7 ms·

If I weighed the total amount of unsolicited bulk physical mail I got each year, it'd be several hundred pounds. I can't think of the amount of diesel fuel used

If I weighed the total amount of unsolicited bulk physical mail I got each year, it'd be several hundred pounds. I can't think of the amount of diesel fuel used to cut the trees down, chop up the pulp, make the paper, deliver the paper, print the paper, deliver the paper to my mailbox, then haul the trash away to dump. I'm 100% for massive postage increases on non-parcels, or complete elimination of this practice otherwise.

jnwatson 6y ago
It is easier to me to imagine the waste involved; I live in a high rise. There's a large trash bin in the middle of the mail room that's empty at the beginning of the day and full at the end. 90% of the USPS' job is to transmit dead trees to our waste facilities.
- SilverRed 6y ago
  But think of all the jobs and money involved in moving those trees.
  - maxwell 6y ago
    How does the energy usage compare to digital advertising and cloud computing?
    - Ekaros 6y ago
      One starts to wonder should we just make advertising illegal. As it seems, it is waste in both paper form and as online adds with all the tracking involved...
      - PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
        what's the line between advertising and protected speech? trick question: there is no line.
        maxwell 6y ago
        Billboards aren't banned in your state? https://movia.media/moving-billboard-blog/why-is-billboard-advertising-not-allowed-in-maine-vermont-hawaii-and-alaska https://movia.media/moving-billboard-blog/why-is-billboard-a...
        sio8ohPi 6y ago
        The supreme court, unanimously, in Rowan v United States Post Office Department, "categorically reject[ed] the argument that a vendor has a right under the Constitution or otherwise to send unwanted material into the home of another."
        PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
        "Consequently, a mailer’s right to communicate ceased at the mailbox of an unwilling addressee." I would be very suprised if SCOTUS would agree this ruling supports any legislative attempt to preemptively block "communication".
  - TchoBeer 6y ago
    "jobs" and "money" don't do anything for society. Junk mail is a drain on resources that doesn't produce anything useful. If the problem is that too many people are unemployed and there aren't enough jobs to go around, that shouldn't be an excuse to not put an end to an incredibly wasteful and annoying practice.
    - pavel_lishin 6y ago
      I think SilverRed was being sarcastic.
      - TchoBeer 6y ago
        Oops.
    - CamelCaseName 6y ago
      Junk mail is "useful" because it distributes information. It's much less effective than, say, books, because there's a lot of overhead and waste in sending junk mail to people who don't care for them. Beyond that, it also subsidizes other mail deliveries. If mail wasn't being delivered to every address, having someone drop off a parcel just for you would be much more expensive.
      - msla 6y ago
        > Beyond that, it also subsidizes other mail deliveries. If mail wasn't being delivered to every address, having someone drop off a parcel just for you would be much more expensive. This is a political decision which indicts the political regime the USPS operates under.
        omgwtfbyobbq 6y ago
        Do you mean the American political system in general?
        msla 6y ago
throwawayboise 6y ago
Junk mail is vital for the USPS finances. It's over 20% of their income, ~$16 billion/yr. It's a shame. Anthing I get in the mail that's not a first-class letter addressed to me by name goes into the trash unopened. But without the will to significantly downsize and reorganize the USPS it is a necessary revenue stream. https://about.usps.com/newsroom/national-releases/2019/1114-usps-reports-fiscal-year-2019-results.htm https://about.usps.com/newsroom/national-releases/2019/1114-...
- cpeterso 6y ago
  > Junk mail is vital for the USPS finances. It's over 20% of their income, ~$16 billion/yr. I wonder how time and money processing and delivering that junk mail cost them. They could forgo that $16B and have more time to provide better service for non-junk mail.
  - toomuchtodo 6y ago
    Support postal banking and postal identify proofing services, both of which would generate revenue that could replace suboptimal activities such as junk mail.
- joe-collins 6y ago
  Except, of course, that the USPS is categorically not a business, and no fundamental barrier exists to direct funding from the federal government, as with many other federal services. It has historically been expected to self-finance, and doing so may appeal to some sense of prudence, but that does not need to be the case if the externalities of doing so exceeds the income generated.
  - HenryBemis 6y ago
    I can be running around my block waving at people. Someone may be paying me $16bn per year to do this. The fact that this is a "$16bn effort" doesn't make it useful. Also consider that if this is a "$16bn effort" the loss is multiple of that. Think of the advertisers (and their clients money), the effort to discard/recycle this garbage etc. The loss for humanity is greater than $16bn. Is this 'type of business' is to be eliminated, then USPS will drop the respective fraction of their use-less resources (staff, trucks, sorting machines, etc.).
Scoundreller 6y ago
I wonder what the lost efficiency is on each tree --> junk mail when it gets burned. I know pulp/papermaking has combustable byproducts, but I don't know how much is "lost": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraft_process#Byproducts_and_emissions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraft_process#Byproducts_and_e... I save most of mine up for the cabin, but it may or may not lead to a lot of extra chimney sweeping.

jnwatson 6y ago

It is easier to me to imagine the waste involved; I live in a high rise. There's a large trash bin in the middle of the mail room that's empty at the beginning of the day and full at the end. 90% of the USPS' job is to transmit dead trees to our waste facilities.

