At a time when ecological transition is becoming a priority, our reading habits are not immune to environmental considerations. Between the good old paper book, the e-reader, and the audiobook, which alternative allows us to quench our thirst for reading without (too much) damaging the planet? We take stock.
In manufacturing: the e-reader is the clear loser
The manufacturing of an e-reader has a much higher carbon footprint than that of a paper book. Despite the tree felling associated with the publishing industry, a standard 300-page novel emits between 1 and 3 kg of CO2 equivalent, while an e-reader generates between 170 and 230 kg of CO2 equivalent during its production phase alone, reports a study by the Stockholm Royal Institute of Technology.
This gap can be explained by several factors: the manufacture of an electronic device requires the extraction of rare metals (such as lithium for batteries or tantalum for capacitors), an energy-intensive and polluting process. The manufacture of electronic components also requires the exploitation of fossil resources. Finally, there is assembly and transport, which further increase the carbon footprint of e-readers.
The ecological break-even point
At first glance, this gap seems to give a clear advantage to the paper format. However, the reality is a little more complex. If the e-reader is more energy-intensive during its manufacture, its carbon footprint can be offset based on its ecological break-even point. The more it is used for reading, the more its environmental impact decreases. According to Ademe (the French Agency for Ecological Transition), it would be enough to read at least 10 books per year for the e-reader to become more ecologically advantageous than paper.
Based on an average lifespan of 5 years, it would be necessary to read around fifty books for each additional work to have a lower carbon footprint than its new paper equivalent.
Second-hand
The calculation, however, does not take into account reused paper books (lent, bought second-hand or borrowed). This practice considerably reduces the environmental impact of the paper format, by dividing its ecological bill. Thus, a used book generates on average 317g of CO2, or about 3.5 times less than a new book. In the case where a book is read by two people (new purchase then loan), the ecological tipping point between an e-reader and the paper format is doubled, increasing to 20 readings per year. Opting for pocket formats reduces the carbon footprint even further, since these editions require about 37% less paper than a traditional book.
And what about audiobooks?
Compared to traditional books and ebooks, audiobooks are an interesting alternative to traditional formats. Their ecological impact, however, depends on how they are used: streaming consumes data via the internet with each listening compared to downloading, which only consumes data once. According to a study by The Shift Project, energy consumption linked to video or audio streaming represents a growing share of global digital emissions. This is hardly surprising, given that Spotify has jumped headfirst into the market, competing with the giant Audible. If you stream the same audiobook multiple times, its impact can become significant.
You also need to consider the size of the book. Quite logically, the longer a book, the higher its carbon footprint. However, when you listen to an audiobook on your smartphone, you're not using a dedicated device. This limits its environmental impact compared to a dedicated e-reader.
A question of habits
According to the National Book Center (CNL), the French read an average of 22 books per year. This figure, however, reveals significant disparities, since 31% read fewer than 5 books per year, while an equivalent proportion reads more than 20 books over the same period. Furthermore, certain types of works such as comics or manga are less well suited to digital or audio reading, which further complicates the equation. To make an informed and environmentally responsible choice, you must therefore start by evaluating your reading habits.
- If you devour more than 20 books a year, mostly bought new and not reused, the e-reader becomes a relevant alternative from an ecological point of view. The same goes if you prefer short novels or lightweight digital formats.
- If you buy your books second-hand or if you regularly borrow from a media library, the paper format retains a clear advantage.
- If your consumption remains moderate, the audiobook can be a good alternative, provided you download your files, to avoid sharing too much data.
0 Comments