How many trees?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by WillAdams

The vast majority of trees which are cut for paper pulp are quick-growing loblolly pines which will be re-planted almost immediately, larger, older, nicer trees are usually cut for lumber, so one should be able to let the 8.85 pounds (of CO_2 per book) figure stand for paper products w/o concern for deforestation.

But what about the CO2 cost of the production and transport of the book? The tree that's used to make the paper may be "carbon neutral", but the rest of the process isn't.

[emellaich]

But just answering the original question ...

A common statistic is about 8,000 (8,333) sheets of copier-grade paper per tree. Newspaper-grade would yield about twice as much if it was cut into the same 8.5x11 size, so about 16,000 sheets.

How many paperback pages per sheet depends on the size of your paperback. Many paperbacks come in 7x4 size, and trade paperbacks are generally 8x5. To make calculations easy, lets assume that a page can be cut in half (8.5x5.5) to make an average paperback size. Since a page has both front and back, this means that 1 sheet is 4 paperback pages.

So, assuming that paperback paper is closer to newsprint, one tree is equivalent to 64,000 paperback pages. If your novel average is 250 pages, then one tree is equivalent to 256 books.

I am by no means an expert on printing -- all of these numbers came from quick google searches, and I didn't attempt to do any detailed verification. And these numbers relied on really gross approximations (how big is an average tree?). Furthermore, I tended to round down, for easy calculation.

I also agree with many of the earlier comments on tree farming, cost of transportation, cost of electronics in eink, electricity, etcetera.

However, I would guess that a round number would be between 250 to 300 books per 'tree'.

[Ekaros]

Also you have to take into consideration that books are carbon storage too. As long as you don't burn them or compost them they are keeping carbon out of atmosphere. So if you keep em forever or dispose them to gas thight enviroment you are acttualy taking some carbon out of system...

[elemenoP]

My head hurts.

eP

[carpetmojo]

Originally Posted by pidgeon92

The people who print up the applications for the United Airlines Visa card have purchased all of the unused paper so they can send me applications virtually daily. Sometimes I get two or three of them on the same day.

So United Airlines are to blame for all the damn "dead" and cold-call phone calls we have lately been besieged by - they can't get the paper to make the junk mail.......

I'd rather have the U.A. junk, frankly....

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

That's like asking how many extra pigs and cows are still alive now that you're a vegan. The answer is none. The sort of trees used for paper are farmed commercially, and as such there will only ever be as many as they need. If the demand for paper ever dries up, the land used for farming trees will be repurposed, most likely for property development.

Yes, this. Trees/paper are a renewable resource that is being managed pretty well these days from what I can gather.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

But what about the CO2 cost of the production and transport of the book? The tree that's used to make the paper may be "carbon neutral", but the rest of the process isn't.

Ebook readers get transported a lot further than the average paperback does, they go from Hong Kong to America, then on to whichever country they are sold in. It's only then that they would be transported as far as a paperback would. There would also be all those computer servers that need to be on waiting for someone to download an ebook.

[Fbone]

From what I hear, there is some type of beetle that is killing a large number of pine trees in British Columbia and the Pacific NW. Effects of global warming, perhaps.
Plus, there is a decrease of new home construction.
All this is causing a glut of wood products. Cost of lumber decreased these last few years. Even my homeowner's ins cost decreased due to cheaper replacement costs.

[WillAdams]

Originally Posted by HarryT

But what about the CO2 cost of the production and transport of the book? The tree that's used to make the paper may be "carbon neutral", but the rest of the process isn't.

That's pretty much what the 8.85 pounds of CO_2 includes, so it's a couple of ounces of carbon bound up in the book itself, and many times that released into the atmosphere.

That's why ebook readers are a benison to the environment.

[kennyc]

I've never seen/heard that word (benison) used in a normal conversation.....

[Kumabjorn]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I've never seen/heard that word (benison) used in a normal conversation.....

I had to look it up. I like that. Feels like I've learned something new.

[kennyc]

Yep, I did too.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Yes, this. Trees/paper are a renewable resource that is being managed pretty well these days from what I can gather.

The lumber industry is largely responsible for the positive PR on their own sustainability. In fact,

• Not as much of the lumber we use is harvested from tree farms, as they would have us believe; huge tracts of virgin forest are cleared every day for paper use (and other lumber-based uses); and
• the process of removing that lumber from the forest, pulping it, turning it into paper and transporting it to the local (or not-so-local) printer is much more environmentally damaging than most people know... and the lumber industry largely ignores or pays lip service to the damage they do.

[ProfCrash]

I remember people discussing the carbon footprint of the K1. The analysis, and this is based on memory, was that reading 44 e-books on your K1 essentially cancelled out the building, shipping, transportation, and battery impact of the K1.

A quick Google search brought up the following articles most from 2009:

http://gigaom.com/cleantech/why-the-...or-the-planet/

For the emergence of the e-Book over the past three years, we can thank breakthroughs in electronic paper display technology and the buildout of high-speed wireless networks. But as use of these gadgets continues to grow, we’ll be able to thank the e-Book itself for some significant reductions in carbon emissions. According to a fascinating report from the Cleantech Group, called The Environmental Impact of Amazon’s Kindle, one e-Book device on average can displace the buying of about 22.5 physical books per year, and thus deliver an estimated savings of 168 kg of CO2 per year. (2009)

http://www.quillandquire.com/blog/in...iendly-option/

There is some disagreement on this, no surprise there, but it sure seems that if you read somewhere between 22.5 and 44 books on an e-reader you are going to offset the envirmental cost of your e-reader. I don't fully get why it matters if you use the device over its entire life cycle as long as you read more then the minimum number of books for an offset.

I would imagine that smaller devices that use less plastic would also drop the number of books you would need to read to offset the enivormental cost of building and shipping the device.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

I would imagine that smaller devices that use less plastic would also drop the number of books you would need to read to offset the enivormental cost of building and shipping the device.

I'd hazard a guess that the battery is the most environmentally damaging part of a reader.