My article today on Triple Pundit on Why Bankruptcy is Not Such a Bad Idea for USPS

I'd like to update you on a new article I published today on Triple Pundit entitled "Why Bankruptcy is Not Such a Bad Idea for USPS":

Here's the first paragraph of the article:

Bloomberg Businessweek reported last week that USPS is on the verge of bankruptcy. There are many reasons for that, but one thing I find disturbing is that USPS’ plan to raise its falling revenues is mainly based on sending you more junk mail and convincing banks and other businesses to keep sending you paper bills. So even though I like mail (who doesn’t?), I think bankruptcy might not be such a bad option in this case.

To read the full article go to http://www.triplepundit.com/2011/06/bankruptcy-bad-idea-usps/

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading

Go Green stamps: Greenwashing at your local post office?

Yesterday I went to the post office and saw that USPS is offering now Go Green stamps, "showing what each of us can do to promote the health of our environment." The brochure on the stamps (printed on FSC-certified paper) also mentions it's part of USPS' "Go Green" commitment.

Sounds very nice, right? But wait a second, isn't that the same USPS that sends you every day loads of junk mail, wasting important resources like trees and water, contributing to pollution and global warming? Did you know that on average, we receive 16 pieces of junk mail a week, compared to only 1.5 personal letters? And that the majority of household waste consists of junk mail? (source: 41pounds.org).

Not only that the USPS don't have a problem with junk mail, but it actually helps junk mailers. The Wall Street Journal reported on January that "the U.S. Postal Service began easing rules on so-called "simplified addressing" for bulk mail. The move allows marketers to send letters, flyers and parcels to every home, business and post-office box on a city delivery route—known as saturation mail at the post office, and junk mail by consumers—without using exact names and addresses."

Why USPS does it? The WSJ article explains: "The changes come as many small businesses have abandoned traditional direct-mail advertising in favor of cheaper e-marketing and social-media strategies." This is bad news to the USPS, because according to PrintReady "the business-to-consumer channel is currently responsible for around 70% of its revenues and 80% of mail volume."

Now, USPS is in financial trouble. According to AP "the Postal Service is continuing to hemorrhage money, reporting a loss Tuesday of more than $2 billion over the first three months of the year and warning it could be forced to default on federal payments." So it might be understandable why they do whatever they can to promote companies to send you more mail, which of course also means more junk mail, although from a business perspective it also looks as a mistake, or at least as fighting a losing war.

USPS has of course the right to choose its own methods to try and avoid bankruptcy, but it certainly doesn't have the right to call itself committed to going green and certainly not to try showing others how to do it, when they do exactly the opposite. No matter how bad things are at USPS, this sort of greenwashing is unacceptable.

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

photo: Go Green Stamps from USPS website

Who support junk mail?

I hate junk mail. Even though I recycle all of of it, we're talking about so much waste of paper, energy, pollution, etc. that I get mad every time I find it in my mailbox. Now I've learned from the Washington Post that there's an organization that thinks junk mail is good. No, I'm not talking about the marketers, I'm talking about USPS - United States Postal Service.

Lyndsey Laton reported last week in the Washington Post ('Effort to Block Junk Mail Slowed') that "barred by law from lobbying, the Postal Service is nonetheless trying to make its case before a growing number of state legislatures that are weighing bills to create Do Not Mail registries". If you're wondering what reason the Postal Service can find to support junk mail, the answer is simple - their business. The Postal Service, according to the article, claims that junk mail (they call it "standard" mail) became a very important part of their business and that many jobs are depended on that.

Well, this argument is not very strong, isn't it? If we'll act in accordance with the Postal Service's logic, then we shouldn't stop any polluting or environmentally damaging activity like driving SUVs or using coal to generate electricity because of its consequences on the suppliers of these products/services.

I really wish that USPS will focus more on how to create new revenue engines, hopefully green ones, instead of trying to maintain services with such enormous environmental impacts (not to mention the fact that junk mail is so annoying!). I want to remind USPS that eight million tons of trees are consumed each year in the production of the 19 billion catalogs that are mailed in the U.S. every year!

I believe that eventually the interest of the public will win and junk mail will be limited by law, so it also makes sense business wise for USPS to get prepared for that day instead of wasting money on lost bottles.

I also want to remind you the great service of Catalog Choice to prevent receiving further catalogs by mail. I wrote about it few months ago and last week I used it for the first time to prevent receiving more catalogs of Pottery Barn, which I really don't understand why they send me in the first place. Anyway, it's a very user-friendly service and it's free, and I hope it will help me now to keep my mailbox safe.

Yours,

Raz @ Eco-Libris

Plant trees with Eco-Libris!