Life Cycle Analysis

Life Cycle Analysis:

E-reader and Printed Books

Peter Ding, Simon Evans, Chong Hong,

Yu-Cheng Lin, Alex Norring

Environment 159

Professor Deepak Rajagopal

Table of Contents Abstract ...... 3 Goal and Scope ...... 3 Literature Overview ...... 4 Functional Unit, System Boundary, System Flow Diagram and Method ...... 7 Lifecycle Inventory Analysis ...... 9 Books ...... 9 E-reader ...... 10 Lifecycle Impact Analysis ...... 13 Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis ...... 19 Monte Carlo Uncertainty Assessment ...... 19 Book: Number of Books ...... 19 E-reader: Cost of Glass & Distance Traveled ...... 20 Sensitivity Analysis ...... 20 Limitations of Current Work ...... 21 Conclusions and Recommendations for further studies ...... 22 References ...... 24 Appendix ...... 26 Appendix A: Flow Charts ...... 26 Appendix B: Life Cycle Inventory Analysis ...... 27 Appendix C: E-book Materials Cost Inventory ...... 28 Appendix D: Life Cycle Impact Analysis Graphs ...... 28 Appendix E: Sensitivity Analysis ...... 31 Appendix F: Uncertainty Analysis ...... 34

Abstract

Recently, the long running print version of the Encyclopedia Britannica was ended in favor of online and electronic publishing and access. So this raises the question, in terms of their life cycle impacts, which version of a book is better: printed or electronic. In this Life Cycle Analysis

(LCA), we examine the impacts associated with Energy Use and Global Warming Potentials

(GWP) for the manufacture of one E-reader and its manufacturing equivalent of 1100 printed book capacity. We conducted our LCA through analysis of data obtained through different tools such as scholarly articles, average industry specifications, and the Economic Input Output LCA

(EIO-LCA) tool. We made a number of assumptions in the course of our LCA. For these parameters, however, we found that for both energy use inputs and GWP outputs, the E-reader was better for the environment. In the study, we further broke down the impact assessment into different categories to determine where the most significant impact was located (manufacturing, transportation, use, and disposal). We conducted several sensitivity analyses and Monte Carlo uncertainty analyses to determine what happens when we change certain variables that we had made assumptions for and how this affects our overall outcome and impacts. In the end we determined that if using the E-reader to full capacity, E-reader is a better option for the environment.

Goal and Scope

The E-reader is a new emerging technology that allows users to store and read many books on one small device. This replaces the need for the production of traditional paper books, whose production consumes many natural resources. While at first glance this comparison may look simple, the E-reader consumes energy during its use, and its production requires many more

3 parts than the paper book. The goal of this life cycle analysis is to compare the production of an

E-reader with the production of paper books to see which product is more environmentally sustainable. The comparison will be for generic industry data for both technologies and a sensitivity analysis will be conducted on the makeup of the energy sources used for manufacturing. Environmental sustainability will be determined by comparing the global warming potential and energy input per functional unit. The functional unit is used to compare the two different technologies, and is defined as 1,100 books per one E-reader. The life cycle analysis will consist of stage two analyses for both e reader use and paper book use. The system boundaries are defined in the flow charts presented below, and include recycling and disposal of product, use of product, distribution, production, and component production.

Literature Overview

“Printed Scholarly Books and E-reader Reading Devices: A Comparative Life Cycle

Assessment of Two Book Options” is an analytical report comparing books and E-readers using life cycle assessment by Greg Kozak. It is a very comprehensive report comparing books and E- readers in various LCA perspectives. The methodology computes the values of different components within books and E-readers ranging from production, manufacturing, distribution, use and end of life management. For each life cycle unit process, inputs include product materials, ancillary material and energy resources, and outputs include primary product, air emission, water effluent and releases to land. The report also provides full explanations regarding data collection, computation and analysis for every single small factor within book and

E-readers. After completing LCA, the sensitivity analysis is also completed for both subjects in detail. There are a total of 16 sensitivity analyses, and one variable was changed for each

4 sensitivity analysis. However, the report only analyzes scholarly books, which are much heavier than normal-weighted books. There was no comparison done between scholarly and normal- weighted books completed in the report.

Two papers we made use of are from Asa Moberg, Clara Borggren, and Goran Finnveden titled “Books from an environmental perspective – Part 1: environmental impacts of paper books sold in traditional and internet book shops” and “Books from an environmental perspective –

Part 2: e-books as an alternative to paper books”. These two sequential papers detail life cycle assessments of two sectors of paper books which were useful to our analysis. In Part 1, they examine how impacts for printed books have changed with the advent of electronic purchasing ability. These impacts change based on whether being shipped to the customer or having the customer drive directly to the store to purchase the book. During this study, they examined the impacts of manufacturing of a paper book, however, the limitations of this study for application to our own was that it was conducted in Sweden. Sweden has a slightly different mix and range of energy and emissions. In part 2, they discuss impacts of an e-book instead of actually reading the paper book. This is much like the Kozak article referenced earlier, doing a life cycle analysis of e-reader to printed book. They found overall that there was no exact way to determine which system was better in terms of impacts, but they did give a number of ways in which the e-reader could improve to make it more competitive with books in environmental impacts. Both these utilized databases in their study to determine impacts, but if no data was available in such a way, they used industry averages.

