As one who lives in the Northern California Redwoods, I must agree totally. The forests have been here for thousands of years for a reason. They create oxygen and increase the moisture in the ground.. just for starters. Seems to me that those are two of the most basic needs of life. Thanks for writing the article, and giving all food for thought

Back in the mid-70's (probably around the time the author of this article was showing the trees around Seattle), I was just starting my career in advertising.

I remember sitting with my creative director looking through paper samples. The cleanest, whitest, and brightest papers cost the most. The slightly speckled, slightly yellowed, and less bright papers cost less.

I asked the creative director about the price difference. He explained that when paper was very pure, and didn't have any garbage in it, it was the highest price. But when the paper company mixed in bits and pieces of old paper, or cardboard, or corrugated boxes, that paper was considered "dirty" and would cost less.

What we were excited about was that the paper that we wanted to use for a brochure had the dirty look that we wanted for our "old-time" brochure. We were thrilled that not only did we get a specialty look, but it was cheaper than the crisper papers.

About ten years later, as Earth-day and other recycling movements took hold, I remember looking through a paper sample book.

This time the recycled papers were listed in a special section with a recycled label. While they certainly looked like the "dirty" papers I had seen ten years earlier, they weren't priced less than the whiter papers. They were priced MORE.

The paper industry has taken advantage of the guilt factor that the recycle movement created. So instead of charging less for dirty papers, they stick a recycle logo on the paper's label and charge more. For the same types of papers that they used to consider less valuable.

I wonder just how expensive those recycled papers really are, and how much is the hype of the logo.