The 2010 Green Books Campaign - now on Facebook and twitter!

The 2010 Green Books Campaign is not that far away! In 18 days, on Wednesday, November 10, 2010, at 1:00 PM Eastern Time 200 bloggers will take a stand to support books printed on environmental paper by simultaneously publishing reviews of 200 such books.

Launched in 2009 by Eco-Libris, the Green Books Campaign is looking to promote books printed on environmental paper by turning a spotlight on books that are already printed this way. Our goal is to raise book buyers' awareness and create a discussion on the ways books should be printed, using the power of the Internet and social media to create a buzz and get the word out on the campaign.

We want it to be an interactive discussion and therefore we have a new Facebook page, where where you can follow news and updates on the campaign in the upcoming 18 days. You're also welcome to add your thoughts, ideas and questions there! The campaign is now also on Twitter and you can follow it at @greenbooks2010.

And if you want to join the green celebration, we still have room for 5 more bloggers! We still have 50 books you can choose from for review at http://www.ecolibris.net/greenbookscampaign_list.pdf

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

Banning phone book litter in Seattle? Not so fast...

Last week the city of Seattle made an important step last week - it voted "on a yellow pages "opt-out" ordinance that would get rid of those phone books." It makes Seattle the first city in the country to set up an opt-out registry if you don't want to receive yellow pages.

We have discussed here before how wasteful are the Yellow/White Pages' practices ('The Yellow Pages are going green, but how about eliminating the wasteful printing in the first place?') and also compared the carbon footprint of a search on Google and a Yellow Pages directory. So any step in the right direction is a reason to be more optimistic.

Nevertheless, I'm not sure if the headline given by our friends at Treehugger to this story (Phone Book Litter Banned in Seattle, Nation's First Opt-Out City) is not a bit too optimistic. Applying Opt-out system is an important step, but it's very far from banning phone book litter. First, you can already opt out system for Yellow Pages (well, right now they're upgrading it so you can't really use it) and second, it's going to be real ban only when it will change to an opt-in system.

I'm afraid that even the most user-friendly opt-out system won't get enough people to move themselves out of the list, even in a progressive city like Seattle. If the city really wants "to allow residents to say no to the books" it should give them the freedom to choose if they want to receive these books in the first place. It's reasonable, better to the environment and will save money to the city (according to the announcement "City Councilor Mike O'Brien says unwanted yellow pages cost the Seattle $350,000 a year in recycling costs").

So I hope that the city of Seattle won't stop in launching an opt-out system and will end the current wasteful practice by creating an opt-in system to get things done. Then, we'll be able to talk about banning phone books litter in Seattle.

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

Is it greener to borrow ebooks from your local library?

When Daniel Goleman and Gregory Norris published their life cycle analysis (LCA), comparing e-books and physical books (How Green Is My iPad?, NYT), they wrote that at "all in all, the most ecologically virtuous way to read a book starts by walking to your local library."

Now, how about staying and home and getting an e-book from your local public library?

I got thinking about it after hearing a report on NPR's Marketplace about libraries in Birmingham, Atlanta that offer users to check out e-books ('iPad and Kindle users can't borrow from e-book libraries'). This is a growing trend, and it seems that libraries find it an interesting channel that will keep them connected with readers in the digital age.

For readers it's very convenient (cheaper than buying e-books and "there are no late fees, no trip to the library, the book expires after the date.") and of course the big e-readers sellers don't like it too much (Library e-books don't work with two of the biggest e-readers - the Amazon Kindle and Apple's iPad) as it means less business for them.

But what about the environmental side of this option? I mean, leaving the e-book vs. physical book debate aside for a moment, is it "greener" to borrow a book from a library than buying it online? I'm not sure. I can't think actually of any reduction of your environmental impact if you choose to use e-library over buying online.

I mean, this sort of activity, can eventually change the way libraries operate and probably influence their current public functions (will we be able to afford and support big brick and mortar libraries if most of their activity will be online?), but I can't think of any advantage from an environmental perspective for borrowing e-book comparing to buying it.

I'll be happy to hear your thoughts about it!

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

Saving trees or softer touch for the butt?

It seems that this is the question consumers have to ask themselves if they're considering using toilet paper made of 100% recycled paper. You can guess the answer most of us will give..

The New York Times had an interesting article today on Marcal Small Steps, a company that is selling for 60 years toilet paper that as they say is made 'from paper, not from trees'.

