Thinking Bigger Than Yourself

startwearinggreen:

This makes me think of a recent article in PCWorld - 5 Reasons Why You Don’t Need an E-Reader. Relevant part quoted below:

4. E-books Are Not More Eco-friendly Than Paper Books

A recent Cleantech report says that a traditional book has less of an impact on the environment than an e-reader. As long as the owner of a Kindle reads at least 23 books, he or she is out of the red for CO2 emissions.

However, electronic components require mining of nonrenewable minerals, often in unstable countries, and then there’s the question of electronics waste. E-waste is often sent to developing countries where hazardous materials are often broken up by hand and incinerated, releasing toxins into the air. The California Department of Toxic Substances Control reported that e-waste, including laptops, LCD monitors, and plasma TVs were shown to exceed safe limits in copper, mercury and lead. A greener bet? Use your local library.

Emphasis mine. It keeps coming down to the fact that people believe, or are led to believe, that there’s a silver bullet for obtaining a sustainable future. The current silver bullet is CO2 … and while I think it’s fantastic and important to strive for lower emissions, focusing on that to the detriment of everything else is DANGEROUS. The obtaining, use and disposal of metals are just as important to a sustainable world; for instance, try making the latest batch of LCD screens without indium - this metal is a vital component and is expected to be depleted in the next 15 years.

(Source: findout)