Another paper we utilized for our overview of book production is “Environmental

Implications of Wireless Technologies: News Delivery and Business Meetings”. Authors

Michael Toffel and Arpad Horvath analyzed newspaper production and paper production.

Although they looked mainly at newspaper everyday delivery and the impacts it has on the environment when comparing electronic delivery against paper delivery, there was some book analysis and the amount of energy required in distribution.

For the E-reader analysis, we used the top ten reviews website to get the average mass and screen dimensions of ten E-readers. In addition, we used G. Kozak’s review to get the compositional weight breakdown of the E-readers. For the mass of raw materials not available in

G. Kozak’s review, we used several different websites and literature. For Lithium, we used the calculation from Fedex Express, after learning about how a battery works from batteryeducation.com. After obtaining all of the compositional data for our study, we consulted literature such as [Koch, Keoleian et al. 1995] and [Caudill 2000] to compare our findings with findings which have already been done.

The case study: “Building a Model to Calculate Energy and CO2 Emissions”, by S. Cholette was used to develop the data for e-reader transportation from the Chinese factory to the distribution centers in the United States. This case study utilized the same route for transport, albeit for a Nintendo Wii. Since the Nintendo Wii and an e-reader are of similar size, the data was assumed to be applicable to our life cycle analysis. The case study used the model Cargo

Scope to calculate the energy and emissions data. This model uses nodes and links to create a distribution network, and subsequently models the emissions.

“Wood in our future: The role of life-cycle analysis: Proceedings of a symposium” by Board of Agriculture, National Research Council, conveys that the use, availability and cost of wood, which has been used for many applications, has come under increasing attention. This is a result

6 of environmentally driven social government policies, and therefore substitutions for wood as a raw material is necessary. A life cycle analysis is used to assess paper production from tree to product, and also assess the environmental impacts to prove that the continued use of wood products as an input is environmentally unsustainable.

Functional Unit, System Boundary, System Flow Diagram and Method

In our analysis, we will be comparing the amount of energy and greenhouse gas emissions produced in producing an E-reader and an equivalent amount of books. In light of this, we will be making the assumption for the functional unit that an average E-reader has the capacity to hold up to 1,100 books, based on the numbers we researched from E-readers such as the Sony E- reader, Amazon Kindle, and the Nook. Of our unit processes, paper recycling for the most part is not recycled back into the system. Based on our research we found very little book printers using recycled paper to make pages, therefore we chose to count this impact as negligible. Since none of our unit processes in the E-reader flow diagram yield multiple products; we assume that all the processes are specialized in production.

Although the average E-reader holds 1,100 books at a given time, the device may not hold a total amount of 1,100 books throughout its lifetime. Therefore, we will use 1,100 as a starting point and conduct a sensitivity analysis by scaling it to different values to account for the variability. Also, a e-reader may also read more than just books – it can also read newspapers, journals, and magazines.

For books and E-readers, we are using a hybrid LCA where the main process (transport, packaging, e-reader use, manufacturing, and disposal) are all accounted for by the process LCA, whereas the auxiliary inputs to some of these unit processes are accounted for by the EIOLCA.

For example, most of the data for the raw materials (such as PVC, copper, and aluminum) were extracted from the EIO LCA tool. Outside of EXCEL, EIO LCA, and models from literature, we’re not using any other software or products for our analysis.

The usage data was computed by using an industry average for charging time and wattage of the charger for an e-reader. This led to each full charge of four and a half hours using

.450KW. Since each full charge lasts approximately one month before needing to be recharged, in a single year an e-reader will use 19.4MJ. Based on the assumption that an E-reader will be used for a decade, one e-reader will use 194 MJ of energy over its lifetime.

The E-reader transportation data consisted of three distinct steps. First the E-reader was trucked to the Port of Shenzhen from the factory warehouse in Shenzhen. The E-reader was assumed to have been produced at the Longhua Science and Technology Park, and manufactured by Foxconn. This factory complex is one of the largest in the world, and produces multiple leading brands of e-readers (Dean, 2007). The second step was shipping of the E-reader from the

Port of Shenzhen to the Port of Long Beach. The third step was national distribution in the

United States. The global warming potential and energy input from these three steps was modeled after the Cargo Scope model as used by S. Cholette.

The disposal of the E-reader was assumed to be negligible for the life cycle analysis. This was decided because E-readers are not recycled due to high costs for minimal returns. Therefore consumers would dispose of e-readers through conventional methods such as ordinary trash collection. Due to the long life and small size and weight, it was assumed the E-reader’s global warming potential and energy usage for disposal would be negligible.

