Whats the Carbon Footprint of printing Federal Reserve Notes?

I keep reading articles on how just about everything man does is impacting the
environment with it's carbon footprint. Just recently yahoo had a story about dogs
being a bigger threat than gas guzzling SUV's.

Polluting pets: the devastating impact of mans best friend

The Vales, specialists in sustainable living at Victoria University of Wellington, analysed
popular brands of pet food and calculated that a medium-sized dog eats around 164
kilos (360 pounds) of meat and 95 kilos of cereal a year. Combine the land required to
generate its food and a "medium" sized dog has an annual footprint of 0.84 hectares
(2.07 acres) -- around twice the 0.41 hectares required by a 4x4 driving 10,000
kilometres (6,200 miles) a year, including energy to build the car.

Years ago, I used to joke around and say (after I farted), if they could charge me
for that, they would. It seems that the door is wide open for things like this to be
given a calculated and numeric value which will result in some kind of tax down the
road. (I'm half joking that my farts will be taxed one day, although I wouldn't be surprised if an all exclusive tax covered things like that)

My question (and I'd like to stay on topic, is this):
Considering the machines that print the money, the materials, the emissions and
other pertinent factors that go into printing our fake economy, what is the carbon
footprint on this?

Is there anyone who can create an honest and fair assumption of what the carbon
footprint is to make Federal Reserve Notes?

Thats a tricky question....do you mean from the point of raw materials?

The materials say just to make nickles needs to be mined, hauled, refined, and after purity is reached it then goes on a 5 MPG 18 wheeler to go to a minting facility.

So yes depending on how far/deep you chase the rabbit its rather a decision of where you draw the line for it.

Or does it go as far as the guy in Washington that makes the order??

[edit on 22-12-2009 by Doc Holiday]

I completely hear what you are saying...
Where doe the rabbit hole end?
but yes the materials would certainly need to be factored..
How were they acquired? all the way to the mint saying "Ta-daaa"!!!

reply to post by keepureye2thesky


You have touched on something I believe will be coming soon. It will soon be too much of an impact on the environment to print money. The money itself will be found to be spreading viruses and sickness. It will have to be taken out of the equation. Of course we know the real reason why this will happen.

gulp...
Chipping? Interesting thought...

reply to post by keepureye2thesky


I don't know quite where the rabbit hole ends, but I do know it does not end at the emissions from my dog's behind. Of this I am certain!

Originally posted by DaMod
reply to post by keepureye2thesky

 

I don't know quite where the rabbit hole ends, but I do know it does not end at the emissions from my dog's behind. Of this I am certain!

Not quite.. you gotta clean it up, right?
Hahahaa. Paper or plastic.

Jackflap brings up an interesting point, though I think.

reply to post by keepureye2thesky


Whats the carbon footprint of Federal Reserve Notes ?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


You must be thinking about that extra $12.3 Trillion (or above $20Tn by some estimates) of money created by the FED & Treas. to bankroll the
Primary-Dealer Banks...who created some $280Trillion in unregulated Derivatives & did not have the required ammount of capital to remain 'Legally' solvent or In-Business.

The Trillions of newly created money did not have to be physically made and then circulated... all those Trillions of newly created money
(Poof! from thin air) are only book ledger entries

but the FED gets paid their 5% commission for allowing those favored Banks to put the ledger entry money in the Plus column...allowed by the authority of the FED Reserve itself !

how's that for making a quick buck...
but i guess it's all 'green' money because there was no impact on the environment in creating those Trillions, now circulating in part as End-of-Year Bonuses

Originally posted by St Udio
reply to post by keepureye2thesky

 

The Trillions of newly created money did not have to be physically made and then circulated... all those Trillions of newly created money
(Poof! from thin air) are only book ledger entries

Right, I remember hearing somewhere that the actual physical money in circulation in print is a very small percentage of the total money that is to be accounted for. (Numbers on a computer screen, digits in a bank book etc).

I am still curious to know what the impact is for the materials used to make coins and bills physically. Doc Holiday mentioned mining and refinement as a step. I would think that this leaves a bigger footprint than my dog.

reply to post by keepureye2thesky


Thanks keepureye2thesky. That was just a thought I had while I was thinking about the opening post. It does make sense though. If you look at how much it costs to print money, the justification could very well be that we are forced to stop the practice. I believe it costs more than a nickel to make a nickel. So they could very well say that we now have an extra billion taken off the debt because we just stopped minting coins and printing money. At the same time touting the advantages to the environment and stopping the spread of disease. Sounds peachy, huh?



[edit on 22-12-2009 by jackflap]

Originally posted by jackflap
reply to post by keepureye2thesky

 

Thanks keepureye2thesky. That was just a thought I had while I was thinking about the opening post. It does make sense though. If you look at how much it costs to print money, the justification could very well be that we are forced to stop the practice. I believe it costs more than a nickel to make a nickel. So they could very well say that we now an extra billion taken off the debt because we just stopped minting coins and printing money. At the same time touting the advantages to the environment and stopping the spread of disease. Sounds peachy, huh?
[edit on 22-12-2009 by jackflap]

Seems kind of logical to save a buck by not minting or printing. It must be cheaper to have numbers floating in cyberspace rather than circulating cash.
Kind of a scary thought. What choice would you have at the point?!

Originally posted by keepureye2thesky
reply to post by keepureye2thesky

I am still curious to know what the impact is for the materials used to make coins and bills physically.

I'm pretty sure that the US Treasury gets operational funds appropriated by Congress each year,

a little sleuthing about the budget at the various 'Mints'
minus the payrolls
would yield a figure for all the 'rounds' used in minting various coins

as far as the special ink, paper, counterfeiting safeguards, etc
it's hard to estimate, but it has to be less than $1 to print a 1$ bill...
probably less than a 'mill' = 100th of a cent each
to print any denomination Note, but i'm just guessing wildly


thanks,

[edit on 22-12-2009 by St Udio]

Approximate Current Cost of Minting Various U.S. Coins * Penny - 1.26 cents * Nickel - 7.7 cents * Dime - 4 cents * Quarter - 10 cents * Dollar (Coins) - 16 cents

coins.about.com...

I found out how much it costs to mint the coins. The paper money I believe can be made for cents.