It may be true that student printing on campus has seen a reduction since the plan was put into place, but it does not follow that any paper was actually saved, and in reducing the use of printers on campus the University may have managed to achieve the appearance of waste reduction while actually changing nothing.

Last year, Student Technology Services (STS) officials found “piles” of printed pages in student labs that were printed for personal reasons, including invitations, announcements and general co-curricular needs. One might be tempted to think that now, with those piles of pages absent from the trays of printers, less frivolous material is being printed. But those needs don’t go away just because printing is no longer free. Student groups still need flyers, events still need invitations, and students still need to write term papers. The only difference is that now students have an incentive to go off-campus whenever heavy-duty printing is needed, since the University’s printing rates are outrageously high for any sort of bulk printing. Additionally, it would be premature to conclude that waste has been reduced without considering how many students purchased personal printers after hearing about the printing restrictions. STS’ confidence in any environmental savings as a result of the restrictions ought to be taken with a grain of salt.

On the other hand, the problems that the printing ban creates in pursuit of saving paper are obvious and well known. The sluggish pace of the Olin Library computers was infamous when I was a freshman, and the addition of a clunky printing system makes the process even slower.

Should the printer fail to connect to the server, as is often the case, one has to repeat the entire process over again on another computer. Printing on the way to class can easily become a nightmare, and having to portion out an additional 20 minutes every time a paper is due in class, in my case twice a week, is unacceptable. I have yet to connect successfully on my first attempt.

And downsides aren’t justified for the average user. According to STS, more than 90 percent of students will not exceed the $40 limit given to on-campus students—in other words, they aren’t the significant contributors to paper waste on campus. It’s the top 10 percent who are wasting the most, and they are the ones going to FedEx, Kinko’s and OfficeMax. The printing policy creates the illusion of savings while only washing the University’s hands of the matter.

If Wash. U. is committed to reducing paper waste, it should take steps to make paper as superfluous as possible. The University could provide an online system for paper submission, or create virtual bulletin boards. They could encourage online textbooks. They could actually try to reduce the need for students to use paper on campus. Trying to reduce campus printing is not the same goal, and will not result in the same benefits. This printing ban might help Wash. U.’s image, but it will not help the environment.

I don’t like having to pay for printing. Paying a few cents per page makes me mad. It makes me mad the same way guac and sour cream costing extra on campus makes me mad. These make me mad because the separate fees are deceptive. When I buy a burrito, I expect sour cream to be included in that $5.95. I don’t expect to pay an extra 50 cents for it.

Now, the guac and the sour cream are arguably nonessential. However, printing is essential, so I expect it to be included in my tuition fee—not tacked on after where financial aid cannot help. So, I am bothered whenever people tell me to just stop printing to save money. The printed document has many qualities not found in digital documents that make it essential to our education.

Sustainability advocates encourage us to go “paperless.” They point to the advantages of it, such as: shareability, ease of searching within and across documents, access from anywhere with Internet and more. They don’t mention the drawbacks: the need for a computer, a lack of flexibility and a lack of malleability.

Since the document is digital, you need something that takes electricity to read it. As most of us do not have e-readers, we use computers to read them. These computers are power hogs, contain toxic-heavy metals and are replaced approximately every three years. How is that sustainable?

By flexibility, I mean that I can read the printed word anywhere it is light enough. I can spread books out all across my desk, instead of being constrained by the 13.3-inch “desktop” on my laptop. Trying to write a paper while consulting a notebook and other texts is best done by spreading them out on the desk with a computer to type on. Trying to view everything at once on a screen that is tiny compared to your physical desktop is inefficient. The printed word allows you to work more quickly and in more situations than the digital document does.

What I mean by lack of malleability is that I can do whatever I want to a physical copy, whereas I can only do a few things with a digital copy. Some PDF readers let you make notes, highlight and whatnot, but doing so takes more time and the notes may not transfer. They also become cumbersome if you try to do anything beyond the program’s capabilities, like drawing a stick figure to mark an important person or trying to write an equation in the margin. Taking notes on paper is just more effective and quicker.

