Where did you get this information from? I find it really interesting but I would love to know what its based on?And did it say why its based on new books that aren't passed on? Surely buying used books would mean even less carbon emissions again?
She, It makes me feel better that I buy used books.
Becky, I got this from Slate (linked above). This is how I read it: old books that are passed on don't take up the paper and power used to print them like new books, therefore using less emissions. When you read as many books as we do in a year, either buying used books or buying an ereader (and reading more than 20 books on it) will lessen your reading carbon footprint.
I'm kinda confused by the graphic and maybe it's just the way I read books. I've debated on getting an e-reader; however, if I'm going to actually purchase a new book they tend to be books by favorite authors or something that I want to keep for a long, long time. Or I'd just get the book from the library.
I'd be interested to see how much added the Co2 operating costs would add to the e-readers carbon footprint.
tediousandbrief, Ok now I see it. I suppose for the ipad it would be hard to measure, as the users surely use the power for other things besides just reading ebooks. The kindle though, that one wouldn't be too hard considering there isn't much else to use it for (I believe, I don't own one).
Well, there you go! I am now justified in all my shopping at Half-Price Books. That's my excuse, and I'm sticking to it! I got so many bargains over Memorial Day weekend, I really need to post about it.
I love it... like I needed another excuse to shop at used bookstores.
ReplyDeleteMelissa, I know!
ReplyDeleteI suspect the savings in paper/trees pretty much offset the carbon emissions, but I'll keep shopping the used bookstores regardless. :)
ReplyDeleteI'm posting this on my blog too! Thanks for another great discussion topic.
ReplyDeleteI really like this! Makes me feel better about not making the switch to ereader ;p
ReplyDeleteWhere did you get this information from? I find it really interesting but I would love to know what its based on?And did it say why its based on new books that aren't passed on? Surely buying used books would mean even less carbon emissions again?
ReplyDeleteSally, Me too :)
ReplyDeleteLoni, Go for it!
She, It makes me feel better that I buy used books.
Becky, I got this from Slate (linked above). This is how I read it: old books that are passed on don't take up the paper and power used to print them like new books, therefore using less emissions. When you read as many books as we do in a year, either buying used books or buying an ereader (and reading more than 20 books on it) will lessen your reading carbon footprint.
I'm kinda confused by the graphic and maybe it's just the way I read books. I've debated on getting an e-reader; however, if I'm going to actually purchase a new book they tend to be books by favorite authors or something that I want to keep for a long, long time. Or I'd just get the book from the library.
ReplyDeleteI'd be interested to see how much added the Co2 operating costs would add to the e-readers carbon footprint.
tediousandbrief, I think they accounted for ereader operating costs... at least they should.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't look like it. The asterisk on the poster states "Does not include operating power" for both the Kindle and iPad.
ReplyDeletetediousandbrief, Ok now I see it. I suppose for the ipad it would be hard to measure, as the users surely use the power for other things besides just reading ebooks. The kindle though, that one wouldn't be too hard considering there isn't much else to use it for (I believe, I don't own one).
ReplyDeleteWell, there you go! I am now justified in all my shopping at Half-Price Books. That's my excuse, and I'm sticking to it! I got so many bargains over Memorial Day weekend, I really need to post about it.
ReplyDeleteinteresting find! i've been looking for something to justify my avoidance of e-readers so i'll refer to this from now on :)
ReplyDelete