It would appear to be the case, since he is claiming that Wired, the paper magazine is more GHG friendly than Wired, the web version. He says the paper version stores carbon in the landfill?

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/3/4/14538/16236/#comment3

This is easy to clarify.  Add in all the fossil fueled inputs to making the paper, producing the magazine, and transporting and selling it.

Compare that total to the energy to produce the website and make it available on the internet.

Then realize how much more GHG was emmitted to "store" that carbon in the landfill.  Where it isn't stored of course, but instead turned into methane (23 times worse as a GHG than CO 2).

Should a publication about technology and science, on the web or in the mail, be headed up by a technical illiterate like this?  Get a new editor-in-chief, Wired.

Have you seen my predictions about a wireless broadband internet web over the power grid, that would enable renewable smart grid technology?  Thus bundling all that cost cutting, GHG reducing, productivity increasing, job creating technological revolution all together.

A new internet boom coupled to a renewable smart grid boom.  All those separate underground cable systems for phone, internet, wireless internet, cable tv, and cellular phones....replaced by wireless broadband that travels over the power grid and uses it as a wireless antenna. 

The distributed renewable smart grid charging plugin vehicles and powering green electric mass transit and running geo heat exchange heat pumps .....replacing oil, nuclear, coal, and agribizz fuel farming status quo energy systems.

In a block buster economic and environmental revival?  No?  never heard about it? Well read my blog more often then. 

Email me if you need a replacement, I can telecommute.  Hehey.