Kindles, Nooks, and iPads, Oh My! The Environmental Effects of E-Readers

Kindles, Nooks, and iPads, Oh My! The Environmental Effects of E-Readers

            Within the past five years, nations across the world have been swept up in a new trendy and technological craze known as e-reading. It has rapidly developed and produced a booming business in the world of literature, magazines, and newspapers, gaining exponential amounts in monetary gain. Geared towards convenience, the developers of products such as the Kindle, Nook, and assorted tablets are all allowing the general public to obtain easy access to their favorite authors, their daily horoscopes, and their subscriptions to hometown newspapers. However, these tiny and convenient devices have caused quite the uproar in several English Language Arts advocates, as well as environmentalists alike. Many claim that they refute the idea of e-reading simply due to the fact that it prohibits them from “holding and smelling” their books, as that seems to bring a “comforting and homey feeling” that e-readers cannot provide. Although several English teachers, professors, and promoters make reasonable claims revolving around pedagogy, a stronger eco-friendly claim can be seen through environmentalists. Various touch screen tablets and e-readers are using harmful chemicals and blood minerals to provide the convenience of “swiping” the pages that we, as a society, desire. These harmful chemicals and minerals are slowly degenerating the earth, as they are difficult to decompose and are extraordinarily difficult to replace. There are also various studies that explore the energy consummation and output. Yet eco-geeks across the world breathed a sigh of relief when they discovered that devices such as the Kindle, require less electricity than a SmartPhone. However, if the entire “go green” population purchases an e-reader purely to save the environment, and then allows it to collect dust in a corner, the value and benefits of this device quickly decline. In order for e-readers to be beneficial in regards to saving paper and printing, each owner must replace a minimum of 20 books on the device per-year. Economically, yes e-readers will save producers and consumers alike a substantial monetary amount per fiscal year. Yet, how “green” are these devices?

            The Book Industry Study Group’s (BISG) “Survey of Consumer Attitudes Toward E-Book Reading” suggests that in the not-so-distant future, people will begin to shift their preferences in the outlet of which they read. According to the study, released in January of 2010, 37% of e-reader buyers purchased their first e-book within the past six months. The data from BISG’s survey also suggests that the consumers of e-books will eventually begin to purchase fewer printer books, thus lowering the demand and then reducing the supply. “25% of e-book owners surveyed said they would buy fewer printed books, 15% said they buy no printed books and 9% said they would not buy a printed book even if the book they wanted was not available as an e-book”. Although the market clearly has a portion of society hooked on their new and improved technology, is it enough to make an economical and environmental difference?

Although many e-readers cost anywhere between $70 to $500, just for the device, the initial cost has proven to be well worth the investment. The cost of the e-books themselves are fractions of the price, some even being completely free, depending on the producer. E-books are much cheaper than purchasing their hardcover or paperback counterparts straight off the bookstore shelves. For example, a Barnes and Noble saleswoman recorder her savings to exceed $80 within the first three months of the purchase of her Nook. Thus, for serious readers and the more advanced English Language Arts advocates, an e-reader such as the Nook or the Kindle would easily pay for itself within the first year or so of purchasing. However, it is important to understand that in order for this hefty purchase of the device to be beneficial, the customer must actually use it, and consistently purchase novels on their e-reader in the same fashion that they might with hardcovers or paperbacks.

The Association of American Publishers reported sales of e-books were up 154.8 percent by the end of April 2009, while overall book sales were down 4.1 percent; 2008 e-book sales totaled $112 million, and some analysts predict sales may reach $400 million in 2012.

By the end of 2008, sales of e-book readers like the Kindle and Sony’s Reader reached approximately 1 million units, while Apple reported more than 1 million downloads of Amazon’s free Kindle e-book reader application for the iPhone or iPad.

It is important to understand that e-readers do have some environmentally benefits in some facet. For example, in terms of carbon footprints alone, “the iPad becomes a more environmentally friendly alternative option for book reading once the reader purchases at least 18 books on it”. Studies have shown that one e-reader does as much environmental damage as 40 to 50 print based books.