Then there are the issues brought about by using high technology unnecessarily. Data loss due to hard drive failure, a virus or theft is a common occurrence. Those people who have shifted over to the paperless age can lose everything. I haven’t had a notebook crash on me in years, and the last time my textbook got a virus was when I sneezed on it. In short, books are not only easier to work with, but they are also more durable.

Digital copies are a long way from doing everything paper can do. Until they can do all that and more, we won’t see a “paperless” age. That is why I need to print for my classes, and that is why printing is essential to my education.

So my thoughts on the matter are not “Great, this will be good for the environment,” but rather “I am paying how much for this school, and they want to nickel and dime me?” By making all students pay for printing, Wash. U. is charging us extra for an education that we thought we had already paid for.

Matt Lanter | Student Life

Printing on the South 40 has increased considerably after the implementation of a printing fee in Eads.

Students on the South 40 need to continue cutting back on paper usage, according to administrators at Student Technology Services (STS). Although PaperCut software is being used in these residential areas, there has actually been a substantial increase in the amount of printing done in residential computer labs this year.

The PaperCut monitoring software is used on main campus and in the residential areas. The labs use the program, in which students have to log in to print, to dissuade students from printing more than is necessary. While the labs on main campus charge for printing, printing in dorm computer labs run by STS remains free.

Barbara Braun, the director of STS, believes that the increase in printing is at least partially due to the newly instated charges for printing on campus. She believes that students are turning to the residential computing labs for free printing instead of paying for printing on campus.

Last academic year, about 2.25 million sheets of paper were used in the residential printing labs. This year, Braun predicts that the number will be higher than 3 million.

“PaperCut helps us manage printing and cut down on waste,” Braun said. “It does not cut down on printing. Only students can do that.”

The week of March 14, 80,000 sheets of paper were used in residential printing facilities.

In the month of February alone, 29,992 sheets of paper were used in the Dardick computer lab. According to STS, this is equivalent to using 37 percent of a tree, leaving a light bulb on for 8,512 hours or emitting 258 pounds of carbon dioxide.

Braun said there are things that students can do to decrease the amount of paper being used in these computer labs. Documents are already printed double sided. Students can print two pages per sheet of paper, which would halve the number of pages printed.

The Student Technology Advisory Committee (STAC) has started to e-mail the top 10 users of paper each week to notify them of the high volume of paper they are using.

According to Braun, this is to help the “resources to be allocated evenly.”

The volume of paper used, particularly given the University’s reputation as an environmentally conscious campus, surprises students and members of the University community. Even so, students recognize the amount of printing that is necessary for many classes.

“We use a lot of paper,” freshman Sarah Garay said. “I wish that teachers would be more willing to let you bring your laptops into class. It could cut down a lot on paper use.”

Senior Cristina Woodhouse lives off campus. She finds the newly instated charges for the Arts & Sciences printers to be inconvenient because she no longer has a source of free printing.

Adjusting to printing less has been a learning process for many students who live off campus.

“It is inconvenient, but it is probably helping the environment, which is something we should all learn to do anyway,” Woodhouse said.

Even though printing on the 40 increased this year, the University’s newly implemented printing software, and charges, have been effective in reducing printing on campus.

Earlier this year, the University campus ushered in a series of changes with its printing programs. Both on main campus and in the residential areas, the PaperCut software was installed on computers.

For the first time, students have been charged to use the Arts & Sciences computing labs. Prior to this, students in Arts & Sciences could use the lab in Eads to avoid the library’s printing charges.

According to Marcia Mannen, associate director for client support of Arts & Sciences computing, charging students to print has caused a substantial decrease in the amount of paper wasted every day.

Last year, students would sometimes leave the labs rather than wait for their print jobs to finish, and they would come back later to reprint. As a result, about 500 pages were abandoned in the Eads labs every week. This year, 10-20 sheets are left in the lab every week.

According to Mannen, 516,572 sheets of paper were printed in the Eads printing facilities in the fall 2008 semester. In contrast, 74,796 sheets were printed last term after the charges were instated.