Lifecycle Inventory Analysis

Books

Since there are light-weighted books and heavy-weight books in our analysis, there are separate assumptions only for the specific type of book. For light-weight books, one book contains 634 pages, and the average weight per book is 0.518kg. For heavy-weight books, one book contains 500 pages, and the average weight per book is 1.052kg. There are many common assumptions for both light-weight and heavy-weight books. The paper recycling rate is 20% of the total book use, and the remaining 80% will go to disposal. The manufacturing rate is approximately three times that of book distribution. For raw materials, the weight of wood used is about 2.33 times the actual book production, and the ink used is about 10 times of number of pages of books. The transportation distance for book distribution is 2000 miles. The average transportation fuel and energy requirements for a diesel tractor-trailer were found to be 9.4 gal/1,000 ton-mile and 1,465 Btu/ton-mile, respectively.

A lot of the data extracted for the book inventory analysis is from G. Kozak’s report, and some data is from EIOLCA tool. The energy input and green house gas emissions for disposal and paper recycling of books were assumed to be negligible for the life cycle analysis. This was decided because disposal and paper recycling do not consume a lot of energy, instead, most of them just directly dump to a landfill.

Table 1. Life Cycle Inventory Analysis for Printed Books (1100 books)

Unit Processes Sub-Unit Weight Energy Input Greenhouse gases [kg] Process (kg) [MJ] Book Use Reading/Storage 864 0 0 Recycling Paper Recycling 173 0 0 Disposal 691 831.6 61.16 Circulation Distribution 864 2944 571 Manufacturing 2591 36019 4800 Manufacturing Wood 2012 2394 3024 Ink (microliters) 5670 0 0 Energy 0 33625 1440 Other Materials 0 0 0 Distribution Fuel(gal) 22 2944 571 Packaging 6 240 0.165 Materials Cardboard 2 96.4 0.136 Plastic 4 143.6 0.029 Total 39795 5433

E-reader

We assumed that the total mass for our E-reader is the average of the 10 E-readers found from the literature, which is 338.38 grams (toptenreviews.com). Furthermore, we assumed that the five major components of an E-reader are cable, battery, chassis, LCD screen, and the adapter components (electronics). In order to obtain the compositional percentages and mass of these parts, we consulted Greg Kozak’s LCA literature [Kozak. 2003], which highlighted a typical percent breakdown of an E-reader.

Furthermore, we assumed for simplicity’s sake that for each of these processes, there existed only two major inputs per process. For example for cable production, the two inputs were simply PVC and Copper. Next we looked to evaluate the impact categories for these inputs. The tool that we used for this part is the EIOLCA tool developed by Carnegie Melon. In order to

10 obtain the total economic activity input needed by the tool, we aimed to find the price of the raw material (e.g. copper, PVC) and the total mass of the raw material. For metals such as copper, aluminum, lithium, and zinc the weights were found at [metalprices.com] which highlighted the average price per pound of some common metals. For the price per unit weight of less common entities such as PVC, literary sources were consulted. The price per unit weight of PVC was determined from literary sources [Ackerman. 2003].

To use the EIOLCA of each raw material, first of all, we selected Industry Benchmark

US Dept of Commerce EIO model from 1997. The activity economic is required, and further information is needed. In 2011-2012, the average price of iron was $140 per ton, $8060 per ton for copper, $2000 per ton for zinc and PVC per pound is $1.15. Using both LCI data and the market price of sub-materials, we could calculate the numbers of each raw material’s economic activity. For instance, to account for the economic activity of iron, the iron mass is 143.22g of each E-reader and the market value is $140/ton. A complete inventory of the materials pricing can be found in the appendix.

It means that to produce an E-reader required $0.02 iron. Following with the same process, copper costs $0.117, zinc costs $0.0217, and PVC costs $0.1464. Meanwhile, LCD display glass costs $154 per kg. The amount of price is based on the assumption that the LCD

10.1 of Samsung tablet weights 130g and that the marketing price is from $20 to $40 of each panel. After briefly calculating, we can assume the price is $20 per panel divided by 0.13kg per panel; the result is $154/kg. The mass of LCD glass on LCI model is 0.0429kg, so the required cost of each LCD panel is $6.51. LCI data of components of the E-reader is based on the major parts; however it should be noted that this E-reader mass excludes the USB cable, telephone cable, CD-ROM, screen electronics, and all packaging elements.

To run the model of EIOLCA and to calculate GWP emissions, we have to make assumption that the unit of economic activity is one million dollars instead of one dollar. It is because that the input data will be too small to get any valuable result if one dollar was used. For example, to evaluate how much carbon dioxide would be produced by lifecycle of manufacturing of iron, we selected iron and steel mills, input $0.02 million dollars as unit amount of economic activity of producing iron process, and chose GHG emissions. After running the model, the table showing global warming potential is derived. GWP emission data could be viewed on the table, which amounted to a total of 54.9 mega tons. However, the goal of this LCI analysis is to identify how much of GWP gases are discharged while producing one E-reader. This amount of

GWP was calculated to equal 54.9g GWP. We can use the same method to evaluate other material’s GWP emissions. For copper, we selected secondary processing of copper, inputted

$0.117 million dollars and ran the model. The GWP emissions result in a total of all sectors of

70.9 megatons. Therefore each E-reader could produce 70.9g GWP due to manufacturing and refining raw materials. By the same analysis, the emissions of GWP from zinc is 32.6g, from

PVC is 243g, and glass is 3176g.

