If you are one of those people who reads more than 5 books per year then a Kindle is definitely for you. According to a report by the Cleantech Group, the Kindle is more environmentally friendly than paper books. The publishing industry is one of the most polluting sectors in the world. In 2008, The U.S. Book and newspaper industries combined resulted in the harvesting of 125 million trees.
The report by the Cleantech Group, titled "The Environmental Impact of Amazon's Kindle" looks at the emissions that devices could produce and prevent. According to the report, a single Kindle displaces the purchase of 22.5 books each year which results in an estimated carbon savings of 168 kg of CO2. It also says that if the full storage of the Kindle is used then the device prevents almost 11,185 kg of CO2 from being released. That is a significant amount and could help the environment drastically especially with sales of the Kindle expecting to touch 14.4 million in 2012.
The Cleantech Group also forecasts that e-readers purchased from 2009 to 2012 could prevent an estimated 5.3 billion kg of carbon dioxide in 2012 or 9.9 billion kg during the four year time period.
According to the study done by Emma Rich, the Amazon Kindle still has a significant edge when taking into account the manufacture and mining required to produce an electronic device.
This is what Emma Rich had to say in her conclusion; "The roughly 168 kg of CO2 produced throughout the Kindle's lifecycle is a clear winner against the potential savings: 1,074 kg of CO2 if replacing three books a month for four years; and up to 26,098 kg of CO2 when used to the fullest capacity of the Kindle DX. Less-frequent readers attracted by decreasing prices still can break even at 22.5 books over the life of the device,"
They also noted that the production of a Kindle produces 168 kg of C02 compared to 7.46 kg of CO2 for a book. They say this citing sources that electronic readers need electricity to run.
They argue that the electronic reader industry can only make a significant impact once people start mass movements from paper media. "A user that purchasers fewer than 22.5 books per year would take longer to neutralize the emissions resulting from the e-reader, and even longer to help reduce emissions attributed to the publishing industry," according to the study.
It comes down to whether people continue to buy books or print papers along with an e-book. The question then is; Are you going to buy an e-book? If so, will you purchase more than 22.5 books per year?
Via CNET
Same. I'm looking for the cheaper book... and if my local library has it, I sometimes just pick it up from there. I've read three books on my iPod Touch Kindle app, and would get more if they were cheaper than paperback. I'm more likely than not going to get a paper book than digital book if they are the same price.
exactly! ... this 'eco' (i.e. GREEN) crap is just a bunch of BS. they just trying to brainwash the public into thinking there's a problem with it's minimal at best.
but either way... at the end of the day for the average joe... it's all about PRICE/convenience more than anything else.
Whew. I see. It's because of people like you that we're still steps and steps away from being eco-friendly.
...
Wait did I say steps? I meant light-years.
Sad, but true...
10-20 years ago _dandy_.
there is no one replacement for what we use today
as we phase out fossil fuels, well be using different solutions around the world
Well they should hurry up and develop more efficient hydrogen production instead then... once they get to a point where the energy output of burning hydrogen is greater than the energy needed to produce it, our world will be transformed overnight. Energy will become more or less free of charge once the infrastructure is in place. Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe.
Lets just hope greed fossil fuel energy corporations don't hold back development or even sabotage experimentation, ala. Chain Reaction
If you actually believe that the multi-billion dollar petroleum industry is going to allow energy to be free of charge, you're in for a big disappointment.
Most ebook readers have highlight as an option anymore.... along with note taking
We still don't know... What we do know is someone at Cleantech likes the Kindle, but beyond that, their analysis is too weak to do more than earn the thanks [& possibly revenues] of Amazon. To really do a serious analysis Cleantech would have had to account for every step of the Kindle's life cycle, including it's demise & burial in a landfill. If they want to focus solely on CO2 emissions, then at least account for the mining, the chemical plants, manufacturing, transportation of both materials & finished products, & to be thorough, effects on on both people & markets -- for example Amazon's servers for e-books are hardly environmentally neutral, especially when compared to bookshelf. ;-)
Actually, I wrote the report. I don't particularly have feelings one way or the other about the Kindle. The full report DOES address every step of the Kindle lifecycle from mining, to manufacturing, distribution, energy use, and disposal. But of course, this site cannot republish the entire report, as it is copyrighted.
Joking, of course. +1 to anybody who can spot the reference here.
