Paper vs Didgital?
There’s a lot of talk about going paperless.
About doing things digitally to be more sustainable.
And I understand why it’s become the go-to.
No trees cut down, no physical waste, no printing. It sounds better. Cleaner.
It just doesn’t tell the whole story.
We trialled email-only communication for quite a while. Years, actually.
Newsletters, announcements, updates - all sent straight to inboxes. It felt like the “right” thing to do.
No printing. No paper. Easier to track, easier to send. It ticked the eco-friendly box on the surface.
But it didn’t work for us.
Over half of our families weren’t opening the emails. Some didn’t even know they’d received them. Others saw the subject line, meant to read it later, and forgot. More than a few told me it got lost in the noise - buried in an inbox filled with bills, junk, and unread newsletters from every website they’ve ever clicked on.
And honestly? Saaaaaame.
My inbox is the modern-day junk drawer. Overstuffed. Constantly full. Even the things I want to read disappear before I get to them.
A study in 2023 showed that the average email open rate across most industries is about 38%. That means more than half of what we send out - the bits we hope will build connection - probably never even get seen.
So the updates got missed.
The photos didn’t get saved.
The words we’d poured care into never reached their people.
That’s when I started questioning things more deeply.
Because here’s the part we don’t always talk about: digital isn’t weightless.
It’s far from impact-free.
Every email uses energy. Every image, download, and file stored in the cloud takes up space in massive data centres - physical buildings that run all day, every day, using electricity, water, cooling systems and more. In 2023, global data centres used over 240 terawatt-hours of electricity. That’s more than the entire power usage of Australia. And with the rise of AI tools now baked into nearly every app and platform, that number is climbing fast. Some forecasts suggest data-related electricity use could triple by 2030.
This isn’t about guilt. It’s about awareness.
Sustainability doesn’t end at “no paper.” That’s just one layer. And it’s not even the whole layer.
Because printing has changed too.
There are now countless recycled paper options.
There are sustainable printing companies using eco-inks and solar-powered factories.
There are carbon-offset programs tied to every ream you buy.
There are forests being regenerated by organisations who replant trees for every bit of paper produced - not because it “makes up for it” entirely, but because it shows care.
🌱 In Australia alone:
Over 87% of paper and cardboard is recycled each year (according to the Australian Packaging Covenant).
Paper is one of the most recoverable resources, and unlike many forms of plastic, it can be recycled up to 7 times.
There are also programs like One Tree Planted, Greenfleet, and Carbon Neutral Australia, which allow individuals and small businesses to offset their paper usage by planting trees or protecting native bushland.
So if I’m printing something - it’s not random. It’s not wasteful. It’s intentional.
Because when I hand someone a printed nature journal or an activity sheet or a session update, they use it. They pin it to the fridge. Their child draws on it. They cut it up, reuse it, tuck it away in a memory box. It’s not just held - it’s valued.
🧠 Here’s what I’ve noticed:
Emails don’t build memory. Paper does.
Files get deleted. Paper gets drawn on.
Links get buried. Paper gets brought out again and again.
A printed activity can be a fridge staple for weeks. A notification disappears in seconds.
📊 And if we’re comparing impact…
Sending 1 email = 4–50g (depending on size)
30 minutes of streaming video = ~1.6kg
Printing 1 A4 page = ~5g (if recycled)
Recycling 1 tonne of paper = Saves 17 trees + 4000kWh
Planting 1 tree = Absorbs ~21kg CO₂/year
So reading a printed newsletter on the couch could actually leave a smaller environmental footprint than half an hour of social media flicking, especially if that newsletter is recycled, reused, or kept.
And honestly, a lot of ours are.
We see them turned into collage, used in journals, displayed at home.
Because it’s not just about the paper. It’s about the purpose.
🌿 True sustainability isn’t about digital vs. print. It’s about how we think, how we use, how we care.
Are we using with intention? Are we thinking about longevity? Are we creating things that actually reach people, that connect us, that get remembered?
To me, that’s what matters more than whether it’s pixels or paper.
So yes, I still print. With care. With thought. Not out of habit, and not as a last resort, but as a choice I’ve made after living through the alternative.
Because I want to do what actually works. Not just what looks like it does.
I’m not anti-tech. I don’t think ditching technology entirely is the answer. In fact, I think completely excluding it does all of us - especially our kids - a disservice.
Tech is part of the world they’re growing up in. It’s about how we balance it.
How we weave it into our lives without it becoming the whole thing.
For me, that means checking in on our screen time, choosing renewable-powered tools where we can, and balancing digital inputs with outdoor hours and face-to-face moments.
That’s another reason I love small printed newsletters. Families often tell me they read them together in the sun. Kids love spotting themselves in the photos or artwork. I get to share community events and shout out small businesses other families run. It’s not just information, it’s connection, outside the scroll.
And sometimes, a piece of paper that gets read, used, remembered, and recycled has more heart, and less impact, than anything stuck in a digital folder, never to be seen again.
