Are e-readers more environmentally friendly than paper books?

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by wizwor

All these studies pit some mythical e-reader against a prototypical library of books, but anyone who reads these forums KNOWS that people who own e-readers own LOTS of e-readers.

Anyone who reads these forums is not a typical reader. I daresay most people have one ereader and keep using it because that's what they are used to -- some people here, on the other hand, treat ereaders as collectibles. mgmueller has "26 Readers, 44 Tablets", and geekmaster has "*.*"

And many people here have a number of devices, because, being unusually knowledgeable about ereading, like having different options.

[barutanseijin]

You can't just look at the device; e-readers aren't much good without servers somewhere serving up content 24/7, without wires, power plants of various sorts, probably a computer in your home to run Calibre, a router, etc. etc. That's a lot of toxic waste that someone will have to deal with, not to mention a lot of energy to keep that infrastructure running. If the infrastructure goes, the e-reader on is just a lump of toxic crap.

A paper book is more of a standalone device. A book can be produced in various ways, from mass print runs on sophisticated machinery to copying by hand on papyrus. If you have to, you can deliver a paper book by bicycle, by wheelbarrow, horseback or by foot. Once produced, a book runs on a combination of solar & human power.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by barutanseijin

You can't just look at the device; e-readers aren't much good without servers somewhere serving up content 24/7, without wires, power plants of various sorts, probably a computer in your home to run Calibre, a router, etc. etc. That's a lot of toxic waste that someone will have to deal with, not to mention a lot of energy to keep that infrastructure running. If the infrastructure goes, the e-reader on is just a lump of toxic crap.

A paper book is more of a standalone device. A book can be produced in various ways, from mass print runs on sophisticated machinery to copying by hand on papyrus. If you have to, you can deliver a paper book by bicycle, by wheelbarrow, horseback or by foot. Once produced, a book runs on a combination of solar & human power.

It's perfectly good even just with the computer that you'd have anyway.

[barutanseijin]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

It's perfectly good even just with the computer that you'd have anyway.

I don't think so. The content is generally delivered by the internet in some fashion, even if the last centimetre comes over USB or through a micro sd slot.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by barutanseijin

I don't think so. The content is generally delivered by the internet in some fashion, even if the last centimetre comes over USB or through a micro sd slot.

One initial investment, much like the initial investment in printing a book. "Once produced, a book runs on a combination of solar & human power."

You are assuming "If the infrastructure goes, the e-reader on is just a lump of toxic crap."

[MikeB1972]

Originally Posted by barutanseijin

You can't just look at the device; e-readers aren't much good without servers somewhere serving up content 24/7, without wires, power plants of various sorts, probably a computer in your home to run Calibre, a router, etc. etc. That's a lot of toxic waste that someone will have to deal with, not to mention a lot of energy to keep that infrastructure running. If the infrastructure goes, the e-reader on is just a lump of toxic crap.

A paper book is more of a standalone device. A book can be produced in various ways, from mass print runs on sophisticated machinery to copying by hand on papyrus. If you have to, you can deliver a paper book by bicycle, by wheelbarrow, horseback or by foot. Once produced, a book runs on a combination of solar & human power.

For paper books you seem to be forgetting Servers/Home computer for buying the book online, Heat/Lighting/Constuction/Maintenace of B&M stores/libraries, warehousing, transportation, power for the tree felling equipment.

You can't try and include all the infrastructure for eReading and then ignore everything for paper.

If the infrastructure goes the eReader still has all the books on it you just can't get more (Same as with paper books).

[WillAdams]

Originally Posted by wizwor

Eventually, someone is going to eat or bathe in the toxic residue of the e-reader.

Not if it's recycled responsibly.

I've made it clear to my locality that I value the annual electronics recycling, and expect that it will be conducted in an ethical and responsible matter (and I also get a kick out of the people who have signs noting they want this or that collectible bit) --- contact your county board of supervisors and demand (and ultimately pay for) the same.

[ProfCrash]

I would also point out that people who share accounts are also doing the environment a huge favor. I share an account with my Mom and MIL. We live in three different parts of the country. If we were reading paper books and I wanted to read a book they were I would have to check it out of the library (something I was crap at doing) or purchase it (the more likely outcome). Sharing an e-reader account means that we can share the book, which saves us money and the purchase of two paper books.

