How many trees does the Yellow Pages industry destroy for its paper?
Zero. None. Zilch. Zip.
While the popular myth is that this industry is responsible for the neutering of forests, the reality is the Yellow Pages industry doesn’t knock down any virgin trees for its paper!!! Let me repeat that – they don’t need to cut any trees for their paper supply.
Currently, on average, most publishers are using about 40% recycled material (from the newspapers and magazines you are recycling curbside), and the other 60% comes from wood chips and waste products of the lumber industry. If you take a round tree and make square or rectangular lumber from it, you get plenty of chips and other waste. Those by-products make up the other 60% of the raw material needed. Note that these waste products created in lumber milling would normally end up in landfills. Not only that, as wood chips decompose, they emit methane, a greenhouse gas closely associated with global warming. Paper manufacturing thus puts these chips to good use. Many paper providers will also use 5% or less of recycled directories in their paper creation.
So despite what you may be reading, hearing, believing — Yellow Pages are not clogging up our landfills.
on March 25, 2008 on 9:27 pm
If yellow page publishers teamed up with companies like 1-800-info-FAST (1-800-463-6327), who gives yellow and white page information over the phone with live U.S. operators for FREE, they would not be such a target from the environmental groups. They would also be able to recover some of the recent and future lost revenues by embracing the future. It would show that publishers are on the cutting edge of technology and conservation.
on March 26, 2008 on 6:07 pm
This is information most definitely worth sharing. Thanks!
on March 27, 2008 on 12:40 pm
[...] http://ypgreen.wordpress.com/2008/03/25/how-many-trees-does-the-yellow-pages-industry-destroy-for-it... [...]
on May 7, 2008 on 5:10 pm
This is really good news to hear Ken! I did not know it and it is very worth mentioning… I added it to the post on my site. Thanks for the info.
on December 11, 2008 on 6:31 pm
You don’t include the fact that paper could be used in other places more useful. And besides why fill our landfill full of these unwanted pages that i could get the same info. with 411 connect. small price for going green. there definitly needs to be a ban on phone books
on December 11, 2008 on 9:00 pm
Filling your landfills?? The EPA, not me reports that phone books only use some .3% of landfill space. That’s 1/10th of what direct mail and newspapers require.
Put to better use?? So I guess the 14 billion lookups those books got resulting in nearly a $1 trillion in commerce aren’t important to the millions of small businesses that rely on them to help buyers find them.
Going green?? The books are fully recyclable, they consumer no power when not in use, they don’t contain mercury like the pc you are using and have trouble recycling when you toss if for the newest model, and are the one source that your local government can use to ensure full communication of their environmental efforts.
Hence, asking for ban makes very little sense Jake.
on December 12, 2008 on 4:05 am
Ken, I think Jake is speaking from reality while you’re responding from something more utopian.
You know that phone books are rarely recycled, so do end up in our landfills. And you know that, while they remain useful to many, they continue to be delivered to people who no longer use them.
That’s bad for the environment and even worse for local businesses who pay for ads that will never be seen in books that are never opened.
on December 12, 2008 on 2:29 pm
Ed, Ed, Ed:
I “know books are rarely recycled” — how would I “know” that?? Are you saying the EPA doesn’t know what they are doing?? I recycle mine curbside and also in the spring when the town has a central bin. When I drop them off I see bins that are full of old books.
You say people don’t use them but the independent research doesn’t support your claim since it shows 85+% use them at least once a year. I know if may shock you, but several people have recently told me they can’t get to the Web from work — access is blocked. When the books arrive at their place of employment, they get picked up quickly, and then used.
Local businesses know exactly what they are getting into when they advertise in the print Yellow Pages. and the millions that do so expect and receive the ROI on those ads they anticipate. If they don’t they won’t spend the money next time around. In this economy, any advertising has to prove itself. Print Yellow Pages consistently does.
