Save the Planet, Font-wise

This page has now been moved to some thoughts on which font is BEST.

Font Ecology

Related to my Type face or font readability page, different people have their views on what is the best font to use for readability. Personally I think they are barking up the wrong tree for the most part, but many are firmly fixed in what they believe.

So how about this then, from the University of Wisconsin.

‘The University of Wisconsin-Green Bay has come up with an unusual way of saving money: changing their email font. The school expects to use 30% less ink by switching from Arial to Century Gothic. From the article on Wisconsin public radio: “Diane Blohowiak is the school’s director of computing. She says the new font uses about 30 percent less ink than the previous one. That could add up to real savings, since the cost of printer ink works out to about $10,000 per gallon. Blohowiak says the decision is part of the school’s five-year plan to go green. It’s great that a change that’s eco-friendly also saves money.”’

Well that throws the favourite-font proponents into a difficulty doesn’t it? In the trade-off between optimum readability and saving the planet, which should you choose?

In my case the problem is not a serious one, since I believe that the mostly-standard fonts are all equally readable. I just need to bear in mind consumables usage.

Of course the best way to be ecological with your printing, is to say what you were going to say in half as many words, but I suppose for a university that would be a hard rule to impose.

And another way of being more prudent with ink usage is to tend towards the smaller type rather than the bigger. Oh dear, all these theories about readability and there are these ecological busybodies out to wreck them! What is one to do?

Next page in this set: The Fonture of Futes .