RE: Paper vs Electric hand drying

[Jim Cooper <james.cooper@socma.com>]

Karen,

You raise a great point.  Life-cycle analysis, as well as other
parts of environmental science, is riddled with jargon to make it
seem like rocket science.  Really, it's not.  It's only as complex
as a person wants to make it.  Unfortunately, some folks make it
really complex so they feel like only they can do it right.  We
make decisions every day based on probability, uncertainty, and
other scientific principles.  The difference is, we, as citizens
and somewhat normal people, don't try to calculate everything 
exactly.  Who has the time?  We tend to use ranges, like this:
     
  Usually....most of the time....half the time....rarely, etc.

The easiest way to approach life-cycle analysis is by simplifying 
the questions to which you are seeking answers:

1. What are the raw materials to make it?
     (Are they mined or synthesized?  Are there by-products?)
2. How much energy is required to convert the raw materials?
     (Whether is coal, gas or electricity, it all starts with
      fossil fuels.)
3. How much does it weigh? 
     (Heavier products require more energy for transportation.)
4. What's done with it after it's used?
     (Remember, recycling requires energy for transportation,
      recovery, cleaning, facilities, etc.)
5. What are the consequences of disposal or recycling?
     (Contamination, by-products, stays put for a long time, etc.)

The key in this exercise is recognizing when something is not
addressed in a publication or argument.  If somebody simply states
one method is better than the other, without answering some of these
questions above, then the analysis is not very complete.

I hope others follow your lead and take the time to ask questions
like this.

Sincerely,
Jim Cooper