Is the iPad a Greener Option Than Printed Books?

Introduction

There is much debate on whether the iPad is a greener option than printed books. Where some believe that the iPad is the greener option, others still believe printed books are the better choice — especially when borrowed from a public library that spreads the carbon footprint over an entire community. Print books produce 8.85 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions per book, but only during production. The iPad uses much less carbon dioxide at the point of production, but its emissions are spread over the entire lifecycle of the product and are not as easy to calculate, due to how consumers use the device, electronic power sources, and the toxins involved in the materials used to produce it.

Print book waste stems from large overproduction in manufacturing, editorial error, and how consumers dispose of unwanted books. Manufacturers print large quantities of books that may not all be sold and, in turn, are either incinerated — releasing more carbon dioxide — or recycled. Editorial errors can double the environmental impact by requiring material to be reprinted. When consumers place unwanted books in landfills, the environment is further impacted because the paper is not recycled and reused.

Where e-waste is a growing environmental problem, the iPad contributes to that problem through components that cannot be recycled and toxins in component parts that cause social and environmental harm. Plastics do not decompose back into the earth and are frequently not recycled. Toxins such as columbite and tantalite, used in the production of e-readers, are causing health problems as well as social problems in underdeveloped countries. There is also the question of exhausting valuable resources that do not renew themselves, such as lithium used in the battery.

Technological changes add to these environmental impacts, as upgrades cause devices to become obsolete within a few years. More devices are discarded, sometimes inappropriately. The introduction of new designs and functions increases carbon dioxide emissions with each upgrade to new versions.

Other factors that influence the determination of which medium is most eco-friendly include consumer usage patterns. Studies show it is difficult to calculate how consumers actually use iPads for reading e-books, given the temptations of searching the internet, checking email, visiting other websites, or having more than one book open at a time — all of which can increase distraction. Calculating how much time is actually spent reading an e-book, or determining the number of dedicated reading sessions, is not easily accomplished given these variables.

Still other influential factors include the weight of the iPad, the temptation of theft, and accidental breakage. The iPad is heavier and bulkier, which can affect ease of use. Theft temptation can be high due to the device's consumer cost and the ease of reselling it. Accidental breakage may require repairs or disposal and replacement, potentially adding to the environmental impact depending on the method of disposal.

The purpose of this paper is to determine whether the iPad is a greener, more viable option than printed books. Section two discusses the print book carbon footprint. Section three discusses the carbon footprint of the iPad. Section four compares the two as mediums for users. Section five discusses the problems with iPads. Section six presents the conclusion that the viability of the iPad as a replacement depends on the toxicity of component parts and consumer usage — specifically, how many e-books are read on the device and the nature of those reading sessions.