Listening to the radio last night there was a piece about the current inclement weather, and the likelihood of emergency cold weather payments being made to those suffering from fuel poverty.

In the course of the discussion it emerged that pensioners in some parts of the country are apparently picking up cheap books from charity shops to use as an alternative fuel source. The books being cheaper than, say, a 10kg bag of coal or a load of logs.

Book burning has such obviously negative connotations that my immediate reaction was one of horror, not least at the thought of the old folk resorting to such measures. But then I reconsidered... While it may pain me to say it, let's face facts: not all books are things of lasting beauty and value. The volumes finding their way into the fire are hardly likely to be a fabulous Folio Society offering or a first edition. Rather, I imagine we are looking at works such as old Reader's Digest Condensed Editions featuring something by Jeffrey Archer. Actually, anything by Jeffrey Archer. And a heap of out-of-date academic textbooks that are utterly obsolete.

If the calorific value of an unwanted book makes it a useful fuel source, why not use it? Surely it's better than landfill? Perhaps this ostensibly negative development could actually be turned into a positive in terms of print's virtuous circle of sustainability story: "This book is printed on paper from certified sources using vegetable inks, it can be enjoyed for years, it can be recycled, or alternatively when the UK runs out of gas it will burn for half an hour in a multifuel stove".