And your argument about what is or isn’t bad for the environment, well, that’s a whole other discussion.
on February 26, 2009 on 8:22 pm
Ken, I really don’t know how you can think the Yellow Pages are environmentally friendly. They are gigantic books sent to just about everyone in the country, when all of that information is at their website, and anyone who has internet probably rarely uses the book version. It is nice that they are 100% recyclable and it is nice that they are made using some recycled content (the extent of which I still remain skeptical of), but to say that this makes them environmentally friendly is a stretch. How much energy is used turning the recycled material into Yellow Pages, how much energy is used transporting all of those Yellow Pages to everyone’s front door, how much energy is used transporting all of the unused or outdated Yellow Pages to recycling centers, and how much energy is used to actually recycle that paper again? The ridiculous blanket distribution of Yellow Pages uses a tremendous amount of energy and a great deal of that energy is completely wasted sending Yellow Pages to people who will never use it and either recycle it or throw it away. If Yellow Pages were distributed to only those who needed them, then maybe you could say they were environmentally friendly, but currently it is a sad state of affairs how much recycled paper and energy is wasted on Yellow Pages in this country.
And your statistic that 85+% of people use the Yellow Pages once in a year is pretty weak. I mean, using a bloated guidebook once in a year does not justify printing it in my mind. I want to see the amount of people that rely on the Yellow Pages every year, and that number is probably really low. And even if it isn’t so low, then fine, distribute the Yellow Pages to those people and stop sending them to people who have internet access and know how to do a google search. Why not put all the money spent on printing Yellow Pages for those who don’t use them into building wireless internet infrastructure in low income neighborhoods? Why doesn’t the Yellow Pages put all that money into conservation efforts for rainforests? There are a ton of ways to spend that money more wisely, but instead they decided to still promote their soon-to-be-completely-outdated program of delivering one or two Yellow page books to each residence in America. Of course there is the opt out system which allows people to get out of the Yellow Page system. But if Yellow Pages actually wanted to make an environmental difference they would institute an opt-in system, calling every residence and asking if they would like to still receive Yellow Pages. But of course that will never happen because I doubt very many people would call back.
We have moved to the age of the internet, you can talk all you want about how relevant Yellow Pages are to this country but give it a few more years and you’ll see, Yellow Pages will soon be a thing of the past.
on March 1, 2009 on 10:37 pm
Travis: much to your disdain, the print Yellow Pages will be around a lot longer than you think. Why? Because those books generate nearly $1 trillion in commerce, which at a time when we are facing such high unemployment and a slow economy, I would think even someone like you would be routing for more it, not less. Or are you one of these big governments lovers too??
Buddy, living has an environmental impact. Are you suggesting we just crawl back in caves and eat uncooked meat that we get by catching animals with a bow and arrow??? Or maybe park our cars and walk everywhere, stop flying, use no electronic equipment (since they have huge environmental impacts when people trash them), etc etc etc. Where does it stop? If you want to lower your standard of living, fine. I can recommend a number of third world countries you can move to.
And now you want private businesses not in that industry to invest in building wireless infrastructure in poor neighborhoods, you are kidding, right? Please tell me that was a joke?
I can say proud say that print Yellow Pages are eco-friendly:
– They don’t knock any trees of their paper. Can you say that about some of your favorite magazines??
– The mills they get their woodchips from only use FSC timber
– The paper mills actually buy some of the trash from local governments which was headed to landfills to use in the manufacture of the paper
– When not in use, the books sit their quietly not using any energy
– Printers have significant local, state and federal regulations they must meet before they open their doors.
– Publishers are working with local communities to encourage recycling of books. I haven’t seen the bottlers, newspaper companies, or direct mail industry step forward in this area.
Next time before you want to pontificate, get your facts straight – do some research here: http://www.yptalk.com/production.cfm
on August 17, 2009 on 9:16 pm
Ken,
If you are going to criticise someone else’ claims and say they haven’t got the facts right then where are yours? Where is the proof that Yellow Pages generate $1 trillion in revenue?
on March 2, 2009 on 5:44 am
Ken, newspaper advertising drives a lot of commerce too, but that doesn’t mean it’s sustainable.
Living, unlike yellow pages, is kind of required to be alive. You can certainly live without yellow pages. I’ve done so for around 10 years. It’s great. It’s really sad to hear you argue that we should waste resources on yellow pages because we use resources on other things we find valuable.
You’re lying if you’re suggesting that phone books are made from 100% recycled material.
