Why We’re Still Testing Recycled Planner Paper

A customer recently asked whether we would consider using recycled paper in our planners. My reply became long enough that I thought: this probably belongs in a blog post.

The short answer is yes. We already use 100% post-consumer waste paper in our lined notepads, and I would love to keep expanding where we use it.

For our planners, I’m still looking for the right balance. I care about where the paper comes from, how it is made, and how it feels when you sit down with your favourite pen. A planner is something you might write in every day for a year. Those details matter.

What I’m looking for in a planner paper

I’ve tested many recycled papers, and I’ve hesitated to move our main planners onto the samples I’ve tried. I want the paper to work well with the pens, highlighters, and markers our community loves.

Recycled content alone doesn’t tell us how a paper will handle ink. The way the sheet is made matters, too. Papermakers use a treatment called sizing to control how readily liquids spread and soak into paper. Research on water-based printing inks also shows that the paper’s pore structure and sizing affect ink penetration. That helps explain why I need to test each paper with actual pens. Li and colleagues, BioResources (2015).

There are a few different things I’m watching for. Bleed-through is ink reaching the other side of the sheet. Ghosting is being able to see the writing through the page, even when the ink hasn’t bled. Smoothness, drying time, and the weight of the finished book matter as well.

Our recycled notepads are already a lovely reminder that recycled paper can perform well. I want to find a paper that meets the needs of our planner formats, too.

Why I want to keep working on recycled paper

Post-consumer waste paper gives material that has already been used another life. There is good evidence for pursuing it: a 2022 life-cycle assessment commissioned by the German Environment Agency found environmental advantages for recycled paper across almost all the categories it assessed, including lower energy and water requirements. The study focused on graphic and tissue papers for the German market, so its results aren’t a footprint calculation for an H&O planner. They are a useful reason to keep researching recycled options. German Environment Agency study.

We’re now developing custom papers with a European mill, beginning with Archivist 70gsm. That partnership gives us a way to keep experimenting with the paper recipe. Finding a recycled blend with the writing qualities I’m looking for is part of the work I want to continue.

Where our paper comes from matters

Our Heritage 120gsm paper carries FSC certification and SFI Certified Sourcing. Our Archivist papers are developed with an FSC-certified European mill. You can find those sourcing details in our planner guide.

It’s useful to be specific about the labels. FSC has separate labels for material from certified forests, recycled material, and mixes that can include controlled wood. SFI Certified Sourcing has its own requirements and does not, by itself, tell you the proportion of fibre from certified forests. These are different claims, even when they appear on the same paper. FSC’s label guide; SFI’s label guide.

A little history: how forestry and paper regulation developed

I find the history behind these rules helpful. Timber shortages, damaged watersheds, and pollution gave governments practical reasons to act. Over time, the goals expanded from maintaining a supply of wood to protecting more of the living systems around it.

Canada: from timber supply to forest health and cleaner water

Canada’s federal forestry service began in 1899, although much of forest regulation developed provincially. Here in British Columbia, concerns about future timber supplies helped lead to the 1912 Forest Act and the creation of a Forest Service. In 1947, amendments introduced management for a sustained timber yield through regulated harvest rates. The aim was to make the resource last and give communities and industry a continuing supply. Canadian Forest Service history; B.C.’s timber-tenure history.

The idea of sustainability later became broader. Ontario’s Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994, for example, addresses long-term forest health, biodiversity, and the social, economic, and environmental needs of present and future generations. That is a much wider brief than keeping a mill supplied with wood. Ontario’s legislation.

Paper-mill pollution has its own history. Canada introduced federal pulp and paper effluent rules in 1971, but the limits initially served only as guidelines for mills already operating. Stronger rules in 1992 extended enforceable standards to all mills and required environmental-effects monitoring. The government’s historical indicator shows the share of fish-toxicity tests meeting the standard rising from 25% in 1985 to 97.4% in 2020. That measures improvement in a particular pollution test, rather than the health of an entire ecosystem. Environment and Climate Change Canada’s regulatory history and results.

The United States: protecting watersheds, then tackling mill pollution

In the U.S., the Organic Administration Act of 1897 set out timber supply and water-flow protection as purposes of federal forest reserves. The Weeks Act of 1911 followed concern about damaged forest watersheds in the eastern states. Forest protection had a very practical connection to the water that communities depended on. U.S. Forest Service research on that history.

