Life cycle assessment analysis: e-books clearly beat printed books
The eco-balance of printed books is much worse than that of e-books, even when the reading devices are considered. This was determined by Stiftung Warentest.
(Image: Impact Photography/Shutterstock.com)
Books on paper have a much greater impact on the environment than e-books and the associated reading devices. This was determined by Stiftung Warentest as part of a comparison of media forms. The gap is therefore enormous and, in terms of the ecological balance, switching to e-books pays off after less than a handful of books – depending on their volume. Over a period of five years, the production, and delivery of books for a person who reads many releases more than ten times as many greenhouse gases as the same quantity of e-books – even if the production of readers is included. If people read on smartphones or tablets, which are available anyway, this item is even eliminated.
Clear result
As the foundation explains in the current issue of its magazine, two books of different thicknesses, which are available as paperbacks, hardbacks and e-books, were used as examples for the analysis. These are “Kairos” by Jenny Erpenbeck and “Holly” by Stephen King. Environmental points were awarded for both, the three formats and, by way of example, one person who reads a lot and one who reads a little. In the case of e-books, points were also awarded for the possible reading devices, for example a Kindle Paperwhite from Amazon and a Tolino Epos 3. The production, transportation, use, and disposal of the electronic or printed books and the devices were assessed. The data centers required for the e-books were not included.
Videos by heise
The best result was achieved by a person who reads 12 e-books a year on an existing tablet. In five years, this results in just 0.14 environmental damage points. With an e-book reader, which can only be used for reading, one such damage point is accumulated in this period, whereas with bound books, it is almost 15. However, if these paper books are not passed on at least once for reading, the damage balance doubles again to 30 points, writes the foundation. This also means that paperbacks are significantly less harmful to the environment than hardbacks, so paper books can also reduce the environmental footprint. However, the e-book values are not reached.
Another reason for the surprising result is that the production of books or readers requires significantly more resources and releases more harmful substances than transportation. However, this only happens once in the case of the devices; the same applies to every printed book. The editorial team therefore advises anyone who cares about the environmental impact of reading to switch to e-books. You can try it out with borrowed devices and e-books from libraries, for example. If you would rather not do this, you can also switch to paperbacks, which are also available in the library, or at least pass on purchased books to friends or family to improve your environmental footprint.
(mho)
