Going green. Being eco-friendly. Getting LEED certified. Saving the environment.

Many organizations are touting the latest eco-friendly buzzwords on recycled paper with acid free ink. But what can these organizations do to make their websites more earth friendly?

If your site has a predominantly white background with dark lettering (most do)... read this post about Black Google. Blog author Mark Ontkush states that if Google used a black background instead of white -- the planet would save 750 Megawatt hours a year. The idea is that light backgrounds use more energy than dark backgrounds -- and that Google gets hundreds of millions of global searches.

So why aren't more eco-friendly company websites light-on-dark?

Designers often argue that dark text on a light background is more readable -- but I found the darker palette (at ecoIron, for example) to be incredibly eye-friendly. Further, after reading at the site for a few minutes and then switching to an all-white site -- I found the contrast to be alarming.

Reading on a white background after reading on dark is actually painful. It's like staring intently at a bare light bulb that is arm's length from my face. (And I have an LCD monitor!)

Reading on a darker palette is definitely more soothing for me. Easier on the eyes.

Is the black-on-white standard a holdover from the print world? By using an eco-friendly palette for our websites -- are we possibly being even friendlier to our health?

Which do you prefer to read online? Light on dark -- or dark on light?

Labels: Presentation

¶ 7/27/2007 05:38:00 PM