E-Readers: The Eco Buying Guide

Are e-readers really green? Is there a significant difference between e-readers, from the Kindle, the Nook and the iPad when it comes to their environmental cred? Does what kind of reader you are affect what kind e-reader you should get? Yes, yes and yes.

If an e-reader is in your future — or you’re planning on buying one as a gift — IzzitGreen has done some research for you:

Are E-Readers Really Green?

Consensus is that yes, e-readers are indeed a green reading option because of the fact that they do not require the paper and fuel-consuming processing that dead tree books, magazines and newspapers require, plus there are no shipping/packing worries.

A study done by Environmental Science & Technology’s Erika Engelhaupt  found that if one person subscribed to two electronic newspapers instead of buying them in the paper format and purchased 20 e-books that individual would save upwards of 700 pounds of newsprint per year and 20-40 pounds of paper books per year.[blockquote align="right"]The CO₂ emissions from a printed newspaper are “up to 140 times more” than their electronic counterparts.[/blockquote]
To drive the point home further, Engelhaupt found that a single subscription to The New York Times generates almost 1,500 pounds of CO₂ from production to disposal. This is roughly equivalent, Engelhaupt says of “driving 2,000 miles in a car that gets 25 miles per gallon.” Take into account the 1 million plus weekday subscribers to The New York Times, and you can see the environmental toll just in newspaper.

The manufacturing of these e-readers contributes to their eco-friendliness as well. In its lifetime, an e-reader generates only 77 kilograms of solid waste compared to printed books which generated 94 kilograms, Engelhaupt reported. In addition, she reported that the CO₂ emissions from a printed newspaper are “up to 140 times more” than their electronic counterparts.

The New York Times said: “With respect to fossil fuels, water use and mineral consumption, the impact of one e-reader payback equals roughly 40 to 50 books. When it comes to global warming, though, it’s 100 books.”

Kindle by Amazon

[one_third]

[/one_third] [two_third_last]

Izzit’s Greenest Choice:
Best known e-reader. Top selling item. For good reason.

The Kindle is the green e-reader frontrunner and is the best bet price-wise, currently listed on Amazon for $139. If you believe in the “you get what you pay for” philosophy of economics consider this: The Kindle has been Amazon.com’s number one best selling item for two consecutive years and, according to Amazon, has been the “most-wished-for, most-gifted and has the most five-star reviews of any product on Amazon.”

Kindle uses e-ink that reflects ambient light to illuminate their displays uses less energy than color e-readers, this allows Kindles to be powered for ungodly amounts of time on one charge, smoking all of its competitors by running for up to one month — yes, as in 30 days – as long as its wireless capabilities are turned off.

Consumer Reports noted that the Kindle screen offers “crispness” and added, that, when compared to the iPad, it’s “smaller, a little easier on the eyes and a whole lot easier on your wallet.” [/two_third_last]

Nook by Barnes and Noble

[one_third][/one_third] [two_third_last]Barnes and Noble offers two versions of its e-reader, the Nook, a black-and-white one and a color version, Nook Color. The black-and-white Nook performs many of the same functions as the Kindle, but on Nook Color, which has a touch-screen, the battery has to power an LCD display in addition to the device itself which reduces its battery life to eight hours of reading time before you have to re-charge it.

The original black-and-white Nook — listed for $149 – has won over some critics, with Money Magazine calling it the “#1 pick for e-readers.” The Nook Color – listed at $249 – was designated as CNET’s Editors’ Choice product in November 2010.  Unfortunately, the middle ground held by the Nook Color — without the true reading benefits of the original black-and-white e-readers, nor the broad functionality of a true tablet — leaves the product doing no one thing very well.[/two_third_last]

iPad by Apple

[one_third][/one_third][two_third_last]Apple’s iPad is obviously much more than just an e-reader. You can share photos, listen to music, send e-mail, watch videos . . . the list is endless. Replacing all of your existing devices that handle these functions separately with one iPad will certainly reduce your environmental impact, but some consumers are not necessarily looking for the added bells and whistles included in the iPad.

TreeHugger.com deemed the iPad green. “Apple designed the casings using recyclable aluminum,” TreeHugger’s Tracy Staedter reported. “The screens use LED-backlit displays which are more energy efficient that LCDs and the glass if free of mercury and arsenic . . . [and] contains no brominated flame retardants and is completely PVC-free.”

Apple — which suffered from some negative publicity a few years ago when it was reported that their iPhone contained “toxic brominated compounds, indicating the presence of brominated flame retardants,” according to Greenpeace — touts the energy efficiency of its iPad, saying on its web site: “iPad uses power-efficient components and software that intelligently manages power consumption. In addition, the iPad 10W USB Power Adapter outperforms the stringent requirements of the ENERGY STAR specification for external power supplies.”

As for quality, Consumer Reports said that in addition to “cooler navigation,” the iPad “wowed” them with its “virtual page turns” and added that it provides access to more than one e-book store and its “backlit LCD screen allows you to read the device in the dark.”

However Greenpeace has questioned whether “cloud computing devices like the Apple iPad . . . can contribute a much larger carbon footprint of the Information Technology sector than previously estimated.” [/two_third_last]

What Kind of a Reader Are You: Izzit’s E-Reader Recommendations

If you’re a bookish sort, or are buying for someone with those telltale inky fingers, Izzit recommends a true black-and-white e-reader.  Both Kindle and Nook offer great features and content catalogs, but it never hurts to go with the leader.  So Kindle it is.  With no glare, no backlight, month-long battery life, and a simple, mature design that will have The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest looking current long after it is, the Kindle is your go-to e-reader.

On the other hand, if you’re already Angry Birds-obsessed and want a fully-functioning tablet in the worst way, you can feel good that Apple has finally begun to match solid eco-design with its famous usability in the iPad.

In the coming months, the market will be flooded with new tablets, including entrants from most big PC manufacturers and electronics companies, along with several garage-based start-ups and lesser-known electronics manufacturers.  Some of these tablets will be from companies with environmental records in the “unknown” to “poor” category.  Given that Apple has faced its eco-challenge and passed the test, should lend further credibility to the iPad as your tablet choice.

In the end, the tablet market will likely mature to include plenty of fully-featured models that deliver the energy efficiency and easy-reading attributes of the Kindle for longer reading sessions, along with apps and the multimedia muscle of the iPad.  Until then, you could always buy an iPad for yourself and a Kindle for your partner.  After all, everyone loves to read, but you want to control who plays Angry Birds!