SilverRed 6y ago
But think of all the jobs and money involved in moving those trees.
- maxwell 6y ago
  How does the energy usage compare to digital advertising and cloud computing?
  - Ekaros 6y ago
    One starts to wonder should we just make advertising illegal. As it seems, it is waste in both paper form and as online adds with all the tracking involved...
    - PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
      what's the line between advertising and protected speech? trick question: there is no line.
      - maxwell 6y ago
        Billboards aren't banned in your state? https://movia.media/moving-billboard-blog/why-is-billboard-advertising-not-allowed-in-maine-vermont-hawaii-and-alaska https://movia.media/moving-billboard-blog/why-is-billboard-a...
      - sio8ohPi 6y ago
        The supreme court, unanimously, in Rowan v United States Post Office Department, "categorically reject[ed] the argument that a vendor has a right under the Constitution or otherwise to send unwanted material into the home of another."
        PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
        "Consequently, a mailer’s right to communicate ceased at the mailbox of an unwilling addressee." I would be very suprised if SCOTUS would agree this ruling supports any legislative attempt to preemptively block "communication".
- TchoBeer 6y ago
  "jobs" and "money" don't do anything for society. Junk mail is a drain on resources that doesn't produce anything useful. If the problem is that too many people are unemployed and there aren't enough jobs to go around, that shouldn't be an excuse to not put an end to an incredibly wasteful and annoying practice.
  - pavel_lishin 6y ago
    I think SilverRed was being sarcastic.
    - TchoBeer 6y ago
      Oops.
  - CamelCaseName 6y ago
    Junk mail is "useful" because it distributes information. It's much less effective than, say, books, because there's a lot of overhead and waste in sending junk mail to people who don't care for them. Beyond that, it also subsidizes other mail deliveries. If mail wasn't being delivered to every address, having someone drop off a parcel just for you would be much more expensive.
    - msla 6y ago
      > Beyond that, it also subsidizes other mail deliveries. If mail wasn't being delivered to every address, having someone drop off a parcel just for you would be much more expensive. This is a political decision which indicts the political regime the USPS operates under.
      - omgwtfbyobbq 6y ago
        Do you mean the American political system in general?
        msla 6y ago

throwawayboise 6y ago

Junk mail is vital for the USPS finances. It's over 20% of their income, ~$16 billion/yr. It's a shame. Anthing I get in the mail that's not a first-class letter addressed to me by name goes into the trash unopened. But without the will to significantly downsize and reorganize the USPS it is a necessary revenue stream. https://about.usps.com/newsroom/national-releases/2019/1114-usps-reports-fiscal-year-2019-results.htm https://about.usps.com/newsroom/national-releases/2019/1114-...

cpeterso 6y ago
> Junk mail is vital for the USPS finances. It's over 20% of their income, ~$16 billion/yr. I wonder how time and money processing and delivering that junk mail cost them. They could forgo that $16B and have more time to provide better service for non-junk mail.
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  Support postal banking and postal identify proofing services, both of which would generate revenue that could replace suboptimal activities such as junk mail.
joe-collins 6y ago
Except, of course, that the USPS is categorically not a business, and no fundamental barrier exists to direct funding from the federal government, as with many other federal services. It has historically been expected to self-finance, and doing so may appeal to some sense of prudence, but that does not need to be the case if the externalities of doing so exceeds the income generated.
- HenryBemis 6y ago
  I can be running around my block waving at people. Someone may be paying me $16bn per year to do this. The fact that this is a "$16bn effort" doesn't make it useful. Also consider that if this is a "$16bn effort" the loss is multiple of that. Think of the advertisers (and their clients money), the effort to discard/recycle this garbage etc. The loss for humanity is greater than $16bn. Is this 'type of business' is to be eliminated, then USPS will drop the respective fraction of their use-less resources (staff, trucks, sorting machines, etc.).

Scoundreller 6y ago

I wonder what the lost efficiency is on each tree --> junk mail when it gets burned. I know pulp/papermaking has combustable byproducts, but I don't know how much is "lost": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraft_process#Byproducts_and_emissions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraft_process#Byproducts_and_e... I save most of mine up for the cabin, but it may or may not lead to a lot of extra chimney sweeping.