Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!umich!sharkey!cfctech!teemc!ka3ovk!raysnec!shwake
From: shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo
Subject: Re: Environmental Packaging
Summary: Could be done, but consider the real problems
Message-ID: <47@raysnec.UUCP>
Date: 5 Jun 90 15:49:00 GMT
References: <9006041348.AA05354@umix.cc.umich.edu>
Reply-To: shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake)
Distribution: na
Organization: IRS - ACI Project Office
Lines: 17

In article <9006041348.AA05354@umix.cc.umich.edu> SRFERGU@ERENJ.BITNET (Scott Ferguson) writes:
>Software manuals have a usable life of a couple months any more before
>they've got to be updated and/or thrown out. Nevertheless, we package them
>in plastic shrink-wrap to preserve their lives. Assuming that shippers
>and handlers don't dip things in water (maybe that's to trusting), do we
>really need to wrap everything in plastic?
>Exxon Research & Engineering

I'm sure some engineers have developed, or could develop, a biodegradable 
wrap. Of course, the machines that currently shrink wrap would have to be
replaced by something able to handle the substitute material.

A still greater contribution would be made if petrochemical plants
would limit their toxic discharges, and tankers and other ocean-going
vessels would limit their spillage. Not trying to start a name-calling
thread... the government does more than its share too (see Rolling Stone's
environmental survey in April).