In addition, we evaluated the total energy consumption of an E-reader by the EIOLCA model. The analysis was changed from the global warming potential to energy consumption.

While the LCI data remains the same in both cases. For example, the LCD glass is a large source of energy consumption. The industry specific option for LCD glass does not exist, so the sector,

“All other electronic component manufacturing” was used instead. The economic activity for the

LCD screen was found to be $6.51 per panel on the E-reader. To avoid rounding errors, we input

$6.51 million per million panels. The result shows 36.7TJ of energy is required to produce a million LCD panels for E-readers. This analysis reduces to 36.7 MJ/ one panel. Using the same

12 method, the values of energy input for iron, copper zinc and PVC can be evaluated. 0.601MJ was found to be the energy needed to produce the iron component for one e-reader, 0.812MJ for copper, 0.431MJ for zinc and 1.53MJ for PVC.

Table 2. Life Cycle Inventory Analysis for E-reader

Unit Processes Sub-unit Processes Total Weight (g) Energy Input GWP CO2e [g] [MJ] E-Reader Use Transportation - 32.25 2354.5 Packaging 402.7 17.86 0.748 Power Generation & - 6737 2682333.5 Supply manufacturing 338.38 101.591088 6098.1012 Transportation product travel 338.38 32.25 2.354 Packaging Cardboard 402.7 17.86 0.748 Manufacturing Cable 30.12 3.207 190.8 Battery 31.75 4.37 660 Adaptor 166.53 1.413 125.8 Chassis 67.68 1.961 275.6 LCD Screen 42.3 36.740088 3165.9012 Power Generation & - 53.9 1680 Supply Cable PVC 15.66 0.587 35.8 Production Copper 14.46 2.62 155 Battery Aluminum 31.31 3.86 264 Production Lithium 0.459 0.51 396 Electronic Iron 143.22 0.601 54.9 Production Copper 23.31 0.812 70.9 Chassis Zinc 10.83 0.431 32.6 Production PVC 56.84 1.53 243 Screen Glass 42.3 36.740088 3165.9012 Production Total 741 6889.2 2690.8 (kg)

Lifecycle Impact Analysis

In looking at our two life cycle inventory analysis tables for the E-reader and printed books, we can calculate a total life time impact assessment for each. In total, we calculated that for an E-

13 reader, energy inputs were equal to 6889.204 MJ. We calculated the total life time impact of

Global Warming Potentials for an E-reader to be 2690.79 kg of CO2 equivalents. Similarly, we took all sectors for the printed books and determined total lifetime energy inputs to be 39795.02

MJ and total global warming potentials to be 5432.51 kg of CO2 equivalents. We created a graph comparing these two total life cycle impacts, which can be seen in Figure 1.

Life Cycle Impact Analysis 45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 Energy Input [MJ] GWP CO2e (kg) E-Reader 6889.204842 2690.786815 Book 39795.0244 5432.509003

Figure 1. Total Life Cycle Impact Assessment

After analyzing this total life cycle case, it is apparent that an E-reader outperforms the equivalent number of books in both categories of analysis. For energy inputs, the total life of an

E-reader uses only 17% of the energy required for 1100 printed books. For CO2 equivalents, we found that for the life of an E-reader the GWPs released were 52%, approximately half, which is a significant difference from the ratio we found for energy inputs. We must remember that 1100 books is a significant number of books to read and thus, will perform a sensitivity analysis to

14 determine how changing the number of books read on an E-reader will change our threshold for the units of analysis.

When looking at this impact analysis, we conclude that the energy used throughout the lifetime of an E-reader is a much higher pollutant emitting energy source for GWPs. Thus, we delved deeper into the life cycle processes of both these methods for book reading to determine where the greatest impact is in the life time. As can be seen in our flow chart (Appendix A) showing our stage 0, stage 1, stage 2, and disposal, along with our inventory analysis breaking down the components into unit and sub-unit processes, we analyzed four main areas of the life cycles. These four areas were disposal, use, transportation, and manufacturing.

When breaking down the impact assessment into four areas of analysis, we have some interesting findings that lead to a number of conclusions. In disposal, we took the energy inputs and GWPs to be negligible for the E-reader because we assumed the small amount of lithium in the batteries was not worth recycling and therefore the entire unit was just disposed of. However, when we averaged out the entire load of a garbage truck, we found the amount of energy needed to transport one E-reader to the landfill to be miniscule and not impactful in our comparison.

With 1100 books though the impact was higher because they weigh more and there is more that is involved in disposal. The calculations and data can be seen for disposal can be seen in Figure 2 below. These numbers would change if we changed our assumption to books never being thrown away which would make impacts equivalent to E-reader at 0, or E-reader actually having a slightly bigger impact.

Disposal Impact Analysis 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Energy Input [MJ] GWP CO2e (kg) E-Reader 0 0 Book 831.6 61.16

Figure 2. Disposal Impact Analysis

For use impact analysis we determined that the E-reader had a much bigger impact for both energy inputs and GWPs because it requires energy, thus emissions, in order to operate the E- reader. Books require zero energy to operate, aside from the light above, which we assumed was the same amount required to read an E-reader, therefore they offset each other. The results for E- reader use and book use impact assessment are shown below in Figure 3.