The business and engineering schools also started to use the PaperCut software this semester, though their allowed printing quotas are higher.

Dear 10 most wasteful printers,

We know who you are.  Though we cannot point you out in a crowd and belittle you for the gluttonous tree eaters you are, (which is what you all deserve) know that your acts do not go unnoticed—not by us, nor by any higher being. We would appeal to your empathy, point out how this community cherishes its printing, but such entreaties would only amuse you. We would exhibit your own selfishness to you if we thought you erred in ignorance.

We would demand your confession if we believed you were capable of regret. But when 10 threaten the resources of 4,000, we realize we are not addressing a conscientious bunch. Merely know that as bookbinding remains a minor at this school, there is no way your printing penchant is anything but criminal. If you are an English major printing out your latest novel-length effort, know that nothing that has happened to you is worthy of such waste. Or if you are a business school student intent on proving the tragedy of the commons, know that this is a stupid way to make your point. And if you are the kind of cheap student who will print out your American history sources rather than pay $11.95 for the paperback, know that your selfish ways are why you have such difficulties making friends.

It is unlikely that you will ever be able to repay the school. Present your penitence to whatever God you know. And hope that your fellow students, whom you have wronged irrevocably, will forgive you.
So please, go easy on the printing.

Sincerely,
Student Life Editorial Board

But this tradition will soon be changing. The Student Technology Advisory Committee (STAC) and Student Technology Services (STS) have teamed up to reduce printing waste in residential halls.

Their solution is a system that enables students to print to a virtual universal printer from anywhere in Residential Life housing. They can then go to a printer anywhere on the residential campus and release their print job from that printer. But they must actually be in the computer lab to print the job.

Members of STAC and STS hope this system will cut down on the number of pages students print and never pick up.

The new system is managed by PaperCut. PaperCut gives Washington University technology services the power to implement many different sanctions, including paper quotas, fees per sheet of paper and the new release system.

Members of STS have high hopes for the new system.

“We hope that by having to physically be at a printer, that will cut back on the amount of waste,” said Barbara Braun, director of STS.

Although STS has not kept count of exactly how much waste there has been in the past, employees say they often observe a large number of packets that just sit in the computer labs until someone recycles them.

Students have also noticed this wastefulness.

“There’s this big tray full of paper that nobody ever uses,” sophomore William Swanson said.

Few students have reported problems with the new system.

“I think that so far students’ reaction to it in res-halls has been really positive,” said John Bailey, manager of STS. “I think the students like that you can print to the system anywhere and release it to any printer in the system…which I think is a nice thing they didn’t have before.”

Students also seem to understand the need for the new system.

“In terms of wastefulness, yes, it’s a good idea. In terms of convenience it might not be, but when it comes to environmental issues in general, oftentimes convenience has to be sacrificed, because in the long run what’s most important is that our environment is in a stable condition,” freshman Justin Blau said.

“I think it makes sense because if someone goes there and prints and doesn’t pick their things up, it saves paper,” sophomore Bridgette Zou said.

STS will be tracking the results of the new program over the next few semesters.

“We’re going to be monitoring this fall and this spring, working with STAC to see how printing totals compare and watching recycle bins to see waste anyway,” Braun said. “We’re taking it out for a test drive, and we’ll see what happens.”

The new policy can potentially make the campus a bit greener and the University’s endowment a bit larger.

Under the conditions of this new policy, the printing of a one-sided, two-sided or color piece of paper will be accompanied by a charge of four, six or 25 cents, respectively, in an effort to encourage sustainability across campus.

In a time of heightened awareness about the global climate change and environment, such an action reflects prudence and innovation. In its last evaluation, Wash. U. only received a C+ on its College Sustainability Report Card. As a leading university, Washington University holds the responsibility of setting an example for the surrounding areas and further. The printing policy sets a precedent of accountability and greenness, if you will, in a hitherto unutilized way.