The National Forest Management Act of 1976 strengthened planning for national forests, including public participation and consideration of ecological resources. Its national-forest planning requirements should not be mistaken for one uniform harvesting code for every privately owned U.S. forest. Ownership and jurisdiction matter. National Forest Management Act.

For mills, the Environmental Protection Agency introduced national pulp and paper wastewater standards in 1974 and 1977. Its 1998 “Cluster Rule” brought major controls on toxic wastewater pollutants together with toxic air-emission standards. This is another reason that forest sourcing and paper manufacturing deserve separate questions: they are different stages, with different environmental rules. EPA’s rulemaking history.

Europe and the EU: old forestry ideas, newer shared protections

One European milestone goes back much further. In 1713, Saxon mining official Hans Carl von Carlowitz published Sylvicultura Oeconomica, arguing for the conservation and cultivation of wood so that its use could continue. Mining and other industries needed enormous amounts of timber, and shortages made the consequences of overuse difficult to ignore. His work became a landmark in the European tradition of sustained forestry. TU Bergakademie Freiberg’s account.

Modern EU rules developed alongside national forestry laws. Forest management remains primarily a member-state responsibility. Shared protections include the 1979 Birds Directive and 1992 Habitats Directive, which protect designated species and habitats and underpin the Natura 2000 network. European Parliament’s forestry overview; European Commission’s nature-protection history.

On the manufacturing side, the EU’s 2010 Industrial Emissions Directive established a framework for permits based on best available techniques. The pulp, paper, and board sector received specific technical conclusions in 2014, covering matters such as emissions, wastewater, monitoring, and efficient use of water and energy. These rules apply to the industrial installations within their scope. European Commission’s explanation; 2014 pulp and paper requirements.

The EU also added controls on the trade in illegally harvested timber: its Timber Regulation began applying in 2013, with due-diligence requirements for operators placing covered timber and timber products on the market. That extended scrutiny beyond the location of the mill to the legality of the wood entering the supply chain. European Commission’s timber-regulation history.

Voluntary certification came later than the early forestry laws. FSC held its founding assembly in Toronto in 1993 and registered its head office in Mexico in 1994. Certification adds another way to assess sourcing, alongside the legal requirements. FSC’s account of its origins.

That history gives me more confidence in asking concrete questions about paper: where the fibre came from, how the forest is managed, and what happens at the mill. The rules and their enforcement still vary by place, and a legal requirement is not a guarantee of zero impact. I want to understand the particular paper we use within that bigger picture.

The energy behind the paper matters, too

Paper production takes energy, and the source of that energy matters. Our planners are printed and bound in Ontario, where nuclear and hydro supply most of the electricity generated on the provincial transmission grid. In 2025, those sources accounted for 48.2% and 23.1% of that output respectively, according to the Independent Electricity System Operator. IESO generation data.

That is useful context for the printing and binding stage. Paper manufacturing is a separate part of the process, with its own location, electricity supply, and heat requirements.

In Canada’s wider forest sector, bioenergy supplies about 55% of annual energy demand, according to Natural Resources Canada’s report using data through 2021. Using biomass for heat and power is one of the changes that has helped reduce fossil-fuel emissions. Biomass still releases carbon dioxide when burned, so renewable energy should not be read as emission-free. Natural Resources Canada; U.S. Energy Information Administration.

For our own papers, a precise environmental comparison would need information from the actual mills and production runs. A country’s electricity mix can only tell part of that story.

And what about going paperless?

I understand the appeal of using less paper. I also think the phrase “go paperless” can make the digital alternative sound less material than it is.

Electronics have an end-of-life problem of their own. The UN’s Global E-waste Monitor 2024 reported 62 million tonnes of electronic waste worldwide in 2022, with 22.3% documented as formally collected and recycled. Those figures cover electrical and electronic equipment broadly, not just phones and computers. ITU and UNITAR findings.

For me, “paperless” is not a synonym for sustainable. Digital devices and infrastructure depend on raw materials, manufacturing, energy, and water, with environmental impacts throughout their lives. UN Trade and Development’s 2024 report documents those impacts. I think they deserve just as much attention as the paper in our hands.

What I’m working toward

I love paper. I love the feeling of opening a book, finding my place, and putting a thought somewhere I can come back to.

My job is to keep asking how we can make that experience with better materials: keep testing recycled fibres, keep asking our suppliers questions, and keep paying attention to how the finished paper actually works for you.

I can’t promise a recycled planner paper or a launch date yet, but it's definitely something we're actively working on. 

With gratitude,
Tia