In addition to encouraging recycling, how about stop sending books to those who no longer use them. It seems more than a little wasteful (and a tax on local businesses) to print and deliver junk-status phone books. It’s really just yellow pages spam at that point.
on March 2, 2009 on 10:53 pm
Ed: you really need to take a minute to read the posts before you launch your ongoing anti-YP dribble. You really are a much smarter guy than this.
First, I have never said the books are made from 100% recycled material. They are made from about 40% recycled material and 60% come from wood chips and byproducts that you get when you mill a round tree for square lumber. For the 100th time, here is the how paper is made (with pictures so you don’t get confused): http://www.yptalk.com/production.cfm
Second, as I have said numerous times before and will say again, publishers are implementing opt-out programs. I’m not sure which part of that statement you are having trouble understanding. As a result your comments like this are “spam” and will be consider such going forward.
Third, I’m happy for you that you have gone 10 years without a print yellow pages. I guess the $26 billion spent worldwide on these products has dipped badly as a result of your non-participation. When online advertising hits that level of spending, then we can talk about “sustainable”.
on March 3, 2009 on 4:59 pm
Ken, implementing and honoring opt-out programs are two different things. I’ve shown you before that the YP companies are not holding their contractors responsible for NOT delivering to homes that have opted out of delivery.
Online advertising is more efficient than offline. You don’t have to pay for the printing and delivery of books, and you can target the ads to people who have expressed an interest in what you sell. For this reason, comparing the declining revenues to print to the rising revenues of online advertising isn’t an apples to apples comparison.
on March 3, 2009 on 6:12 pm
I guess the marketplace will have to decide this won’t it?
on March 3, 2009 on 6:15 pm
On the opt-out programs, seems like we will need to see who is right then.
Online vs. offline: clearly we are going to disagree. I think I’ll go with the revenue leader that has continually shown it’s value year in and year out to advertisers, or they wouldn’t continue to spend money.
on March 4, 2009 on 7:14 pm
Ken, the real world examples of delivery people admitting to ignoring the lists, and stories of people who’ve opted out getting books are the reality of the market today.
Print yellow pages revenue is decreasing. That wouldn’t happen if yellow pages advertisers were seeing measurable value from ads delivered to opt-out homes and vacant homes.
on March 4, 2009 on 11:22 pm
Print YP revenue is down Ed because small businesses are struggling in a very bad economy. Several publishers have researched advertisers that have canceled their print ads and found that less than 10% of those dollars are going to the Web. The rest of the cash is being held to offset lost business. It’s got nothing to do with those of you who don’t use the books Ed. In the bigger scheme of things, your non-usage isn’t even a blip on their radar screen.
on March 5, 2009 on 4:52 am
Ken, for your industry’s sake, I hope you’re right. However, what you’re describing is different from what I’m seeing. Companies that go under are clearly no longer advertisers. But the ones that are surviving are ones that are taking a close look at every line item and cutting everything they can justify. And from what I see, a lot more cuts are coming on the print side of advertising (newspaper & yellow pages) than out of online budgets.
Why? Because winning businesses are starting to apply online metrics to offline advertising. Rather than caring about distribution, they can about actual views and conversions from those impressions.
Of course, I’m sure you can find some exceptions to support your financial interests, but I wouldn’t bank on them.
on August 20, 2009 on 9:24 am
Let me explain it for you Scottie so even you can understand it:
The worldwide revenue for the Yellow Pages industry is approximately $32 billion USD (depending on which source you want to use). Yellow Pages has consistently shown a return to advertisers that usually averages over $10 for each $1 spent. To be conservative, I’ll use just the $10 figure. So hence $32 billion in industry revenue is yielding $320 billion in total sales for advertisers.
Now that money just doesn’t disappear — it gets spent by the recipients, the advertisers for a whole bunch of things — new materials/products, salaries for workers (and the owners), investments, etc, etc, etc. Now since you sound like a Google type guy I’m sure you can check out “multiplier effect”, and while there are a range of studies on what that number can be, I’ll use the conservative number of 3x. Net total: $960 billion in economic effect.
Of course it doesn’t stop there as that $960 billion gets spent again, and again, and again. So it is easy for me to say that conservatively the industry generates at least a $1 trillion in economic benefit……