Environmental study: 30 min of e-paper reading = 30 mins of print reading

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by slayda

Shouldn't that be "approximately 87%"?

Well, he seemed pretty sure of the number ....

[jakeluck]

did they factor in the energy cost of shipping of the paper books?

[Goshzilla]

Paper is a hard industry to compete against in terms of efficientcy. Very little from a tree is wasted, they even use woodchippings and discarded branches from lumber factories, so that little of any tree is wasted. Most consumer grade paper not labeled as 100% recycled is about 30% recycled. How often does an ebook reader say "30% recycled electronics?" probably none.

This study seems to compare reading ebooks to producing the same duration on paper. So there is a loss of electronic efficientcy if someone were to re-read the same book electronically, versus reading the same paper book. Rereading a book electronically would have the same impact on the environment as producing another paper book. While re-reading the same paper book would not.

[JSWolf]

4 out of 5 dentists recommend.... So what does the 5th one know that the others don't?

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Goshzilla

Paper is a hard industry to compete against in terms of efficientcy. Very little from a tree is wasted, they even use woodchippings and discarded branches from lumber factories, so that little of any tree is wasted. Most consumer grade paper not labeled as 100% recycled is about 30% recycled. How often does an ebook reader say "30% recycled electronics?" probably none.

True, but more than materials efficiency is at stake here, it's also use of other resources and power in production. The rest of the paper equation is the cost of the large amount of electricity, water and toxic chemicals used to produce paper (and those figures probably don't account for environmental issues pertaining to toxic runoff often accompanying paper production).

Originally Posted by Goshzilla

This study seems to compare reading ebooks to producing the same duration on paper. So there is a loss of electronic efficientcy if someone were to re-read the same book electronically, versus reading the same paper book. Rereading a book electronically would have the same impact on the environment as producing another paper book. While re-reading the same paper book would not.

Fair point. However, there is so much printed material that is only read once, like newspapers and magazines, and I think this was what the study was directly referencing. There is a huge industry devoted to producing paper newsprint on a daily basis, so you'd be talking about a significant environmental savings by converting newsprint alone to e-books.

[Alisa]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Fair point. However, there is so much printed material that is only read once, like newspapers and magazines, and I think this was what the study was directly referencing. There is a huge industry devoted to producing paper newsprint on a daily basis, so you'd be talking about a significant environmental savings by converting newsprint alone to e-books.

Yep. The study was focused on newspapers which are also printed close to where they are consumed unlike books which are often shipped great distances. I don't think it accounted for all the surplus copies in every printing either.

[nekokami]

The shell of a reader could be made from post-consumer recycled plastic. And even recycling paper isn't "free" in terms of environmental impact.

I'd like to see an expansion of this study taking more types of reading and more factors into account, though. It would be very helpful to be able to make the case for more green design as more companies may be considering jumping into the ebook reader market.

[eppythacher]

Wait I'm confused. With a memory card I can have the Library of Congress on my Sony reader. How many trees does that take? Hmm now that I think about it all the users on mobileread can have the "Library of Congress" (unit of measurement) on their readers. Won't that save a lot of resources, not having to reprint the "Library of Congress" over and over for all the people that what it

Smoking is one of the leading causes of all statistics.
More funny Liza Minnelli quotes
***
USA Today has come out with a new survey: Apparently three out of four people make up 75 percent of the population.
More funny David Letterman quotes
***
If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.
More funny Ernest Rutherford quotes
***
You cannot feed the hungry on statistics.
More funny David Lloyd George quotes
***
He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts—for support rather than for illumination.
More funny Andrew Lang quotes
***
I can prove anything by statistics except the truth.
More funny George Canning quotes
***
Statistics are no substitute for judgment.
More funny Henry Clay quotes
***
Statistics are to baseball what a flaky crust is to Mom's apple pie.
More funny Harry Reasoner quotes
***
Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.
More funny Evan Esar quotes
***
Definition of a Statistician: A man who believes figures don't lie, but admits than under analysis some of them won't stand up either.
More funny Evan Esar quotes

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by eppythacher

Won't that save a lot of resources, not having to reprint the "Library of Congress" over and over for all the people that what it

Exactly. Once you pass the 30 minute mark, the e-book reader is more economical than paper by an increasing amount. The more books you get in there, the more you save environmentally.

[NatCh]

Unfortunately, that's the sort of logic that is simply too much for some folks to grasp. Usually, you don't find those folks righting study papers though.

[nekokami]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Exactly. Once you pass the 30 minute mark, the e-book reader is more economical than paper by an increasing amount. The more books you get in there, the more you save environmentally.

If you read them, that is. Filling your ebook reader with electrons that you never look at is probably a net loss from an energy point of view.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Yeah, but so is filling your house with printed books you never read!

[Penforhire]

I think I have improved home insulation from all my p-books though...

[Alisa]

Originally Posted by Penforhire

I think I have improved home insulation from all my p-books though...

LOL. I hope my husband doesn't read this. The last thing I need is for him to have another excuse!

[nekokami]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Yeah, but so is filling your house with printed books you never read!

Touché!

I'd think the environmental damage of unread pbooks is worse than that of unread ebooks, though I'm not sure this study would support that theory. Would we go by an estimate of how long the content would take to read, then subtract the power actually used to read the ebook?