<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8216;Books vs. eEbooks: Which are greener?&#8217;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.teleread.com/2008/08/31/books-vs-eebooks-which-are-greener/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.teleread.com/ebooks/books-vs-eebooks-which-are-greener/</link>
	<description>News &#38; views on e-books, libraries, publishing and related topics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:28:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob Preece</title>
		<link>http://www.teleread.com/ebooks/books-vs-eebooks-which-are-greener/comment-page-1/#comment-889626</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob Preece</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 01:49:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.teleread.org/blog/2008/08/31/books-vs-eebooks-which-are-greener/#comment-889626</guid>
		<description>Again, this may be true in the US. I doubt it&#039;s true in Indonesia. Even if it is true, two saplings are hardly the same as one substantial tree in terms of carbon impact.

Again, you&#039;ve got to consider more than the trees. Shipping trees to pulp mills, pulping, the chemical process of bleaching and papermaking, shipping paper to printing plants, all of the chemical messes in inks, shipping books to warehouses, shipping from warehouses to distribution centers and bookstores. Storing books in beautiful air conditioned bookstores, stripping covers and returning covers, trade paperback and hardback books, driving to bookstores to buy books, storing books at home. Books in landfills (rotting and adding carbon to the atmosphere), it all adds up.

Save a tree is shorthand, but far from the full story.

Rob Preece
Publisher, www.BooksForABuck.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Again, this may be true in the US. I doubt it&#8217;s true in Indonesia. Even if it is true, two saplings are hardly the same as one substantial tree in terms of carbon impact.</p>
<p>Again, you&#8217;ve got to consider more than the trees. Shipping trees to pulp mills, pulping, the chemical process of bleaching and papermaking, shipping paper to printing plants, all of the chemical messes in inks, shipping books to warehouses, shipping from warehouses to distribution centers and bookstores. Storing books in beautiful air conditioned bookstores, stripping covers and returning covers, trade paperback and hardback books, driving to bookstores to buy books, storing books at home. Books in landfills (rotting and adding carbon to the atmosphere), it all adds up.</p>
<p>Save a tree is shorthand, but far from the full story.</p>
<p>Rob Preece<br />
Publisher, <a href="http://www.BooksForABuck.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.BooksForABuck.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Meadows</title>
		<link>http://www.teleread.com/ebooks/books-vs-eebooks-which-are-greener/comment-page-1/#comment-889244</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Meadows</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 15:38:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.teleread.org/blog/2008/08/31/books-vs-eebooks-which-are-greener/#comment-889244</guid>
		<description>I seem to recall hearing that for every tree lumberjacks cut down, they are required by law to plant two. This would mean that paper may have a greenhouse cost in the short run, but in the long run it actually helps.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I seem to recall hearing that for every tree lumberjacks cut down, they are required by law to plant two. This would mean that paper may have a greenhouse cost in the short run, but in the long run it actually helps.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob Preece</title>
		<link>http://www.teleread.com/ebooks/books-vs-eebooks-which-are-greener/comment-page-1/#comment-889215</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob Preece</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 15:03:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.teleread.org/blog/2008/08/31/books-vs-eebooks-which-are-greener/#comment-889215</guid>
		<description>I agree that analyses that charge the environmental costs of computers against the eBooks are horribly unfair. People have computers for various reasons and eBook reading is an incremental use. Charging the cost of generating electricity is fair, but again, it should be incremental. Many people don&#039;t turn off their PCs even when they&#039;re not actively working on them so the electrical cost of eBook reading may be minimal. Of course, downloading rather than making a drive to my nearest Barnes and Noble (approximately 20 miles) is a pretty huge deal. 

I think nobody ever evaluates the environmental costs of providing climate-controlled storage for books--both before and after sales. I don&#039;t think I&#039;ve seen a paper book evaluation that includes the environmental cost of building huge Barnes and Nobles, of running their air conditioning, or of stripping land to make vast parking lots. 

Book publishers are becoming increasingly aware of the environmental consequences of offshore printing--which has contributed to the deforestation of several third world countries. It isn&#039;t correct, however, to assume that all paper comes from well-managed local forests equipped with environmentally-conscious paper-making facilities.

Further, with advances in technology (like ePaper), the greenhouse costs of eBooks will continue to decline. Not so with paper.

Rob Preece
Publisher, www.BooksForABuck.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that analyses that charge the environmental costs of computers against the eBooks are horribly unfair. People have computers for various reasons and eBook reading is an incremental use. Charging the cost of generating electricity is fair, but again, it should be incremental. Many people don&#8217;t turn off their PCs even when they&#8217;re not actively working on them so the electrical cost of eBook reading may be minimal. Of course, downloading rather than making a drive to my nearest Barnes and Noble (approximately 20 miles) is a pretty huge deal. </p>
<p>I think nobody ever evaluates the environmental costs of providing climate-controlled storage for books&#8211;both before and after sales. I don&#8217;t think I&#8217;ve seen a paper book evaluation that includes the environmental cost of building huge Barnes and Nobles, of running their air conditioning, or of stripping land to make vast parking lots. </p>
<p>Book publishers are becoming increasingly aware of the environmental consequences of offshore printing&#8211;which has contributed to the deforestation of several third world countries. It isn&#8217;t correct, however, to assume that all paper comes from well-managed local forests equipped with environmentally-conscious paper-making facilities.</p>
<p>Further, with advances in technology (like ePaper), the greenhouse costs of eBooks will continue to decline. Not so with paper.</p>
<p>Rob Preece<br />
Publisher, <a href="http://www.BooksForABuck.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.BooksForABuck.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Books vs. eBooks: Which Are Greener? &#124; Library Stuff</title>
		<link>http://www.teleread.com/ebooks/books-vs-eebooks-which-are-greener/comment-page-1/#comment-889179</link>
		<dc:creator>Books vs. eBooks: Which Are Greener? &#124; Library Stuff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 14:12:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.teleread.org/blog/2008/08/31/books-vs-eebooks-which-are-greener/#comment-889179</guid>
		<description>[...] - &#8220;But is an eBook really greener than a regular, paper book?&#8221; (via)   Posted in Going Green &#124; &#124; Top Of [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] &#8211; &#8220;But is an eBook really greener than a regular, paper book?&#8221; (via)   Posted in Going Green | | Top Of [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching using disk: basic
Object Caching 336/360 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.teleread.com @ 2012-02-09 13:42:51 -->
