Reading Environmentally
When it comes to the topic of e-books vs. paper books, most of us will readily agree that the spread of e-books let people’s life more and more convenient. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of environmental protection. Whereas some are convinced that e-books are greener than traditional books, others maintain that e-books do not size up to our expectations. Nowadays, with the development of science technology, the chance that we use science are more and more. Furthermore, the convenience and the light of electronic products attract lots of young people. According to the survey, a majority of e-books users are under age 30. On the other hand, some adults are more likely to read printed books. E-reader vs. paper book is a provocative question, which lots of author also make own point about. And I have chosen two articles that mainly talk about the environment of e-books and paper books in the following.

In the article” E-books Are Not Greener than Paper Books”, in the author Debra.A.Miller’s view is, “the basic tenet of sustainability is the key to the problem about E-reader vs. paper book”. The author reminded us that we should think about the depletion about the materials of electronic products, shipping cost, fuel and the energy which use to recycle them. Then, the author reported some conclusions which from her colleague - Mr.Green, at Sierra Magazine. At first, Mr.Green claimed that the e-reader is not greener than the traditional books unless you are a fast and furious reader, which is according to an article in the New York Times about the study of the website of TerraPass. Because the e-reader needs more energy to manufacture and recycle than the traditional books. However, the author of the article persist in his point,”the e-reader was the more environmentally responsible choice”. Another article that published in the New York Times against this viewpoint when it is written,“the outfit called Cleantech also did a study using similar data, and then got the conclusion that readers should at least read three books every months over four years”, in that way, the e-reader is environmental than paper books in carbon emitted. There is no doubt that paper books are the better choice. Not only that, once the books or library shelves are damaged, they can be easily recycle because they are generally all paper. Finally, the author gave some advice for reading environmentally. As an illustration, we can borrow some books from the downtown, and return them to the library we are near after finishing them. What’s more, the sustainable way to read is going to the good old fashioned public library. Nowadays, a lot of libraries, take the case of that The Sierra Club Green House, also asserted “reduce, reuse, and recycle”. People can read library books over their lifetime. At last, the author hopes today’s young people to read more books through paper or electronic means.

In the article “ E-books Are an Environmentally Friendly Option”, the author Julia Silverman clearly states,” textbooks are being phased out, replaced by online-only versions nowadays”, and he also thought that e-books are a good choice for people to read because the cost of fossil fuels, mineral consumption and water use of a single e-reader is not large.
He expounded his opinions from five aspects. First of all, the reason that the author gave was manufacturing requirements. Although minerals and other materials that needed to produce e-books are problematic, the production of paperbooks not only require deforestation but also need more energy for transporting from publisher to bookstore. According to the research of Daniel Goleman, the consumption of an e-reader equals the purchase about 100 paperbound books. The author gave the second reason was the versatility question. After finishing books, we can keep it on our shelves, donate it or sell it back to used-book stores; nevertheless, e-books are more convenient to be stored in the virtual library of ipad. At the same time, the ipad are widely used. Thirdly, the author is saying, “ e-reader is more appreciate for the reader if he is a voracious reader”. Because the price of e-readers has dropped steadily and individual e-books cost less than that new hardback versions. Then, the author made his points about the waste options. Plenty of books which fall to sell and be shipped back do end up in landfills. On the other hand, e-readers also grow amounts of e-waste because most consumers are in pursue of fashion. But then, e-recycling is getting easier. Fifthly, the author claimed that e-books are extraordinarily democratizing. For instance, a published author can see only a small part of returns on traditional books, e-books can net authors up to almost returns. Finally, the author insisted that e-readers can benefit the reader and the environment, because of the immediacy and accessibility of the medium. In addition, an e-reader is necessary for the people who always want a new book at their bedside or who plan to hang onto their device for a few years.

After reading these two articles, I disagree with the Julia’s view that e-books are more environmental than traditional books. Nowadays, although a large number of people bought the ipads, most people use them to play games or surf the Internet. At the same time, lots of young people in today are pursuing the trend of fashion. Few people can use these electronic products until the end of these products’ days. There is no doubt that it will grow amounts of e-waste. In the second article, the author also claimed that e-recycling is getting easier, but anyone all know that old computers or other electronic products can wind up overseas, being stripped for metal parts, exposing toxins and polluting waterways. I think everyone should know we can not live without water. Once the water is polluted, our lives will throw into confusion. Thereafter, the author in the second article also made his point that the cost of e-books are cheaper than the print. I do support Julia’s position, but I think it is not benefit for our health. In spite of the e-readers is convenient for our life, it enable to let us be lazier. For example, with the development of science, most people use ipads to handle official business, even the model of instruction in schools is becoming more and more modern and technological. For this reason, more and more students have to wear short-sighted glasses for studying. The face of computers, TVs or Ipads time lead to the loss of version. Besides, people are conditioned to sit or lie for a long time while the ipads are gradually accepted for the public. Nowadays, lots of busy work or homework cause the deficiency of taking exercises, and the popular of the electronic products also make the matter worse. Finally, I think the advice of the first author is extremely useful because it shed insight on the difficult problem how to read environmentally. We can borrow some books from the small library near our houses. If you are a avaricious reader, you can go to the libraries which in the downtown, and return it to the library beside your home. Without doubt, when we go to the library, we are also taking some exercises. Isn’t it the method which can get a double advantage.

In one word, e-books and paper books not only bring lots of convenience for our life but also have some side effects. As an old saying goes,” The coin has two sides.” Some readers prefer to reading traditional books because of its texture, and they like the feeling of turning pages. Another readers choose e-books because they can be installed in the electronic products and can be easy to carry. I think whatever methods we choose to read, it is most important for us to learn some from books. We use various routes to read our favourite books, which is also order to gain new ideas from books. If we have not the invaluable knowledge or unique creative, we also can not invent so many technological products, isn’t it?

Works Cited
Miller, Debra A. E-books. Detroit, MI: Greenhaven, 2013. Print.
Gerdes, Louise I. What is the Impact of Digitizing Books? Détroit: GALE CENGAGE Learning, 2013. Print.