They have now a new marketing campaign and it seems that they're doing well - in any case, much better than the market in general. But they still have a very small market share in paper product categories ("low single digits"). The reason? Their products are not soft enough for the American consumer.

There is some trade-off here and no matter what the reason is (Darby Hoover of NRDC suggest it's "decades of advertising promoting softness"), most of the consumers will prefer to wipe their tooshie with a softer paper even if it comes on the account of trees. Trade-off has always been an obstacle in the efforts to green up consumers' behavior. It is very unfortunate, but we have to face reality and think what can be done to get more green paper products purchased.

Right now, according to NRDC, just 10% of the paper products for home contain recycled content. This is very low. Too low. Some companies look for middle ground, like Kimberly-Clark (remember their new relationship / partnership with Greenpeace?) that is selling Scott Naturals’ products, which are "only partly made of recycled content, with the toilet paper using the least at 40 percent and napkins the most at 80 percent."

Aric Melzl, senior brand manager for Scott explained on the article that “you can have a product that’s 100 percent recycled with a smaller following or you can have Scott Naturals, where you choose to deliver the quality that folks are expecting with more mass appeal and a bigger business and more impact on the environment than a business that has a smaller following."

He definitely has a point and this is a good way to convert consumers gradually to use greener products, but this is still a partial solution. The other part that I'm missing here is innovation - Can't we really find a way to make sure there won't be any trade-off at all?

I mean, in a day like this, when we are so happy to see the rescue of the 33 Chilean miners, you wonder how we know can save miners captured 2,000 feet below the ground, but have no idea how to make toilet paper from recycled paper that will be soft enough for the American tooshie? (by the way, does anyone know what toilet paper the miners used on the last 69 days?)

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

Who is also offering more of the same? Barnes and Noble!

I wrote couple of times in the past (here and here for example) on the lack of winning strategy at Barnes & Noble with regards to their 700+ brick and mortar stores. At the same time I was always wondering if I miss anything and somehow they do have a real good plan for the stores.

Now, after reading an interview with Leonard Rigio of B&N on Publishers Weekly I know they just don't have it. All they can offer is more of the same.

Rigio is of course very confident when he refers to the digital side of B&N, saying that "the company will continue with plans to aggressively transform itself into a major force in the sales of digital content." But what is his vision about the stores? Here's the plan:

Despite the possible bump in print sales over the holidays, it is clear fewer print books will be sold in bookstores in the future, forcing booksellers to find ways to make up for lost sales as well as to bring in customers, Riggio said. B&N stores "will remain chock-full of books," he said, and will continue to have the appearance of a grand library. But the company has already added more nonbook items, such as education games and toys, and the retailer will continue to test new initiatives over the holidays. And while the merchandise mix of the stores will change, Riggio said he doesn't expect the number of stores to change. "We tend to close a few stores every year at the end of their lease, and we move some stores to better locations. But over the next two to three years, I don't see the composition of our stores changing much at all," Riggio said.

So, if I summarize it, we'll have similar number of stores selling books and some more merchandise like toys and notebooks. This is far from being promising or even encouraging. These ideas are nothing new - Blockbuster, for example, tried to do something similar in the past and we all know where it ended. Not to mention that keeping the same number of stores operating doesn't sound too realistic.

These ideas certainly won't help to transform the stores from a liability back to an asset. If anything, this interview shows me that B&N is still very much in the dark when it comes to its bookstores. It's time for them to look for new ideas before it will be too late.

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

There’s no such as “normal” weather in Guatemala…but trees can help!

An AIR-planted pine forest, about 8 years old in Simajhuleu, Guatemala, stopping a mudslide from the road above and protecting a stream and houses below (June 2010; photo: A. Hallum)

Last June we updated you how trees planted by our planting partner AIR in Guatemala help to mitigate some damages of Hurricane Agatha.

AIR is doing an incredible job in Guatemala in general, but in such situations its work is even more substantial. This is also a demonstration of the value of trees planted by AIR and their significant impact on people's life.

Dr. Anne Hallum, the Director of AIR, who was in Guatemala at that time with a team of volunteers to plant trees as this was the planting season, sent us a brief report, which is enclosed below, on the event with pictures that help to get a better understanding what happened there.

There’s no such as “normal” weather in Guatemala…but trees can help!

The last day of May, 2010, tropical storm Agatha poured so much rain on south central Guatemala, it caused horrific flooding and mudslides that killed at least 145 people, washed away crops and highways, and hundreds of homes. Particularly hard hit was the Department of Chimaltenango where AIR works.