Use Impact Analysis 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Energy Input [MJ] GWP CO2e (kg) E-Reader 6737.5 2682.3335 Book 0 0

Figure 3. Use Impact Analysis

Distribution is a big impact sector. E-reader is manufactured in China and therefore must be shipped to the United States. Once it reaches the Port of Los Angeles, the E-reader must be trucked to distribution centers located throughout the country. For this we took the average distance one E-reader must travel. As can be seen from Figure 4, the actual energy inputs for this distribution remain relatively low per E-reader unit. However, the GWP released far outranks that of printed books distribution, despite printed books having a higher energy input impact.

This is in part because E-readers must travel further distances, which include ship transportation.

Distribuon Impact Analysis 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Energy Input [MJ] GWP CO2e (kg) E-Reader 50.11375413 2355.214213 Book 2943.970282 571.4912725

Figure 4. Distribution Impact Analysis

Manufacturing would seem to be the life cycle sector where there would be the most impact.

We can see this to be true. Looking at Figure 5, we see the manufacturing impact comparisons.

For the manufacturing of 1100 books, we see that there is a huge impact on energy inputs. This is actually the most impactful area of a books life cycle, accounting for approximately 90% of life time required energy. This is the area of a books life cycle that can become more environmentally friendly and can take advantage of new renewable energy technologies to help

17 improve the life cycle impacts of printed books. Manufacturing of an E-reader is relatively low on energy inputs, but once again we see that the GWPs, while almost equivalent, are slightly higher for E-reader manufacturing. As stated earlier, E-readers are manufacturing in China, which has less stringent regulations on energy sources and their emission outputs. As a result, we see high GWP outputs for the electronic manufacturing of E-reader.

Manufacturing Impact Analysis 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 Energy Input [MJ] GWP CO2e (kg) E-Reader 101.591088 6098.1012 Book 36019.45412 4799.85773

Figure 5. Manufacturing Impact Analysis

These are not the only two categories by which to compare E-reader and printed books. As with any life cycle analysis, there are multiple sectors that can be analyzed and broken down.

However, for the purpose of time and available data, we chose energy inputs and GWPs as our units for impact analysis and comparison. Based on the overall life cycle impact assessment for the E-reader compared to the printed books, we can see that for both categories, the E-reader performs better (Figure 1). Again this does not take into account our sensitivity analysis or uncertainty analysis, which we can change a number of variables to determine where the true significant impacts lie. The main area in which the E-reader can improve its overall performance

18 is through its usage stage. Considering the large margin of difference between energy usages for printed books compared to energy usage for an E-reader, the E-reader can become more efficient and lower energy usage. In addition as the energy sector starts to use renewable energy sources, the impacts from usage will decrease greatly, almost approaching 0 like a book.

Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis

Monte Carlo Uncertainty Assessment

In addition to the sensitivity analysis, we also performed Monte Carlo analysis to simulate a case where there were 1,000 different variations of our sensitivity criteria. Again, those three criteria were number of books, cost of glass ($), and distance traveled in E-reader shipping. To begin our analysis, we started with some basic assumptions. The first assumption we made was that all distributions were triangular. In response to a lack of actual sample of data, this assumption was made arbitrary and based on our best professional judgment. The rest of the assumptions we made were specific to the sensitivity criteria.

Book: Number of Books

As mentioned in the Functional Units section, the base value (capacity) for the e-reader was 1,100 books, though an E-reader may not necessarily hold just 1,100 books throughout its lifetime. We assumed that the minimum books held were just 2% of the base (22 books) and the maximum books held 500% of the base (5,500). Similar to the sensitivity analysis, we assumed energy and greenhouse gas warming potential to be a linear function of the number of books. For example, because the total energy measured from our impact assessment is 39,395 MJ (36.177 x

1000), we established our equation to be 36.177 x n, where n was the randomly generated number of books in the Monte Carlo assessment.

E-reader: Cost of Glass & Distance Traveled

In contrast to the Monte Carlo assessment for books, we assumed energy and greenhouse gas warming potential to be combination of the linear function of the cost of glass and distance traveled. The baseline value for the cost of glass was $6.51 and we assumed the minimum cost to be 10% of the base and the max to be 110%. The reason we assumed this was because in view of a relatively high glass price compared to the other raw materials, we wanted to see how a very low cost for glass will affect the overall environmental impact. As for the distance traveled, the min and max range was 50% and 150% respectively. The equation for total energy was 0.0151d

+ 5.64c + 6,824, where d was the distance traveled (miles) and c the cost of glass ($). In the same way, the equation for total GWP was 0.00111d + 0.486c + 5,880.

