General Category > Climate Change

What’s better for the climate: A paper book, or an e-reader?

(1/1)

rangerrebew:
What’s better for the climate: A paper book, or an e-reader?
MAY 25, 20245:00 AM ET
 
Chloe Veltman

 
The summer reading season is here.

Some people will opt for paperbacks because they're easy to borrow and share. Others will go for e-readers, or audiobooks streamed on a phone.

But which is the more environmentally sustainable option? Reading's carbon footprint is not large compared to other things people do, like travel, and it isn’t something most people consider when choosing how to read a book. But for those looking for small changes in their lives to reduce their impact on the climate, it might be worth exploring how the ways we choose to read books affect the planet.

A complicated question to answer
Whether it's better to read books in print or on a device is complicated, because of the complex interplay of the resources involved across the entire lifecycle of a published work: how books and devices are shipped, what energy they use to run, if they can be recycled.

Digital reading is on the rise — especially audiobooks. According to the Association of American Publishers, they now capture about the same share of the total US book market as e-books — roughly 15%. But print is still by far the most popular format.

https://www.npr.org/2024/05/25/1252930557/book-e-reader-kindle-climate

rangerrebew:
The solution would seem to be stop reading!  That is something liberals and rinos would suggest and communist nations would drool with pleasure to see them do. :headbang:

Navigation

[0] Message Index