Which is Greener: E-Readers or Print Books?

In December alone, Amazon sold over 4 million Kindles. And it’s hard to guess how many other e-readers and tablet devices, like the iPad2, were purchased. However, it’s safe to say that e-readers, and e-books, are a societal norm. They’re devices that most everyone wants to have.

However, is it better to buy one of these devices instead of paper books? Which is safer for the environment?

It’s kind of a complicated issue because most of the companies who make e-readers aren’t open about the environmental impact of the production and distribution of these devices. However, there are some perspectives we can cover to at least give you some food for thought.

E-Readers Save Paper and Water

According to Planet Green, one average sized tree only provides enough paper for 116 books. It takes four gallons of water to create a book. And, a book is published somewhere in the world every 30 seconds. There’s also an impact for the delivery of all those books.

Whenever you buy an ebook, you step out of that paper and water consumption loop. It’s an almost zero-emission transaction.

E-Readers Consume Electricity

So, you’re saving water and paper with e-readers. But, e-readers must be charged regularly, which increases your use of electricity. I haven’t plugged my own Kindle into my Kill-A-Watt device to see how much energy it uses to charge to a full battery. But, I only need to charge it up once every couple of weeks; far less than my cell phone. So, I can’t imagine that it’s using that much energy.

E-Readers Are More Production Heavy

This is a fairly compelling argument; e-readers are small computers. They use glass, plastic, and metal. So, they’re definitely more production heavy than books are. And, they can’t just be thrown in the trash; they must be recycled responsibly. And as you can probably guess, not everyone is going to recycle their e-reader responsibly.

So, What’s the Final Word?

It’s impossible to pin down the exact number of books you need to read in order to justify, environmentally at least, the purchase of an e-reader. I did find a thoughtfully written article in the San Francisco Chronicle that put the number at 10; if you read more than 10 books per year, then you’re better off (again, environmentally), investing in an e-reader.

I read a lot, and I also do a lot of book reviews as part of my work. I have around 250 books on my own Kindle, which means I’ve saved roughly two trees, and about 1,000 gallons of water, not to mention the emissions from the trucks that would have transported those books to my local bookstore, or my house. So, it’s definitely worth it!