This is an incredibly clever idea that makes sense. Just took a teenage science whiz to think of it.
Collecting random samples of teachers’ handouts, Suvir concentrated on the most commonly used characters (e, t, a, o and r).
First, he charted how often each character was used in four different typefaces: Garamond, Times New Roman, Century Gothic and Comic Sans. Then he measured how much ink was used for each letter, using a commercial tool called APFill® Ink Coverage Software.Next he enlarged the letters, printed them and cut them out on cardstock paper to weigh them to verify his findings. He did three trials for each letter, graphing the ink usage for each font. From this analysis, Suvir figured out that by using Garamond with its thinner strokes, his school district could reduce its ink consumption by 24%, and in turn save as much as $21,000 annually.
He applied his logic on a larger scale with one of the biggest ink consumers in the world, the US government. Genius. If this bears out (and it sure seems like it should), this kid should get a medal and a full ride to the college of his choice.
Too many public schools have been so starved for funding that, for years, teachers have had to pay for things like copies and supplies for their classes out of their own pockets. I wonder if this kid took that into account.
It would probably save nothing. First Garamond has a smaller x-height than Times, so the switch to another font is effectively reducing the point size of most letters, which would further reduce legibility, which would require a larger point size, which would defeat the purpose.
Second, most government printing is done on laser printers or at printing presses, not ink jets. Most laser printers are on a service contract with a cost per click charge. The switch to Garamond would save zero dollars. Similarly, presses charge per copy, not for ink coverage.
It’s a cute story, and the kid clearly gave this a lot of thought, but the buzz it’s generating is all about the potential savings, which is approximately sweet F.A.
So by switching to Garamond, you can make your inkjet printer 25% more efficient.
The problem with that is that by switching your inkjet printer to laser, you can make it 500% more efficient.
And what’s more, by switching your laser printer to an iPad, you can make it 100,000% more efficient.
So this is sort of like a power-saving tip that says to replace your 100 watt incandescent light bulb with a 75 watt to save power, and the light won’t be that much dimmer. It sounds great until you realize that you can replace your 100 watt incandescent light bulb with a 15 watt LED light bulb that provides the same light and lasts 25x longer.
Actually, the kid’s reasoning oversimplifies the problem in several ways. Switching to Garamond is the equivalent of reducing point size, which impairs legibility, for one. There’s more here:
http://www.thomasphinney.com/2014/03/saving-400m-font/
Update: just saw Scott Falkner’s post above. Apologies for repeating your first point.