Some scientists speculate that climate change has changed the normal afternoon rains of the rainy season into intense “rain events.” It doesn’t help that decades of deforestation have worsened the mudslides, and that highway construction and gravel mining in the mountains takes down more trees, and safer engineering practices are not used.

In any case, the rains continued throughout the summer months (Guatemala’s “winter” months). In September “Tropical Depression 11-E” parked for days over the same area of Guatemala, and mudslides destroyed highways and one bus filled with persons was buried, killing at least 12 persons. One of AIR’s technicians was trapped on a road all night outside of Panajachel, with mudslides occurring around him.

What is to be done? First, AIR is responding with targeted emergency aid because the technicians are themselves Guatemalan and know the roads and villages very well. Secondly, volunteers have already been recruited to help rebuild homes—once it stops raining every day. Thirdly, the tree-planting efforts must intensify in these mountainous regions.

It was evident to everyone this summer, that where AIRES had reforested hillsides, the mudslides did not occur. In one village, a young pine forest that AIR had planted 8 years ago acted like brakes on a mudslide washing down a road and protected the stream and houses below. As the AIR technician said, “the little trees stood like soldiers” stopping the mud (photo).



AIR staff members & truck delivering food & water, in Santa Apolonia, 2 June 2010 (Photo: A. Hallum)

The benefits of trees seem innumerable – animal habitat, soil nutrition; shade; beauty; fertilizer; fruits, carbon sequestration—and this summer in Guatemala, they literally saved lives.

Josue, standing next to an AIR-planted forest in Simajhuleu, Guatemala; his family has worked with AIR for 10 years (Photo: A. Hallum)

AIR tree nursery; Santa Apolonia; Rebecca Hallum, Anne Hallum, with Luis Iquique and the resident committee, June 2010 (photo: A. Hallum)

For more information, and to donate for AIR’s emergency response, see www2.stetson.edu/air/

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

Are publishers and bookstores in the same boat when it comes to e-books?

Not too long ago it looked like the book industry is a unite front when it comes to dealing with the new challenges of the digital era. When talking about the the future of books or trying to answer questions like 'Is Print Dead?', the general notion was that bookstores and publishers are in the same boat.

But are they?

I believe that right now the answer is no. While both publishers and bookstores need to deal with difficult challenges, it looks like publishers in general are better positioned than bookstores.

Here is some evidence: Let's start with publishers. Last month Publishers Weekly reported on the results of the five largest trade publishers in the US:

"Four of the five houses reported significant changes in their operating performance in the first half of 2010 compared to one year ago, with big books, or the lack thereof, playing a major role in the shifts...In general, the major houses were optimistic about the second half of the year."

On the other hand, when it comes to bookstores the headlines aren't that positive:

Does The Independent Bookstore Have A Future? (Treehugger, October 4, 2010)

Borders Posts Net Loss of $46.7 Million for 2Q (GalleyCat, September 1, 2010)

Barnes & Noble to Shutter Upper West Side Superstore in NYC (GalleyCat, August 31, 2010)

Now, this is of course generalization, as you still have many publishers struggling and new bookstores that are opened, but I believe it reflects the current state of the book industry, where bookstores have much harder time to adjust to the e-book era than publishers.

Don't get me wrong. Publishers have their own unique challenges to deal with and you can find some of them on a great piece that Stephen Page wrote on the Guardian ("The future of publishing takes shape"). Still, it looks as publishers have more flexibility and capabilities than bookstores to meet the new e-challenges. As Publishers Weekly reports from "This year, e-books are looked at more as an opportunity than a threat." And yes, it is referring only to publishers.

At least for now. Both bookstores and publishers are making more money from sales of e-books -B&N CEO reported last month to investoers that "over the last two quarters, these eBook sales have been driving the growth of our BN" and, according to Publishers Weekly, at the end of June, e-book sales accounted for about 8% of adult sales at the publishers. Still, book sales at bookstores are declining while publishers manage to show better performance. Contradiction? Not really. Readers just go elsewhere to buy their books, paper or electronic.

The conclusion is that publishers look more prepared for a hybrid future of both paper and electronic books, although they still have to prove they are capable to adjust their traditional business model to the new era and be able to provide an added value to both writers and readers. Bookstores still need to figure out how to respond to the e-book challenge. If for publishers, e-books begin to look like more as an opportunity, then to bookstores, it's still both a risk and an opportunity.

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Plant a tree for every book you read!