New York Times’ analysis: what’s greener, a paper book or a digital iPad?
The NY Times, last Sunday, did an in-depth analysis of the eco-impact of the iPad vs. printing, buying, reading hundreds of books. Fascinating: is it greener to mine the earth and create metal gadgets that allow you to read 1000s of books without printing anything but that need electricity and are shipped halfway across the world, or is it greener to ship heavy books printed (usually) with petroleum-based inks?
I say the iPad is greener (particularly if you consider all the other things it does)—if it’s built to be taken apart and recycled at the end of its useful life.
Their conclusion? Hint: go to the library.
hot on elephant
The story behind the Elephant-headed God. 338 shares Visual Yoga Blog: Refresh your Eyes the Yoga Way. 160 shares Boomers vs. Millennials: Will We stay the Course or Change It? 364 shares Instead of Sabotaging another Relationship, here’s how to Run into your Fear. 952 shares Join: Elephant’s Winter 2017 Academy. 2 shares The Benching Mind-F*ck: Worse than Ghosting. 1,295 share 5 Ways to Kiss & Make Up for your Mercury Retrograde Mishaps. 497 shares “I’d look her right in that fat, ugly face of hers.” 1,209 share 15 Cool Things Yoga has Taught Me. (Hint: None of them are Handstand.) 2,431 shares How we can Rewrite our Stories after Loving a Narcissist. 1,074 share