Back to articles
Articles
Volume: 27 | Article ID: art00083_2
Image
Carbon Footprint Analysis Comparing a Digital Frame to Printed Photos
Tom Etheridge
Tim Strecker
  DOI :  10.2352/ISSN.2169-4451.2011.27.1.art00083_2  Published Online :  January 2011
Abstract

Electronic digital photo frames provide a convenient, aesthetically pleasing way for consumers to display several photos in a small space. Though convenient, these displays require continuous electrical input during operation while printed photos rely on reflected ambient light for viewing. To understand the relative environmental impact of both photo display options, a carbon footprint analysis was performed comparing a digital frame over its expected lifespan with 4” × 6” photos printed in album format on a HP printer. We find that operating an average digital frame displaying 200 photos at 44 hours per week for 2 years has a carbon footprint greater than 6 times that of a 200-photo album printed on a HP OfficeJet 6500 All-in-One printer. For the OfficeJet-printed photos the printer bill of materials, photo album materials, and energy consumption all contribute similarly to the carbon footprint. In the case of the digital frame, energy impacts from the usage model are critical for determining the overall impact. In this paper we present our carbon footprint model, the underlying assumptions, and a sensitivity analysis of the results

Journal Title : NIP & Digital Fabrication Conference
Publisher Name : Society of Imaging Science and Technology
Publisher Location : 7003 Kilworth Lane, Springfield, VA 22151, USA
Subject Areas :
Views 15
Downloads 3
 DOI 10.2352/ISSN.2169-4451.2011.27.1.art00083_2
 articleview.views 15
 articleview.downloads 3
  Cite this article 

Tom Etheridge, Tim Strecker, "Carbon Footprint Analysis Comparing a Digital Frame to Printed Photos"  in Proc. IS&T Int'l Conf. on Digital Printing Technologies and Digital Fabrication (NIP27),  2011,  pp 728 - 731,  https://doi.org/10.2352/ISSN.2169-4451.2011.27.1.art00083_2

 Copy citation
  Copyright statement 
Copyright © Society for Imaging Science and Technology 2011
72010410
NIP & Digital Fabrication Conference
nip digi fabric conf
2169-4451
Society of Imaging Science and Technology
7003 Kilworth Lane, Springfield, VA 22151, USA
2169-4451(20110101)2011:2L.728;1-
nip_v2011n2/splitsection83.xml
/ist/nipdf/2011/00002011/00000002/art00083
Articles
Carbon Footprint Analysis Comparing a Digital Frame to Printed Photos
EtheridgeTom
StreckerTim
01012011
2011
2
728
731
2011
Electronic digital photo frames provide a convenient, aesthetically pleasing way for consumers to display several photos in a small space. Though convenient, these displays require continuous electrical input during operation while printed photos rely on reflected ambient light for viewing. To understand the relative environmental impact of both photo display options, a carbon footprint analysis was performed comparing a digital frame over its expected lifespan with 4” × 6” photos printed in album format on a HP printer. We find that operating an average digital frame displaying 200 photos at 44 hours per week for 2 years has a carbon footprint greater than 6 times that of a 200-photo album printed on a HP OfficeJet 6500 All-in-One printer. For the OfficeJet-printed photos the printer bill of materials, photo album materials, and energy consumption all contribute similarly to the carbon footprint. In the case of the digital frame, energy impacts from the usage model are critical for determining the overall impact. In this paper we present our carbon footprint model, the underlying assumptions, and a sensitivity analysis of the results