Welcome to the Snowblog!
This is the place to hear the thoughts of those at Snowbooks. We'll post about book launches, new reviews, and whatever's running through our heads at any given moment. We hope you enjoy it!
Search the Snowblog and website
If you'd like to contact us about anything you read here, please feel free to email us at blog@snowbooks.com.
Feeds
Elsewhere
Archives
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
Reference documents
What would you do?
posted by Emma on May 17, 2007 11:50 AM

I genuinely need your advice. Stop lurking, lurkers, and pitch in.
We really want to print all our books on recycled paper - not just FSC because it still requires perfectly healthy trees to be killed. We asked for a quote from our favourite printers. Here are the two quotes for the same number of units:
FSC: £3,648.67
Recycled: £4,974.88
That's a difference of £1326, which is a lot of money, in anyone's book.
So what would you do if you were me? Go for the not-actually-evil-but-not-ideal FSC? Or shell out for the go-straight-to-heaven-do-not-pass-go recycled? And don't just say 'recycled' without thinking about it. Put yourself in my shoes. Our margins are miniscule; my salary is less than £4000 a year; survival is pretty tough.
Squeaky clean conscience or slightly less crap margin? Principles or profit? You decide.
Comments: 16
All content © Snowbooks | Privacy policy
I think at this stage you should go for FSC. Recycled would be great but at this point you can't afford to uphold all of your principles. In a year or so, when things are easier then maybe you can. I believe that there are degrees of FSC certifcates though so you could look into making sure that it is as sustainable as possible.
Posted by: Vanessa on May 17, 2007 12:29 PM
Go FSC. Nothing wrong with chopping down healthy trees if they are replaced. Young trees which grow faster than old ones absorb more CO2 so do more good than fully grown healthy trees.
M
Posted by: Matthew on May 17, 2007 01:21 PM
It's a very interesting question, not just for snowbooks, but for the much bigger publishers too. Bloomsbury have just published Jon Mcgregor's, so many ways to begin,on recycled; it's the only mainstream example I can think of at present.
Posted by: JonathanM on May 17, 2007 02:42 PM
FSC. The label is there for a reason - not just any old trees, but sustainably managed forests that meet the criteria of the FSC. The kind of forests grown for paper are planted for that purpose, so it is not as though you'll be chopping down ancient teak rainforests or something.
Kudos to you for grappling with the ethics though.
Posted by: Equiano on May 17, 2007 05:13 PM
I agree, FSC. If you were Bloomsbury you could afford to go green, but until they make recycled paper more affordable it's not your fault if you can't afford it.
Posted by: KatharineC on May 17, 2007 06:27 PM
Given the economics, it is heroic that you are even contemplating this shift, Emma.
All I can offer - but you've probably done this - is recommend you investigate all the technical issues surrounding use of recycled paper before going near it. Your readers will expect 'normal' standards on paper feel, aging, light resistance, print quality and fastness, page curl and so forth. Are there bulk and weight negatives for shipment and display or higher print wastage on set-up, which undermine the environmental case? What is the consistency in quality? Are there any undesirables such as odour, DIPN or heavy metals present. How is the material sourced?
Good luck - Derek
Posted by: Derek Haycock on May 17, 2007 06:27 PM
FSC absolutely. Not all of us were made to be martyrs. Your business needs to be sustainable as well as the planet. Sx
Posted by: Sarah Bower on May 17, 2007 11:05 PM
FSC I think, publishing is lower than writing is wastefully. Draft upon draft!
Posted by: Brian Hadd on May 17, 2007 11:27 PM
Strikes me that FSC is the way to go. I am skeptical about recycling in anycase. Energy usage in making recycled products is high and when you count in costs of collection, sorting, and then the distribution of the recycled stuff I imagine that the FSC paper is probably better for the environment anyway.
Eoin
Posted by: Eoin Purcell on May 18, 2007 08:40 AM
Wow, thanks chaps. I will ask for your points of view more often.
FSC it is, then!
Posted by: Em on May 18, 2007 09:34 AM
Get another printer's quote?
Printing on recycled paper SHOULD from any economic angle cost less but, as ever, the environmental kudos is being premiumised.
"My mama told me you better shop around"
Posted by: Michael K on May 18, 2007 05:01 PM
Absolutely FSC. Isn't FSC sustainable by definition? Anyway, it woudl be madness to let Snowbooks suffer or die for this principle - when FSC is sustainable (if not as tree friendly).
Also, keep working the ebooks angle, to make your products as available electronically to enlightened readers. (I'm not enlightened - I enjoy cover art and touch/feel which I'm not sure ebooks can provide - but then I'm judging after reading Jules Verne on a Palm Pilot in 2001).
Thanks for asking, though
Posted by: John A-W on May 19, 2007 05:23 PM
realistically, you can't justify recycled on a book with tight margins. work to get yourself into the position where you can influence policy on this kind of thing, and work towards all books being carbon neutral - but you have to survive as a company to get there.
Posted by: rivergirlie on May 21, 2007 09:20 AM
I would go for the FSC for now BUT make a commitment to plant say 10 trees every year somewhere.
Planting trees helps toward solving the global warming crisis--which many here haven't got as yet but it's coming.
Conscience eased :)
Posted by: damian on May 23, 2007 08:19 PM
Print on woodfree paper. We do at Long Barn Books. Environmentally friendly and only a tiny tiny bit more expensive than normal paper.
And it has a lovely look and feel whereas recycled does NOT.
Posted by: SUSAN HILL on May 26, 2007 08:41 AM
We looked into self-publishing once, and you may like to try TJ International in Cornwall, as they do really good rates for 100% post-consumer paper and 50 to 100% recylced covers. Green Books use them, and the quality is really good. Hope this helps!
Posted by: kindlyconsumer on June 2, 2007 07:49 PM