My mother has had 2 Kindle DX's, she lost the first one. In the four years she has had it she has read many a book on it. We have shared many a book. So life is good and the planet is happy.

In the US, there are stores that collect electronics and batteries for recycling.

I have not heard much about what goes into recycling paper and the like but there are resources involved in that process.

As I understand it. the problem with recycling electronics is in the adhesives that are used to attach the precious metals can be toxic. Some companies do their best to find the least problematic methods for building their products but that does increase the price. Apple apparently has a good track record with this.

Like all things, responsible constuction or production costs more. So if it is something you are interested in, you need to do your research and pay a higher cost for the product.

I have not looked into Amazon's production process for the Kindle or if they use recycled goods and the least dangerous practices. But my Kindles are happily in the hands of others after I move on, one is in Afghanistan, one is with my Mother, and the third is with my Mother In Law. They are seeing a lot of use and will hopefully be used to read enough books that they will have been enviromentally friendly.

[QuantumIguana]

We need more plasma converters. Plasma converters use extreme heat to break down the waste. It's not a garbage burner, it breaks down the substances - it's hotter than burning, the molecules disassociate rather than making new combinations. Burning plastics isn't a good idea because it leaves a lot of toxic chemicals, but plasma gassification breaks it down into a burnable gas that can be used as a fuel. The heavier elements form a slag which can be processed further. Although it uses a lot of energy to break down the substances, it is a net producer of energy. There are are 9 plamsa converter plants in operation with 5 more planned. It's better than garbage burners and better than landfills.

Here's a link to the article on Plasma Converters http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_gasification

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by barutanseijin

I don't think so. The content is generally delivered by the internet in some fashion, even if the last centimetre comes over USB or through a micro sd slot.

This could make a difference if your only use or even if 90% of your use of the internet is to acquire ebooks. Downloading a purchased/PD/library book usually takes less than 30 seconds for me. Locating the book and deciding on buying/borrowing it takes a longer time, but I spend far more internet seconds reading articles or forums or researching non book purchases weekly then I do for a years worth of books. And my router is plugged in and my internet is connected 24/7 so how could I be using any more power etc. Well maybe a dollar or two a century. Maybe even a dollar or two a year.

Helen

[wizwor]

Originally Posted by WillAdams

Not if it's recycled responsibly.

I've made it clear to my locality that I value the annual electronics recycling, and expect that it will be conducted in an ethical and responsible matter (and I also get a kick out of the people who have signs noting they want this or that collectible bit) --- contact your county board of supervisors and demand (and ultimately pay for) the same.

That guy at your local transfer station doesn't care what your 'values' are and you are not the only person disposing of e-waste. You can 'expect' anything that you want, but the reality is that most e-waste ends up in landfills. Even the stuff that IS recycled isn't magically reintegrated into the ecosystem. A lot of it is turned into shopping bags (which end up in landfills) and the rest is put in piles somewhere.

This is all mental masturbation. If you want to be green, the order of priority is...

- Reduce (use less manufactured stuff)
- Reuse (give it to someone else when you are done)
- Recycle (try to use it for something else)

Reduce say that you read the same book over and over. Reuse says you borrow a book from a friend of the library (that you walk to). Recycle is the last option. If you select eco-friendly books, you can landfill them and they will go away after a short time. Otherwise, you are leaving a mess for someone else.

[lucian.g]

Check this article. The kindle has the edge here

Study paints Kindle e-reader a dark shade of green

[wizwor]

'cause CO2 is THE threat to the environment?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by wizwor

'cause CO2 is THE threat to the environment?

The problem is that it's very difficult to assess the TOTAL environmental impact of a product. Yes, you can assess the "carbon footprint" of something, but given the fact that both paper making and making electronic devices are nasty, polluting industries, how do you weigh the impact of one against the other?

Personally I don't buy readers because I think they are better for the environment, but because they let me carry around lots of books at once.

[wizwor]

Getting back to my use less, reuse, recycle point, this is the problem...

Kindle PW2, iPad Retina Mini, iPhone 4, MS Surface Pro

Chances are the 'greenies' are responsible for tons of ewaste not pounds.