Sony Reader versus books: what's greener?
Round three: end of life impact
Reader
What happens when your Reader gets dropped, or the battery finally
dies? We don't know. Sony doesn't have a specific recycling scheme in
place for the Reader, and it doesn't say what percentage of the Reader
is recyclable.
Then there's the question of upgrades. Sony's already on the second
generation of the Reader, so what's to say version three won't arrive
within a decade? It could allow you to download books straight to the
Reader rather than using a PC, and might persuade gadget junkies to
ditch their old Reader and rush to buy a new one. Result: more carbon
and more old Readers in landfill.
Score: 2/5
Books
Books are a proven technology that last for hundreds of years. Just
visit the British Library in London or the Deansgate Library in
Manchester for proof.
They can also be recycled, easily passed on to other 'users' and are low value, making them a suitable medium for loan libraries.
Modern consumer electronics, on the other hand, are lucky if they last for ten years before requiring replacement or repair. So it's not unreasonable to guess that over the course of a book's life -- let's conservatively say 100 years -- you might buy 10 different Readers. Which wouldn't be very green.
Printed books' Achilles Heel is the number of unsold books. The UK Publishers Association says 12.2 per cent of total book sales were returned unsold in 2007. That works out at 60.8 million books each year in the UK. Some of those are restocked, some are recycled and some are pulped and binned, increasing greenhouse gases from landfill.
Regardless of where the copies end up, there's no doubting it's an
inefficient way of distributing books. To the industry's credit, it is
trying to reduce returns, and they're down 5.4 per cent between 2003
and 2007.
Score: 4/5
Verdict
Printed books beat the Reader hands-down on end of life impact. And even when you consider the
inefficiencies of returns and pulping in the print book trade, print
still looks better. Printed books are durable and easily recycled.
Total scores
Reader: 9/15
Books: 10/15
On balance, it looks like sticking with Julian Barnes in print is
slightly greener than downloading his latest novel digitally. But due
to the lack of hard evidence and studies, I'd never pretend the
comparison above is scientific or precise. Neither does it encompass a comprehensive ecological impact assessment; I've chosen to focus on carbon rather than, say, the toxic chemicals involved in paper production or inside the Reader.
What it does is offer a broad sense of the environmental pros and cons of print books versus e-books. And, with the information available right now, the humble book looks like the eco champion.
The Sony Reader's on sale today for £200 via Sony Style and Waterstones.
- Share:
To get an avatar and username, log in or register
Anonymous User