Interesting comparison in the New York Times between e-readers and actual books in terms of their environmental impact. The Times concludes:
All in all, the most ecologically virtuous way to read a book starts by walking to your local library.
Is this possible, given the emissions from HVAC and other climate control, heat pollution from facility parking lots and roofs, etc. from a large public institution? I’m a believer in the public library, but I suspect there are costs not being counted in this analysis.
[Note to NYT.com: when comparing two things, it’s probably not a good idea to introduce a third variable in the summing up! Just sayin’.]