E-readers are currently not typically marketed as Eco-Friendly or environmentally beneficial, but their influence on the environment is quickly becoming a serious topic of discussion and research. In a recent and on-going test, six colleges in the United States will be allowing textbooks to become available on e-reader such as the Kindle and the Nook, with the goal to essentially use less paper. A New York Times representative states that “Sustainability is the driving force behind [several colleges] using the Kindle and the Nook”.

Water is also a major consideration in the production of print-based books and e-readers. The United States newspaper and book publishing industries together consume 153 billion gallons of water annually, according to figures by the nonprofit group Green Press Initiative included in the Cleantech analysis. It takes about seven gallons to produce the average printed book, while e-publishing companies can create a digital book with less than two cups of water. Like any other company, e-book publishers consume water through the paper they use and other office activities. Researchers estimate that 79 gallons of water are needed to make an e-reader. Thus, from a water based standpoint, the e-reader owner comes out on top after reading their 12^th e-book.

Downloading e-books can easily take place from the comfort of your own home, your favorite coffee shop, the workplace, and essentially any location where WiFi is available. Thus, this eliminates the factor of needing to drive to a local library or bookstore each time you desire to divulge into some fascinating literary fiction or begin research for a big project coming up. Although it is generally simple to locate a used book online, it still takes petroleum gas to power the vehicles to bring that book to your doorstep in seven to eight business days. Currently, petroleum is a quickly diminishing valuable resource which should be conserved as much as possible. It also is quite harmful to the environment, furthering the reasoning against using it altogether.

It is generally a well known fact that devices such as laptops, tablets, and e-readers (all along with their batteries) require a reasonable amount of carbon emissions to produce. E-readers easily have the capabilities to offset their total carbon emissions within one year, but only if they are used as a total replacement of paper made books. However, if the majority of the users tend to utilize their e-reading devices alongside the use of paper made books, no good will have been done concerning the effects of carbon emissions. According to media analyst, Sarah Rotman Epps, “Right now, e-books are having no positive impact on the environment, unless publishers print fewer books in anticipation of e-book sales. If publishers continue to produce large numbers of books, e-readers will eventually prove to be useless to the environment. This is mainly due to the publishing industry having one of the largest adverse effects on the environment when all factors of production, such as display and distribution, are taken into consideration.

It is not simply purchasing the device that will aide in the reduction of carbon emissions, because if a Kindle or Nook sits on a desk and collect dusts, not only will it be a waste of money for the customer and book publishers, it will damage the environment once it is discarded. Emma Ritch of San Francisco’s Cleantech Group states that, “the key [to being environmentally friendly concerning the Kindle and the Nook] is the displacing of the purchasing of 22.5 physical books” per year. Cleantech’s new studies find that e-readers could have “a major impact on improving the sustainability and environmental impact on the publishing industry, one of the world’s most polluting sectors”. Only in the year of 2008, the United States book and newspaper industries combined resulted in the destruction of 125 million trees, disregarding the wastewater produced, or its massive carbon footprint.

The report asserts that printed books have the highest per-unit carbon footprint — which includes its raw materials, paper production, printing, shipping, and disposal — in the publishing sector. “In the case of a book bought at a bookstore,” Ritch states, Cleantech’s measurement “takes into account the fossil fuels necessary to deliver to the bookstore and the fact that 25-36 percent of those books are then returned to the publisher, burning more fossil fuels.”

True, e-readers save an extraordinary amount of trees per year, the amount of carbon emission during its production is far higher than the standard print based book. The Cleantech study concluded that purchasing three e-books per month for four years produces roughly 168 kilograms of CO2 throughout the Kindle’s lifecycle, compared to the estimated 1,074 kilograms of CO2 produced by the same number of printed books (Graph 1). Of course, none of this means that e-readers are without environmental impact. Consumer electronics, after all, are notorious for containing a variety of toxic materials among their circuitry. Valerie Motis, a Sony spokeswoman, said in an e-mail message that the company’s e-reader products are free of toxic materials, including polyvinyl chloride, or PVC — a particular devil among environmental groups.