Overall, the standard error in doing this assessment for # of books is much greater than in doing the same for the cost of glass and transportation distance for e-reader. This means that the

# of books is much sensitive with respect to the impact criteria.

Sensitivity Analysis

Three different input variables were considered for the sensitivity analysis. Two of these variables were from the life cycle analysis of the e-reader, and the third variable was from the paper book life cycle analysis. All three variables were first tested for global warming potential, and second for energy input. The first input variable tested for sensitivity was the average distance to the distribution center traveled by an e-reader. This variable in reality would be highly variable, since e-readers would be shipped all over the country, changing this variable significantly. The second variable analyzed was the cost of the glass screen used in e-reader production. This variable was chosen because the glass screen is an expensive component of the

20 e-reader, so fluctuations in the price could affect the overall analysis. The third variable considered was the number of books that equal one e-reader. This important variable relates the two life cycle analyses together.

The sensitivity analyses were calculated using the sensitivity analysis add on tool for excel provided by the professor. All other variables were held constant while the target variable was incrementally changed. All six graphs of sensitivity were linear relationships, because the

EIOLCA tool, which is a linear model, was used for the life cycle analysis. Based on the data produced from the sensitivity analyses, the global warming potential and energy input needed for paper books is most sensitive to the number of books per e-reader. For the e-reader life cycle analysis, the output variables global warming potential and energy input were most sensitive to the cost of glass. This means that changes in the price of glass caused the greatest change in

GWP and energy input. The sensitivity analysis on the number of books that equal one e-reader is especially important, since reducing this number can cause paper books to have less GWP and energy input than one e-reader.

Limitations of Current Work

Though our assessment is in-depth, it is limited in some areas. One example is our analysis of the e-reader manufacturing materials. For example, although LCD glass is a major component of the display screen of an e-reader, other components, such as Li-Ion materials, Graphite, Circuit

Boards Liquid crystal and printed wiring board, are excluded from the LCI analysis. In addition, most manufacturing companies do not provide information about PVC manufacturing, LCD supply chain and other raw metals in order to maintain a competitive advantage over their

21 competitors. Therefore we simply used the assumption that the ratio of each components found for the industry averages to be comparable in terms of material composition for our e-reader.

Another limitation of our analysis is that the sectors chosen for our EIOLCA analysis were broad and is not necessarily specific for our product of analysis.

A final reason why our analysis does not capture all the attributes of the product is the fact that we assume that an E-reader can only read books. In reality, an E-reader can also read journals, magazines, and newspapers. Some more advanced E-readers can also browse the web.

Therefore, our comparison is limited in scope.

Conclusions and Recommendations for further studies

We examined two impact categories centered on energy inputs and global warming potentials released into the atmosphere. Both energy inputs and GWPs are significant for their future impacts. We established our functional unit as 1100 books used per E-reader. We concede that this number is high, but we wanted to analyze the effects of using an E-reader to its full capacity.

For further studies, we recommend that analysis be conducted concerning other impact sectors like water usage, toxics released, and maybe even some cost benefit analysis. However, much variability exists for pricing. Another recommendation we have is to examine how changing to renewable energy sources would impact the life cycle impacts of E-readers and printed books. This would certainly reduce the GWPs emitted, but not necessarily the energy inputs. Our final recommendation for further analyzing this area is in the realm of disposal. In this study, we had difficulty finding data for disposal and thus assumed the amounts of energy inputs and GWPs emitted per E-reader was negligible. We did factor in some disposal data for

22 books yet did not include recycling because recycling is not a hugely utilized sector currently in book printing industry.

Overall, what we found in our life cycle assessment of E-reader to the equivalent 1100 books was that for both sectors of analysis, energy inputs and GWPs, the E-reader performed better.

However, as discussed in our sensitivity analysis there are a number of factors that can vary to change that finding. Most notably, changing the number of books read per E-reader has a significant impact. It would take a very low number of books read per E-reader to make that option more appealing in terms of energy inputs. We conclude though that currently an E-reader is a better option.

References

• Ackerman, Frank. Massey, Rachel. (2003) “The Economics of Phasing Out PVC”

• Borggren C; Moberg, A; Finnveden G “Books from an environmental perspective – Part

1: environmental impacts of paper books sold in traditional and internet book stores”

International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2011 16:138-147

• Caudill, R. (2000) “A Lifecycle Environmental Study of the Impacts of E-Commerce on

Electronic Products.” IEEE International Symposium on Electronics on Environmental.

Pages 298 – 301

• Guinee J, Gorree M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, De Koning A, van Oers L,

Wegener Sleeswijk A, Suh S, Udo de Haes H, de Bruijn J, van Duin R, Huijbregts M

“Handbook on Life cycle assessment: Operational Guide to the ISO standards Series:

Eco-efficiency in industry and science

• Koch, J., Keoleian, G. (1995) “Evaluating Environmental Performance: A Case Study in

the Flat-Panel Display Industry.” IEEE International Symposium on Electronics on

Environment. Pages 158 – 165

• Kozak, Greg. (2003) “Printed Scholarly Books and E-book Reading Devices: A

Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Two Book Options.” Center for Sustainable

Systems. Report No. CSS03-04, pages 1-238

• Moberg, Johansson, Finnveden and Jonsson (2007) “Screening environmental life cycle

assessment of printed, web based and tablet e-paper newspaper”. Page 13 - 47, 93 - 99

• Moberg, Asa; Borggren, Clara; Finnveden, Goran. “Books from an environmental

perspective – Part 2: e-books as an alternative to paper books” International Journal of

Life Cycle Assessment 2011 16: 238 – 246

• National Research Council. (1997) "ANNEX 1: LIFE-CYCLE STRESSOR EFFECTS

ASSESSMENT." Wood in Our Future: The Role of Life-Cycle Analysis: Proceedings of

a Symposium.

