would be that using the computer is less tolling on the environment, for several reasons. Not only does the newspaper have to printed on paper using lead-based inks generally, but it has to be transported in CO₂ emitting vehicles.

While there are renewable and sustainable sources of energy (solar, wind, hydraulic, et al) it seems to me that growing trees merely for the purpose of printing paper that only contains a day’s news is rather expensive. Granted, the paper can be recycled, but so can the Internet’s content.

At the end of the day, everything you do contaminates and pollutes the environment—heck, even you breathing contributes to global warming! But that mentality would negate our existence and our inalienable right to be happy, so what is critical is finding out a way in which the waste from our activities can be reabsorbed/regenerated by the environment at a faster rate than we can introduce it. It’s a tricky balance and unfortunately, the effects of unbalances in Nature often become apparent once they are irreversible or have reached a critical mass, which is why we haven’t even seen the tip of the iceberg (pun intended) about climate crisis.

The only thing one can do really, and at the risk of sounding repetitive and cliche, is “reduce, reuse and recycle”.

Cheers for giving a damn :)