With a monetary charge, students will now consider not only the implications of having piles of paper lying around their dorm room, but also a mounting charge on their student account. Is it worth printing this paper for a meager three lines of information about the mating habits of the African baboon? Why not just watch the Discovery Channel or scribble them down in a notebook? With an awareness of this policy, students will print less and rely more on resources that they already have.

This new mandate also encourages the innovation of even more ways of using less paper and sustaining the environment. Maybe because of these charges, professors will accept assignments via e-mail. Maybe syllabi will be distributed through Telesis and not packets of paper. Maybe the University will have to worry less about toner and notice the deepening hue of green spreading from the South 40 to The Village.

In addition to reducing the resources consumed by students and faculty alike, the policy will aid in shrinking Wash. U.’s financial woes. In a speech given in February, Chancellor Mark Wrighton announced that the University’s endowment had shrunk an unprecedented amount of between 10 and 25 percent. Certain cutbacks would have to be made, he warned. Construction was delayed. Budgets were tightened.

This policy helps to offset, if only by a tiny amount, the financial problems that our Univesrity faces. If each student prints two twelve-page papers every semester, Wash. U. will have approximately $12,000 extra by the end of this year. Comparatively speaking, that is a very small amount of money, but is it insignificant? Not in the slightest bit.

Click here to read the counterpoint.

Tell that to a student who is in three Writing Intensive courses this semester, and I have no doubt that a look of frustration or pure vitriol will flash across her face. I mean, we’re spending $50,000 per year to come to this school, so we shouldn’t have to pay extra for assignments, should we?

Honestly, though, it is only a very small fee. I love this university and I want to do everything I can to help it along, because I not only feel like I’m learning, but I also feel a sense of community. That is what this policy asks us all to do. The charge is small, but when we come together with our ideas and our finances, we help shape the condition of this community and the world itself.

Just remember this when you print off your first paper of the semester: Sometimes it takes a little gold to be green.

I see two possible ways for Wash. U. to solve its printing problem. The first is to require, or at least strongly recommend that students buy a personal printer. Inkjet printers today are very cheap, one can get a high-quality printer for less than $50. Of course much of the cost of owning such a printer comes from the cost of ink cartridges, although recently, services have sprung up that allow you to refill cartridges for a fraction of the cost of a new one. Considering what books, laptops and other essential schools supplies cost, I don’t think it would be outrageous to expect students to buy a printer. What is necessary is better information regarding the issue. If perhaps I were informed before the semester that printing on campus can be difficult, I might have brought my printer from home instead of relying on public printers. Unfortunately, I left my printer at home, and am left to struggle with the over-taxed and poorly-maintained machines that exist on campus.

An alternative to asking students to provide their own printer would be to provide easy access to printing across campus. Currently, this is far from true. Printing in the library is a pain, as one must sign into a computer (about a five minute ordeal), print their document, and then go to a print release station to print the document. Besides the library, other printing options on campus are scarce. Some dorms have computer labs, but because these printers are free, they are over-used, and thus are often broken, or out of either paper or ink. As any engineering student well knows, the Center for Engineering Computing (CEC) has only three extraordinarily outdated and overworked printers designed to handle the printing loads of more than 100 computers. In fact, during busy times, the CEC’s hallway smells of burning plastic and printer toner as the printers print nonstop as they struggle to meet the demand. Dozens of people then crowd around the printers to find their documents, and papers get lost and stepped on. Instead of the hodgepodge of printing options currently available, the University should provide one system that allows fast and easy printing across campus. This should mean that no log-in is necessary to print, that there are enough printers to meet demand and that the printers are not often out of paper or toner. Of course implementing such a system would be costly, but I am confident that the few thousand dollars it would cost would be well worth the frustration it would save students.

Although five or 10 minutes to wait for printing here and there is a small nuisance, those minutes add up. Also, a broken printer at the wrong time can spell doom for a student with an impending deadline. The system as it stands is simply unacceptable. The two solutions I have outlined both address the current system’s problems. Both have drawbacks, but the University should at least begin fixing what is a major problem on campus.