• Toffel M, Horvath A, “Environmental Implications of Wireless Technologies: News

Delivery and Business Meetings” Environmental Science & Technology 2004 11: 2961-

2970

• (2012) “Lithium Battery Calculations.” Fedex Express.

http://images.fedex.com/us/services/pdf/LithiumBattery_JobAid.pdf

• Dean, James, “The Forbidden City of Terry Gou.” Wall Street Journal. Aug. 11 2007.

• Other websites used:

o http://www.metalprices.com

o http://ebook-reader-review.toptenreviews.com/

o http://www.batteryeducation.com/2008/10/how-many-cells-are-in-a-battery.html

o http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/01/18/apple-will-profit-from-doing-the-right-

thing/

o http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB118677584137994489.html?mod=blog

o http://www.searates.com/reference/portdistance

o http://userwww.sfsu.edu/~cholette/sustain/SSCpublic/Wii-Case-and-

SoftwareTutorial.pdf)

o http://www.ecolibris.net/

o http://avgpostageweights.blogspot.com/2010/10/average-weight-of-paperback-

book.html

Appendix

Appendix A: Flow Charts

Figure A1: Preliminary Flow Diagram of Book Production

Figure A2: Preliminary Flow Diagram of E-Book Production

Appendix B: Life Cycle Inventory Analysis

Table A1. Life Cycle Inventory Analysis for Printed Books (1100 books)

Unit Processes Sub-Unit Process Weight (kg) Energy Input [MJ] GWP [kg]

Book Use Reading/Storage 864 0 0 Recycling Paper Recycling 173 0 0 Disposal 691 831.6 61.16 Circulation Distribution 864 2944 571 Manufacturing 2591 36019 4800 Manufacturing Wood 2012 2394 3024 Ink (microliters) 5670 0 0 Energy 0 33625 1440 Other Materials 0 0 0 Distribution Fuel(gal) 22 2944 571 Packaging Materials 6 240 0.165 Cardboard 2 96.4 0.136 Plastic 4 143.6 0.029 Total 39795 5433

Table A2. Life Cycle Inventory Analysis for E-reader

Unit Processes Sub-unit Processes Total Energy Input GWP CO2e Weight [MJ] [kg] (g) E-Reader Use transportation - 32.25 2354.5 packaging 402.7 17.86 0.748 Power Generation & - 6737 2682333.5 Supply manufacturing 338.38 101.591088 6098.1012 Transportation product travel 338.38 32.25 2.354 Packaging Cardboard 402.7 17.86 0.748 Manufacturing Cable 30.12 3.207 190.8 Battery 31.75 4.37 660 Adaptor 166.53 1.413 125.8 Chassis 67.68 1.961 275.6 LCD Screen 42.3 36.740088 3165.9012 Power Generation & - 53.9 1680 Supply Cable Production PVC 15.66 0.587 35.8 Copper 14.46 2.62 155 Battery Production Aluminum 31.31 3.86 264 Lithium 0.459 0.51 396 Electronic Iron 143.22 0.601 54.9 Production Copper 23.31 0.812 70.9 Chassis Production Zinc 10.83 0.431 32.6 PVC 56.84 1.53 243 Screen Production Glass 42.3 36.740088 3165.9012 Total 741 6889.2 2690.8

Appendix C: E-book Materials Cost Inventory

Table A3. Cost analysis of e-reader manufacturing

Total Weight (kg) Price ($/KG) Cost ($) PVC 0.0725 2.53 0.1834 Copper 0.03777 8.5 0.3210 Aluminum 0.03131 2.52 0.0789 Lithium 0.000459 62.9 0.0289 Iron 0.14322 0.14 0.02 Zinc 0.01083 2 0.0217 Glass 0.0423 154 6.5142 Total 0.338389 - 7.1681

Appendix D: Life Cycle Impact Analysis Graphs

Life Cycle Impact Analysis 45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 Energy Input [MJ] GWP CO2e (kg) E-Reader 6889.204842 2690.786815 Book 39795.0244 5432.509003

Figure A3. Total Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Disposal Impact Analysis 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Energy Input [MJ] GWP CO2e (kg) E-Reader 0 0 Book 831.6 61.16

Figure A4. Disposal Impact Analysis

Use Impact Analysis 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Energy Input [MJ] GWP CO2e (kg) E-Reader 6737.5 2682.3335 Book 0 0

Figure A5. Use Impact Analysis

Distribuon Impact Analysis 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Energy Input [MJ] GWP CO2e (kg) E-Reader 50.11375413 2355.214213 Book 2943.970282 571.4912725

Figure A6. Distribution Impact Analysis

Manufacturing Impact Analysis 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 Energy Input [MJ] GWP CO2e (kg) E-Reader 101.591088 6098.1012 Book 36019.45412 4799.85773

