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
Elephant Journal’s Holiday Gift Guide 636 shares A letter to the Anger that refuses to Leave Me. 571 shares Waylon’s favorite Ethical Gifts. 13 shares Join: Elephant’s Winter 2017 Academy. 28 shares Trevor Noah just won my Respect. 2,560 shares Year of the Fire Rooster 2017: What to Expect. 925 shares December Forecast: Letting Go of 2016 & Leaning into 2017 with Love. 7,155 shares The Real Reason so many Long-term Relationships Fail Sexually. 724 shares Why a Year of No Dating was the Best Thing I ever did for Myself. 6,284 shares These Tweets (and Retweets) actually Happened. 1,387 share