Day After Tomorrow
Joking, of course. +1 to anybody who can spot the reference here.
On another note, Farenheit 451 anyone? Wait until we burnt all the books for warmth and then we only have kindles, at which point the world governments ban reading, creating a tyrant world government banning reading even of the sports section
Sounds like a movie too, lets see who can guess this:
Hmm.. tough one. The only movie I can think of that has a government that rules with an iron fist like that is V For Vendetta.
Nope, I was thinking more of Equilibrium, its about the future after I believe WWIII, where people have to take a drug to be emotionless, and there are "rebels" out there who try to preserve works of art and literature, its a good movie
@Jubber2002: Yeah, the government will wait until everybody's using Kindles, burn the books, and then wipe the Kindles wirelessly like Amazon did with those books not too long ago.
Who buys 22.5 books a year? I rarely buy books
My wife buys over 50 books a year.
Your wife must be one of those people bending the curve upward, I doubt most people buy that many books.
What type of books does she read?
Sounds like you need a hybrid.
Do they still run on smug?
What type of books does she read?
First of all, the statistic was taken from people who actually buy Kindle. Not that the average person reads 22 books a year. Secondly, I'm not sure you know what an average is.
The study doesn't assume that everyone does, but it concludes that once a user buys 22.5 books, they have prevented as much emissions as were generated in the lifecycle of the Kindle, which is 168 kg.
At one point the study is quoted as saying the Kindle breaks even at 22.5 books over the lifetime of the device. At another, it's 22.5 books per year. Which is it?
The Kindle breaks even at 22.5 books over the lifetime of the device.
It's like the auto industry - no, it *doesn't* need rescuing to the point of sustaining it in America/UK etc, just aiding it's decline to be more gentle. Imagine the price we pay for this labour which could be reduced if replaced with technology or the roles transferred to lower cost, more developing countries. Retrain these workers and you have a new, more efficient, more effective workforce, which in the long term is better for them and us.
You would think. However the reason the price is/has gone up is because of companies that had been buying paper are moving to more tech-oriented ways of producing their print, and the companies that are still using paper for their products refuse to or cannot afford to buy the paper at an elevated price.
I'm sorry for the people who lost their jobs, but I'm in the camp that says lowering a paper mills production is a good thing.
If anything digital copies are likely to survive a longer time than physical ones as they aren't subject to wear and tear.
I mean...good luck reading many 200 year old books
If anything digital copies are likely to survive a longer time than physical ones as they aren't subject to wear and tear.
I mean...good luck reading many 200 year old books
200 years is nothing for a book or other written material. Visit a museum, you can read stuff written thousands of years ago. Preserving digital information isn't so easy, there is already stuff being lost because it was saved on archaic media formats that can no longer be read.
What? Have you gone mad? If a digital file is "cared for" it will last for far longer than printed type. Your argument assumes that there will be care taken, yet you fail to prove that care can't be taken with a digital file.
What do you think has better odds of being read 500 years from now; a real book or an ebook on some ancient holographic disc format?
http://liswiki.org/wiki/Digital_Dark_Ages
Last edited by Skyfrog on 31 Aug 2009 - 19:17
If your that worried about germs im surprised you have lived to the age you are now. Image whats floating around on store shelves when you pick something up to look at it, or open a public door handle. Books from a library are as steril as a hospital when compaired to that.
Do you lick your hands up like a cat after handling a book? If you have this weird habit of sticking germs in your mouth, then yeah you should probably avoid public library books. If you have good hygiene and wash your hands regularly throughout the day, then you should be fine. Do you not touch counters in public places too?
Instead it would be best to read eBooks on a laptop. Laptops provide more functionality, and its very likely that if you have a Kindle, you already own a laptop or would want the functionality of a full computer OS. Maybe you could emulate the 'feel' by turning off the backlight or maybe computer makers will release laptops with eInk. I just think having a separate device for reading eBooks is wasteful.
Instead it would be best to read eBooks on a laptop. Laptops provide more functionality, and its very likely that if you have a Kindle, you already own a laptop or would want the functionality of a full computer OS. Maybe you could emulate the 'feel' by turning off the backlight or maybe computer makers will release laptops with eInk. I just think having a separate device for reading eBooks is wasteful.
That's a good point. If someone really wanted to be eco-friendly they would first figure out if they could read eBooks on something they already have... not buy yet another piece of plastic to later just throw away because a new version is out.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.