Figure A7. Manufacturing Impact Analysis

Appendix E: Sensitivity Analysis

Sensivity Analysis GWP of Number of Books for Paper Book LCA

16000

14000

12000

10000

8000

GWPs (CO2e) 6000

4000

2000

0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 # of books

Figure A8. Sensitivity Analysis GWP Number of Books for Paper Book LCA

Sensivity Analysis for Energy Input of Number of Books for Paper Book LCA

100000

80000

60000

40000 energy input (MJ)

20000

0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 # of books

Figure A9. Sensitivity Analysis for Energy Input of Number of Books for Paper Book LCA

Sensitvity Analysis for GWP for Average Distance to Distribuon Center for E-reader LCA

12000

11000

10000

9000

GWP CO2e [g] 8000

7000

6000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 Average Distance to Distribuon Center (mi)

Figure A10. Sensitivity Analysis GWP for Average Distance to Distribution Center

Sensitvity Analysis for Energy Input for Average Distance to Distribuon Center for E-reader LCA 210

200

190

180

170

Energy Input [MJ] 160

150

140

130 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 Average Distance to Distribuon Center (miles_

Figure A11. Sensitivity Analysis Energy for Average Distance to Distribution Center

Sensitvity Analysis of Energy Input for Cost of Glass for E- reader LCA

280

260

240

220

200

180 Energy Input [MJ]

160

140

120 0 5 10 15 20 25 Cost of Glass ($)

Figure A12. Sensitivity Analysis GWP for Cost of Glass

Sensitvity Analysis of GWP for Cost of Glass for E-reader LCA

15000

13000

11000

GWP CO2e [g] 9000

7000

5000 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Cost of Glass ($)

Figure A13. Sensitivity Analysis Energy for Cost of Glass

RiskSim 2.42 Trial for Evaluaon - Histogram 120 RiskSim 2.42 Trial for Evaluaon - Histogram 100 200 80 150 Appendix F: Uncertainty Analysis60 100 40 50 Frequency Uncertainties in BooksFrequency 20 0 0.00 5000.00 10000.00 15000.00 20000.00 25000.00 30000.00 0 Units Base0 20000 Min40000 Max60000 80000 Min_val100000 Output Base_case120000 140000 160000 Max_val180000 Distribution200000 Random Value Output # of Books Books 1100 2% 500% 22 1100 5500 Triangular 4487.845411 Total GWP g emissions 22165.47 Energy Input MJ 162356.7834

Monte Carlo Assessment for GWP (kg)

Mean 10922.52 St. Dev. 5815.34 Mean St. Error 183.90 Minimum 186.84 First Quartile 6371.26 Median 10095.06 Third Quartile 14902.96 Maximum 26461.51 Skewness 0.4597

RiskSim 2.42 Trial for Evaluaon - Cumulave Chart

1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.00 5000.00 10000.00 15000.00 20000.00 25000.00 30000.00 Output

Cumulave Probability

Monte Carlo Assessment for Energy (MJ)

Mean 80004.83741 St. Dev. 42595.98035 Mean St. Error 1347.003171 Minimum 1368.567098 First Quartile 46667.93123 Median 73943.88793 Third Quartile 109160.6702 Maximum 193824.2876 Skewness 0.4597

RiskSim 2.42 Trial for Evaluaon - Histogram

150

100

RiskSim 2.42 Trial for Evaluaon - Cumulave Chart Frequency 0 1.0 2637.5 2638 2638.5 2639 2639.5 2640 2640.5 2641 2641.5 2642 2642.5 0.8 Output 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 160000 180000 200000 Output

Cumulave Probability Uncertainties in E-books

Units Base Value Min Max Min_val Base_case Max_val Distribution Random

Cost of Glass $ 6.5142 10% 110% 0.65142 6.5142 7.16562 Triangular 5.221 Distance of transportation miles 1877.273 50% 150% 938.6365 1877.273 2815.9095 Triangular 1634 Total GWP emissions kg #REF! 2640 Energy MJ #REF! 6878

Monte Carlo Assessment for GWP (kg)

Mean 2640.39 St. Dev. 0.85 Mean St. Error 0.03 Minimum 2637.78 First Quartile 2639.79 Median 2640.46 Third Quartile 2641.01 Maximum 2642.23 Skewness -0.3205

RiskSim 2.42 Trial for Evaluaon - Cumulave Chart

1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 2637.50 2638.00 2638.50 2639.00 2639.50 2640.00 2640.50 2641.00 2641.50 2642.00 2642.50

Cumulave Probability Output

RiskSim 2.42 Trial for Evaluaon - Histogram

200

Monte Carlo Assessment for Energy (MJ)150

100

Mean 6879.342801 Frequency 50 St. Dev. 10.33769308 0 Mean St. Error 0.326906559 6850 6860 6870 6880 6890 6900 6910 Minimum 6850.03835 Output First Quartile 6872.369879 Median 6879.624959 Third Quartile 6887.045231 Maximum 6902.434963 Skewness -0.2419

RiskSim 2.42 Trial for Evaluaon - Cumulave Chart

1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2

Cumulave Probability 0.1 0.0 6850 6860 6870 6880 6890 6900 6910 Output