How we calculate environmental savings

A standard business card weighs approximately 1.8 grams (Karapetyan et al., 2015). Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs) of modern paper production estimate that producing 1 metric ton of paper generates approximately 950 kg of CO₂ (Sun et al., 2018; Tomberlin, 2020). Based on these estimates, a single 1.8-gram business card is assumed to be responsible for approximately 1.71g of CO₂ emissions. It is important to note that these values can vary significantly depending on factors such as paper type, production process, energy source, and country of manufacture.

To help visualize CO₂ emissions, we provide an equivalent distance that a standard petrol car would need to drive to emit the same amount of CO₂. Average CO₂ emissions for petrol cars range from roughly 106 g CO₂/km for new vehicles to about 166 g CO₂/km for the typical petrol car (CO₂ emissions performance of new passenger cars in Europe, 2024; Suarez et al., 2025). Based on this estimate we assume we assume an average of 130 g CO₂/km for our calculations.

To estimate amount of paper saved by switching to digital business cards, we assume that a standard paper business card weighs approximately 1.8 grams (Karapetyan et al., 2015). The total paper savings can then be calculated by multiplying the number of paper cards by this weight. To provide a relatable reference, we convert this weight into equivalent A4 sheets. A standard A4 office sheet (area ≈ 0.06237 m², paper grammage = 80 g/m²) weighs about approximately 5 g, meaning that 1 kg of this paper corresponds to about 200 sheets (Kuhn, 2023). Actual savings may vary depending on the paper thickness, weight, and quality.

The production of paper is generally considered to be very water-intensive, though estimates vary significantly across studies. Specifically, research on priniting-grade paper shows that producing one tonne of paper (1000 kg) can require from 300 to 2600 m³ of water, depending on factors such as climate conditions, forest type, and manufacturing technology (van Oel & Hoekstra, 2012; Schyns et al., 2017). Since the range is broad and influenced by many variables, we use the most conservative point of 300 L per kg of paper. This value sits at the lower end of the peer-reviewed estimates, avoids overstating the environmental impact, and provides a realistic, evidence-based representation of the water used to produce small paper items such as business cards.

To help visualize the water savings, we convert the total liters of water saved into an equivalent number of standard bathtubs, assuming an average bathtub holds about 160 liters of water.

The cost savings from switching to digital business cards are estimated based on an average price of 0.25€ per paper business card. This figure represents a mid-range estimate in the spanish market, considering that prices for paper business cards can vary widely depending on factors such as design, paper quality, printing method, and quantity ordered. By using this average cost, we aim to provide a realistic estimate of the financial benefits associated with adopting digital business cards while acknowledging that actual costs may differ based on individual circumstances and choices.

• CO2 emissions performance of new passenger cars in Europe. (2024). European Environment Agency. Link to source
• Karapetyan, A., Yaqub, W., Kirakosyan, A., Sgouridis, S. (2015). Two-stage Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Paper-based and Software-based Business Cards. Procedia Computer Science, 2015; 52:819-826. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.05.138. Link to source
• Kuhn, M. (n.d.). International Standard Paper Sizes. Link to source
• Schyns, J. F., Booij, M. J. & Hoekstra, A. Y. (2017). The water footprint of wood for lumber, pulp, paper, fuel and firewood. Advances in Water Resources, 107, 490-501 Link to source
• Suarez, J., Tansini. A., Ktistakis, M. A., Marin, A. L., Komnos, D., Pavlovic, J., Fontaras, G. (2025). Towards zero CO2 emissions: Insights from EU vehicle on-board data. Science of The Total Environment, Volume 1001, 2025. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2025.180454. Link to source
• Sun, M., Wang, Y., Shi, L. & Klemeš, J. J. (2018). Uncovering energy use, carbon emissions and environmental burdens of pulp and paper industry: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2018; 92:823-833. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.04.036. Link to source
• Tomberlin, K., Venditti, R. & Yao, Y. (2020). Life Cycle Carbon Footprint Analysis of Pulp and Paper Grades in the United States Using Production-line-based Data and Integration. BioResources, 2020; 15(2):3899-3914. Link to source
• van Oel, P.R., Hoekstra, A.Y. (2012) Towards Quantification of the Water Footprint of Paper: A First Estimate of its Consumptive Component. Water Resour Manage 26, 733-749 (2012). doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-011-9942-7 Link to source