Some are touting the Kindle as the “green machine” in literary circles. At first, it would appear it is just that: a device that is saving trees one electronic Kindle at a time. If we only bought a Kindle instead of real live books, which are made of real live paper, which comes from real live trees. Yet I have to wonder if the Kindle is truly as eco-friendly as one might think it is? After taking the toll of manufacturing, transporting, energy wasting, wireless covering, recharging, human laboring, land filling, and high costing effect on this earth of ours, is the Kindle still greener than the old standby of perusing (or devouring) bound books of paper and ink?
I wish I could say that I’ve personally had the benefit of reviewing the Kindle as I have the traditional method of reading books. But the $359 price tag barricades a lot of book lovers from trying it out, though for someone like me who likes to stick my smeller into many books at once it would be nice to tote a 10.2 oz Kindle as opposed to a heavy straight-armed stack of books around.
Aside from the benefit of its size and weight, the Kindle is a manufactured product, which means that the Kindle not only takes up natural resources to produce the end product, but that the Kindle is made with human hands, Chinese hands to be more specific. Is the Kindle a fair-trade product? Were the hands that produced this luxury for Americans treated justly, humanely and respectfully? Were they given a fair price for the work done, a safe environment to work in, fair labor hours? I can’t answer those questions, but it must be asked of all manufactured products: are the people who labor over our products treated well? What of the cost of transporting thousands of Kindles from Asia to America? What of the cost of packaging and delivering the same product into the hands of the consumers once in America?
While it’s true that most everything we do requires energy consumption, one must take into consideration the things behind the scenes. For example, one can download a book from Amazon in 60 seconds flat. How does that book get from Amazon’s library to your Kindle? By their Whispernet technology, a wireless coverage in all 50 states… just think of all that energy expended to supply Kindle followers of unlimited entertainment. Or how about the battery installed in each Kindle? Amazon thoughtfully installed a rechargeable battery, but one must use power to recharge that said battery. Where does that electricity come from?
Even though I still like the idea of the Kindle, regardless of the fact that it takes resources to produce it, I still have a difficult time with its fast extinction. Americans want bigger, better, faster, easier, and they want it NOW. Though the Kindle debuted a short two years before, Amazon has already introduced Kindle 2. I hate to think of all the resources wasted on Kindle 1, and I’m bothered even more to think of where Kindle 1 will end up. It will go to the landfills, along with the dinosaur computers and ipods of the first or second generation. Then, I wonder how soon will it be before Kindle 2 will be near extinction?
So, before I answer if the Kindle is eco-friendly, I think you have to ask yourself what kind of reader you are, because you will find that the answer lies within yourself. You see, if you are a reader who likes to own your own private library and buys every book you read brand new, then the Kindle may be more of an eco-friendly choice for you. If you are like me, however, and utilize the public library for your reading pleasure, and only buy books (used ones, at that!) when you absolutely must have a copy, then the Kindle may be a less eco-friendly choice for you.
But if you’re also like me, and like having gadgets and a world of books at your fingertips, then take the greener road and buy a used Kindle, even a lesser, older, slower Kindle 1 version.
Or you could wait…
… ‘til Amazon figures out the true green path of Kindledom: public sharing of good reads to good friends. After all, the best books in life are meant to be shared, not kept.
Sharing is what being an eco-friend is all about.
Posted by bren on March 30, 2009 at 10:04 am
Don’t overlook the thousands of free e-books currently available for the Kindle. Or the content on the web that’s free via their network. You have an Internet connection at home, but if you weren’t a content producer, would the Kindle’s connectivity suffice for your information consumption needs? For many, it might.
Also, I get your point, but public libraries have an impact on the environment, too. Those books still need to be produced and transported (your library doesn’t have EVERY book you want, they’ve got to come from somewhere), the heat and lights need to stay on in the building, employees must be paid to keep the resources organized, etc. And by extension, you’re paying taxes to keep the library open. But you’ve got to have a job in order to have taxes to pay. That means all the taxpayer’s job related impact needs to be factored in and amortized across the resources that the library holds. Until you know the true cost of acquiring a book for a given library and then the true cost of retaining that book at the same library, it’s hard to
Sharing is good, no doubt. The Kindle’s DRM has already been broken, so if your conscience (and that of your friends) can handle it, you can already share books at will.
Beyond all that, the Kindle isn’t just hardware anymore. I’ve got the Kindle reader on my phone. Using Amazon (or Gutenberg or other free ebook resources), I can acquire and read books on a device I already own and use for other purposes. What’s the cost of those books? I’m using a device that’s my phone, my email, calendar, contacts management, RSS reader, music player, and ebook reader. It’s definitely not a single-use device, and it definitely wasn’t constructed to be an ebook reader, but it works serviceably. If I pay $8 for a book that costs effectively nothing to store and reproduce, read it on a device that (unlike paper) isn’t single-use, it seems like my book consumption footprint is even smaller than if I bought the same book, used, at my local bookstore.
Posted by EQ on March 30, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Thanks for the input. I totally agree with the environmental impact of public libraries, let alone the production of all the books that are bought and stored there, the energy and time it takes to scan the items, restock and transport both to the reader’s home and back again to the library. Then I wonder what would it be like if the library didn’t exist? Would there be more books being produced solely so each family unit could have their own copy of these books? There would be extra costs in packaging and transporting to individual households, as opposed to one building, albeit a large building that uses up lots of energy. I don’t know where the balance lies. Is it better to utilize a system that’s already in place, or is it better to buy Kindles for each family member? For those of us who have a phone that allows us to purchase (or freely trade) books, then it’s not really an issue, is it? But for those of us who have neither the iphone or Kindle, which is the greener method of reading stories?
I am awed by the fact that you can use your phone for so many applications, even Kindle at that! I’m simply stating that there is always consumption: one need only evaluate to what degree he/she uses, and work toward a more sustainable path. Sounds like you’re further along than others, including me, in the paper realm.
I am excited about the possibilities the Kindle could bring to us in the form of an educational tool. How cool would it be for our kids to switch back and forth to different textbooks, look up words in the dictionary, wikipedia, read current events in the paper/blogs/magazines, etc?! So many texts become outdated and thrown out so quickly, and with the Kindle, new textbooks could easily be uploaded.
The most blatant problem? Money. It may be a long time for school districts to jump on the Kindle bandwagon unless we can procure another educational stimulus package. And personally, I’ll be needing some kind of stimulus package too if I ever were to buy one. I mean, after all, the public library is free. And it’s a system that’s already in place. Maybe the library should buy some Kindles…
Posted by Kindle 2, Ecofriendly? | Electronic Book Readers, Compare and Buy on April 7, 2009 at 11:09 am
[...] Is the Kindle Eco-Friendly? « EcoQuaker [...]
Posted by Rafat Sarosh on April 25, 2009 at 3:06 pm
1500 books in one kindle, average 200 pages, 300,000 pages, how many trees are saved? And this number will keep multiplying with the numbers of Kindle customers?
After tree, producing paper need energy too, and then printing and color need energy too and you print as many books as many customer you have, no! you always print more then you need, so energy consumption is directly propotional to the popularity of the book.
Then think about transporting those books from printing press to book store and then to customer around the corner, how much energy you are wasting there again ….
Sure, you charge the Kindle, but remember we can produce electricity by nuclear plants too, it is not necessary that we will burn coal only…
Posted by joe crispy on February 10, 2010 at 9:48 am
I Get The kindle the kindle bad it use much power. i hate kindles kindles make me sad because they are dumb and crappy