Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy

, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp 803–809 | Cite as

Is e-reading environmentally more sustainable than conventional reading?

Brief Report

Abstract

Technology is changing the way we read, with printed material being replaced by electronically published text such as e-books and e-newspapers. Although digitally published texts offer some advantages over printed material in terms of cost and ease of access, it is not immediately clear whether e-reading is environmentally a more sustainable alternative to conventional reading. Therefore, this paper reviews the literature and compares the environmental impacts of the two reading alternatives, taking a life cycle approach. The review of various studies indicates that there are large variations in the impacts for e-readers as well as the printed material, mainly owing to different assumptions. Nevertheless, the results of this work indicate clearly that e-reading can only be environmentally sustainable at very high usage rates, as manufacturing of e-readers has relatively high environmental impacts.

Keywords

Books E-books E-paper Newspapers LCA Carbon footprint 

References

  1. Apple (2013) iPad environmental reports. www.apple.com/uk/environment/reports Accessed 10 Feb 2014
  2. Arushanyan Y, Ekener Petersen E, Finnveden G (2014) Lessons learned—review of LCAs for ICT products and services. Comput Ind 65:211–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boguski KT (2010) Life cycle carbon footprint of the National Geographic magazine. Int J of Life Cycle Assess 15:635–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Borggren C, Moberg Å, Finnveden G (2011) Books from an environmental perspective—Part 1: environmental impacts of paper books sold in traditional and internet books stores. Int J of Life Cycle Assess 16:138–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Deetman S, Odegard I (2009) Scanning life cycle assessment of printed and e-paper documents based on the iRex digital reader. Institute of Environmental Sciences (CML), Leiden University, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  6. Enroth M (2009) Environmental impact of printed and electronic teaching aids, a screening study focusing on fossil carbon dioxide emission. In: Advances in printing and media technology. Proceedings of the 36th International Research Conference of IARIGAI, Stockholm, Sweden, 36:23–30Google Scholar
  7. Guinée JB, Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, De Koning A (2001) Life cycle assessment: an operational guide to the ISO standards; Part 2a. Institute of Environmental Sciences, University of Leiden, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  8. Hischier R, Achachlouei MA, Hilty LM (2014) Evaluating the sustainability of electronic media: strategies for life cycle inventory data collection and their implications for LCA results. Environ Model Softw 56:27–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. IDC (2013) Worldwide and US Tablet 2013 -2017 Forecast Update, www.idc.com Accessed 10 Feb 2014
  10. Kozak G (2003) Printed scholarly books and e-book reading devices: a comparative life cycle assessment of two book options. Centre for Sustainable Systems, University of Michigan, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  11. Moberg Å, Johansson M, Finnveden G, Jonsson A (2010) Printed and tablet e-paper newspaper from an environmental perspective—a screening life cycle assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev 30:177–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Moberg Å, Borggren C, Finnveden G (2011) Books from an environmental perspective—part 2: e-books as an alternative to paper books. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:238–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pihkola H, Nors M, Kujanpää M, Helin T, Kariniemi M, Pajula T, Dahlbo H, Koskela S (2010) Carbon footprint and environmental impacts of print products from cradle to grave. Results from the LEADER project (Part 1). VTT Tiedotteita—Research Notes 2560, Helsinki, FinlandGoogle Scholar
  14. PwC (PricewaterhouseCoopers) (2011) Turning the page: The future of ebooks, www.pwc.com Accessed 10 Feb 2014
  15. Toffel MW, Horvath A (2004) Environmental implications of wireless technologies: news delivery and business meetings. Environ Sci Technol 38(11):2961–2970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Wells J-R, Boucher J-F, Laurent A-B, Villeneuve C (2012) Carbon footprint assessment of a paperback book. J Ind Eco 16:212–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Wischenbart R, Carrenho C, Kovac M, Licher V, Mallya V (2013) Global ebook—a report on market trends and development, updated Fall 2013. Rüdiger Wischenbart Content and Consulting, SebastopolGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Chemical Engineering and Analytical ScienceThe University of ManchesterManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations