Negative Environmental Impact

Materials required for an E-Reader. A common oversight amongst the general population when weighing the environmental impact of the e-reader and print book would be the generalisation that e-readers are environmentally more friendly simply due to the amount of ink and paper they save. However, as reported in an article in The New York Times in 2010, journalists Goleman and Norris found that one e-reader requires the extraction of 33 pounds of minerals. This figure reflects the amount of exotic metals like columbite-tantalite, often mined in war-torn regions of Africa. Furthermore, an e-reader also requires 79 gallons of water to produce its batteries and printed wiring boards, as well as in refining metals like the gold required to manufacture the integrated circuit boards in these devices.

Manufacture of an E-Reader. The largest environmental impact an e-reader has is in the production of the device itself. To illustrate this point, a website reviewing whether electronic devices are better for the environment drew a parallel between e-readers and cloth diapers, where both objects are the greener alternative between a paperback and paper diaper. It does propose, however, that with each download, one’s environmental impact is reduced if directly weighed against buying the same number of paperbacks.

In the manufacture process of an iPad, 130kg of carbon dioxide is produced and the figure of 168kg has been estimated for that of the Amazon Kindle, according to the Cleantech group’s report in 2009 by Emma Ritch. This figure is argued to be fully off-set after its first year of use, however, contingent on the reader downloading more than 22 ebooks annually. This would make up net savings of carbon dioxide worth the 168 kg as mentioned!

Transportation Costs. In contrast to the print book, the negative environmental impact of e-readers stem mostly from the manufacturing and usage of the device, and not from transportation costs.

Usage of E-Reader. The increasing trend towards digitisation in our society cannot be curbed – but is the total elimination of the print book really an ecologically responsible goal? With the increasing global population, the rise in the carbon footprint of e-readers compounds that of print books. Furthermore, the average e-readers are utilised for a mere 2 years before being replaced and discarded of. More often than not, these devices are disposed of in the informal e-waste sector, a point on which I will elaborate on below.

Research has also illustrated that the fossil fuel production to power an iPad is 50 times more than it takes to read a book with a night light. E-Readers that have attempted to solve this issue include the latest Nook Glowlight, which boasts a built-in reading light.

Disposal of Device. In a recent United Nations Environment Programme report titled “Recycling – From E-Waste to Resources”, data from 11 developing countries including China and India revealed that the irresponsible disposal of electronic devices would multiply in five-fold terms by 2020. As the recyclability of an e-reader is limited in some cases, these devices are simply shipped to a developing country, where especially in the informal sector, members of the community manually dismantle electronic products such as e-readers. Therefore, e-reader contribute to the negative impact of e-waste that exposes such citizens to toxic materials and improper handling through methods such as backyard incinerators and whereby the rest of the product is stored in landfills or incinerated.

Image from: http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2010/02/23/e-waste_poison_environment_health/

Image from: http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2010/02/23/e-waste_poison_environment_health/