:24","modified_gmt":"2010-02-18T14:27:24","slug":"does-pcw-paper-really-save-energy-its-worth-asking-the-question","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/inspiredeconomist.com\/articles\/does-pcw-paper-really-save-energy-its-worth-asking-the-question\/","title":{"rendered":"Does PCW Paper Really Save Energy? It’s Worth Asking the Question"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>My last post on questioning conventional wisdom on recycled paper<\/a> 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.<\/p>\n

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.”<\/p>\n

That is a question worth asking, and it generates yet another question. How does <\/em>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: <\/p>\n