An estimated 3kg of carbon emissions are saved each time an e-reader owner purchases an e-book, rather than a print based book. This is due to the fact that 70% of emissions are released when paper is produced, rather than a virtual e-book. Essentially, when a reader is looking a book on their Kindle, Nook, or tablet, they are seeing a carbon neutral book. The impacts from the production of the paper are counterbalanced by the savings in paper, ink, and even in the delivery of print-based books.

The production of ink for printing releases a number of volatile organic compounds into the atmosphere, including hexane, toluene and xylene, which contribute to smog and asthma. Some of them may also cause cancer or birth defects. Computer production is not free of hard-to-pronounce chemicals, to be sure, but both the iPad and the Kindle comply with Europe's RoHS standards, which ban some of the scarier chemicals that have been involved in electronics production. E-readers do, however, require the mining of nonrenewable minerals, such as columbite-tantalite, which sometimes come from politically unstable regions. Thus, in hopes of reducing the world from various harmful chemicals, e-readers are on the right track.

Despite the various problems with waste, chemicals, and carbon emission, one major drawback of e-readers is the fact that they require an enormous amount of electricity from a fossil-fueled power source. In hopes of combating this problem, LG, a Korean company, created a solar-powered e-reader that uses a thin solar cell technology in order to provide electricity to the device. However, LG is currently the only corporation to do so, unfortunately making the beneficial effects seem much less environmentally friendly.

However, several e-readers contain rechargeable lithium polymer batteries. These batteries seem to last extensive periods of time, and compared to nickel-based batteries, they are much cleaner for the planet, during their life and when they are recycled. Over the course of time, e-reader owners will eventually save a reasonable amount of money, as well as energy off of the grid, with these long life batteries.

As with any technology, the market of e-readers is constantly growing, producing new generations of devices. As these new brands and versions are populating the already existing market, the old generations and out-dated versions begin filling up the landfills across the nation. However, some companies such as Apple and Amazon have developed unique recycling programs, yet not everyone seems to be aware of these outlets, nor do they use them effectively. Raz Godelnik, CEO and cofounder of Eco-Libris¹ states that, “according to the EPA, Americans generated about 3 million tons of electronic waste in 2007 alone. Out of that waste, only 13.6% was recycled. The rest ended up in landfills or incinerators, even though, as the Electronice TakeBack Coalition explains, the hazardous chemicals in them can leach out of landfills into groundwater and streams”.

Electronic waste is becoming a growing problem especially in America today. Many electronic devices use the highly toxic element of PVC, which easily leaches out of plastic products, such as e-readers, into groundwater and soil. Although Apple has stated that their iPad and iPhones do not contain any trace of PVC, Kindle and many other e-readers have not been capable to provide the same evidence.

Clearly, the portion of books read in electronic format will continue to increase rabidly in the very near future. Yet, it is not so definite precisely what percentage of books will ultimately be delivered electronically. In order for e-books themselves to be environmentally friendly, the production of print-based books will need to dramatically decrease or halt altogether, thus lowering both the supply and demand for hardcovers and paperbacks. Yet several readers seem to prefer the nostalgic qualities of print-based books over e-readers. They also seem to believe that the harmful qualities of e-reader and e-books outweigh the damaging qualities of paper production and ink. Thus, to make e-readers more appealing, producers must place pressure on the manufacturers of e-readers and tablets to eliminate the use of toxic components, improve recycling of electronic devices, and strive to make the devices even more energy efficient.

Intuitively, the basic conclusion of the Cleantech Group is resounding: “the more you reduce your use of paper media in a single electronice device, the less you’ll pollute by harvesting and shipping physical goods”. It ultimately boils down to if a consumer utilizes their e-reader. If the owner continues to purchase print-based books and periodicals and refrains from recycling the product, the environmental impact of the e-reader potentially can become negative.

            So, unless only fast and furious readers continue to purchase e-readers, the energy required to manufacture and then in turn dispose of an e-reader is much greater than what is needed to produce a traditional print-based book. If each e-reader owner is reading 22.5 or more books per year, devices such as the Kindle, the Nook, and other tablets become environmentally friendly. Much like any product, if these e-reading devices are only used on occasion and generally collect dust on a desk, they eventually only cause harm to the environment through their production, their use, and as they become waste to the earth.