3 ms·
Slightly off topic, but I often wonder why there is no backlash on print media regarding the environmental aspect of this whole publishing industry. Most books
by mstolpm 7y ago
Slightly off topic, but I often wonder why there is no backlash on print media regarding the environmental aspect of this whole publishing industry. Most books are mass-printed, shipped to warehouses, then shipped to local sellers (or e.g. Amazon, that ships a single book to a buyer) - and the (huge) non-sellable rests are either deeply discounted or completely dumped. If you see a pile of the latest "bestseller" at the local store, its almost guaranteed that only a fraction is sold, the rest will be disposed.
Moreover, most print books, magazines and newspapers aren't even fully read by the buyers, let alone multiple times. Its a huge industry producing, promoting and selling mostly single-use items.
And the used market for most books is virtually non-existent: I had to move a couple of times and the paper weight was one of the biggest hurdles. I dumped lots of books because I couldn't find a buyer on the used market (handling would far exceed the value of the books, some companies buy used books only based on weight and condition) and even libraries and social services like the Caritas declined to take used books.
So, I'm really wondering why we as a society aren't more demanding on the sustainable side of the publishing business, especially the environmental effects. Ebooks could perhaps be a much more environment-friendly alternative, but I agree that publishers and market places have done a lot to make them less attractive, affordable and available for most readers in comparison to printed alternatives.
- lostlogin 7y ago> I had to move a couple of times and the paper weight was one of the biggest hurdles. It is painful, but packing and unpacking books is by far the least painful bit about moving. You can clear or stock a shelf in seconds and they transport well too.
- caro_douglos 7y agoIt’s all about that media mail price and not caring when they show up!
- hannasanarion 7y agoOur culture holds print books as sacred objects. Talking about the environmental impact of books is like talking about the environmental impact of churches, or music halls, or war memorials, or grave stones: it doesn't even make sense to talk about it because people don't imagine those things at the level of costs and impacts, they are inherently worthwhile. If you propose printing less books, or even worse, destroying existing books that nobody reads to recycle their paper, you will quickly have a pitchfork-bearing mob at your door calling you a book-burner.
- naniwaduni 7y agoThey'd be right, too, if not necessarily for the right reasons.
- lusmd 7y agoPaper is not really environmentally unfriendly. Those are farmed trees. No one is turning virgin rainforest into paper. The shipping is far and away the worst part of that. On the other hand, ereaders use electricity. Tablets use more. So not much of an environmental angle here.