From: Keith Gerling (keithgerling@att.net)
Date: 04/25/02-09:04:44 AM Z
Regarding my suggestion that digital photography might be the friendliest to
the environment, Judy says:
>As for "digital" being environmentally friendly -- maybe at point of use,
>but -- I'm told -- not at point of manufacture. Apparently, the process is
>environmentally harmful in the (3rd world?) countries where the computers
>are made.
This could be true, although I would think that coumputer component
manufacturing would not pose more of an environmental threat than any other
kind of manufacturing. Related, though, is the environmental burden placed
by all of the obsolete equipment. I recently tried to dispose of 4 old PC's
and found that they were not "acceptable waste for a family dwelling". Even
though one may dispose of TVs, freezers, etc., (on an appointed day every
month), you are STUCK with PC's if you live in my area. A have no idea why
(the mobo battery?).
BTW, another environmental sting placed on most photographers (digital
included) is the making of paper, a really ugly process, as anyone living
near a papermill can attest. (The Aroma of Tacoma!)
>The fact is that almost anything we do beyond die without issue is
>potentially harmful....
Agreed! It's only proper, though, that we realize what impact our actions
have, rather than just blissfully ignoring them.
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 05/01/02-11:43:31 AM Z CST