.png)
Episode:
33
This or That? What’s better? E-Readers vs. Books, Hand Dryers vs. Paper Towels, and the Truth about “Eco” Laundry Detergent
Play Episode
Or listen on :
14:49
Welcome to another "This or That" episode!
This short, snappy installment investigates the sustainability of three topics you've asked me about, helping you make informed decisions.
In this episode, we’ll be covering three unusual options:
More Information:
I mentioned a few LCAs and information references that you can find here:
Find us online:
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/nowthatswhaticallgreen/
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/company/now-that-s-what-i-call-podcasts
Follow me on social media:
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/briannemwest/
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@briannemwest
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/briannemwest/
Wanna know more about Incrediballs?
www.incrediballs.com
https://www.instagram.com/incrediballsdrinks/
https://www.tiktok.com/@incrediballsdrinks
Transcript
Brianne West:
Kia ora, kaitiaki, and welcome to Now That's What I Call Green. I'm your host, Brianne West—an environmentalist and entrepreneur trying to get you as excited about our planet as I am. I'm all about taking a scientific approach to making the world a better place—without judgment—and making it fun. And, of course, we’ll be chatting about some of the most amazing creatures we share our planet with.
Welcome back to This or That, our short, snappy podcast episodes where I break down the least impactful options from topics you’ve asked me about—mostly on Instagram.
Today, we’ve got three unusual comparisons:
As always, before we start, jot down which option you think is going to be best. I love challenging assumptions about sustainability because so many of them are just… wrong.
You all got mad at me when I talked about how single-use glass—yep, all those glass bottles your drinks come in—is so much worse than single-use plastic. I know, I know, that’s not what you assume.
So, let’s talk about books.
I’m currently building a library and filling it with secondhand books, which made me think—what’s actually better for the planet? A Kindle or a real book?
Because you can’t beat the feel of books. The smell, the little holes in the old ones that bookworms have made, the texture—it’s just better.
But is it better for the planet?
Well, if we look at the environmental impact, physical books require paper—obviously—which means trees, water, and energy. According to a lifecycle analysis, reading 120 physical books over five years (which is probably above average, since the average American reads just three books a year) results in about 150 kilograms of CO₂ equivalent emissions.
That includes everything—paper, ink, transportation to bookstores, or shipping directly to you. That’s the whole point of a lifecycle analysis—it considers everything.
If a book is read only once and then thrown away, its environmental impact is really high. But most books are passed on, sold secondhand, borrowed from libraries, or reread, which significantly reduces their impact over their lifetime.
That 150 kg number varies, though—some studies say it’s up to 7.5 kg CO₂ per book, depending on factors like whether the paper is FSC-certified (Forest Stewardship Council), meaning it comes from sustainably managed forests.
As always, sustainability is grey.
Now, let’s talk e-readers.
Kindles and other e-readers have a much higher initial environmental cost because they’re made of mined materials, metals, and plastic. Producing and transporting an e-reader results in about 52-53 kg of CO₂ emissions—same study, same methodology.
This includes:
E-readers contain lithium-ion batteries, which have their own footprint. I’ve talked about lithium mining ad nauseum on this podcast—it has its own episode—but to summarize:
Now, battery technology is improving, and hopefully, we’ll move away from relying on rare earth minerals altogether. But for now, it’s something to consider.
What about energy use?
E-readers are very low-energy—they last about two weeks on a full charge.
And according to the study, if you read more than 25 books on your e-reader within its five-year lifespan, the e-reader is more climate-friendly than physical books.
If you read fewer than 25 books in that time? Physical books win.
But New Zealanders? We’re doing better. We read about 11 books per year on average.
Now, of course, this comparison gets tricky—
So, what’s the takeaway?
📖 If you’re a heavy reader, an e-reader is the best option—but keep it for as long as possible.
📖 If you’re a light reader, or love physical books, sticking with paper is justifiable—especially if you borrow from libraries, buy secondhand, or pass books on to others.
📖 Best option of all? If you’re reading books on an app on your phone—like the Kindle app—you win.
Since you already own the phone, there’s zero extra environmental impact. No new device, no mining, and the energy used to read is negligible.
That’s my recommendation—that’s what I do. I used to have a Kindle, but honestly? I didn’t see much of a benefit.
Drying your hands is just as important as using soap.
I hate seeing people leave bathrooms and just fling their hands around, spraying droplets everywhere. As someone who studied microbiology at university, that makes me cringe.
Wet hands take on and offload way more microbes. So please, please dry your hands.
Now, I hate hand dryers. They give me the ick—especially the ones that collect water at the bottom. And sure, they might have UV lights, but still... ugh.
But what’s actually better for the planet?
Let’s look at lifecycle assessments (LCAs).
📊 MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) did a study on this.
But it’s not just about carbon emissions.
A University of Melbourne study found that hand dryers have a significantly lower environmental footprint when powered by renewable energy.
Paper towels?
So—
📌 Best option? Modern jet air dryers—especially when powered by renewables.
📌 If paper towels are 100% recycled & composted? Then maybe they compete. But let’s be real—that almost never happens.
Finally, laundry detergent.
Those strip detergents? They’re not as eco-friendly as they claim.
Yes, they’re lighter & reduce transport emissions.
BUT.
They contain PVA (polyvinyl alcohol)—a petroleum-based plastic.
Companies say it dissolves in water. It doesn’t.
A study from Arizona State University found most dissolved PVA in wastewater does not fully biodegrade, even in modern treatment plants.
This means? Microplastics.
And that is my problem.
In order for PVA (polyvinyl alcohol) to biodegrade, special PVA-adapted microbes need to be present at high levels and for extended durations. And since most water treatment facilities don’t do that, I think that’s a pretty big red flag.
Moreover, if you look at the production of PVA, it’s pretty polluting. A study by Ryerson University found that the production of PVA involves significant environmental burdens, including:
That’s a lot of words, but basically—none of those things are good.
So, for me, these negative impacts completely outweigh any benefits from the reduced weight and dosage of PVA-based detergents.
And remember, it’s not just the strips. This also applies to:
It’s also worth noting that laundry detergent strips performed the worst in Consumer NZ testing.
They ranked in the bottom three—by a significant margin.
As always, I’ll put all the references to these studies and the Consumer NZ report in the show notes.
So, when you see detergent strips marketed as "plastic-free" and "eco-friendly," ask them for an LCA (lifecycle assessment).
Because hey—maybe some of them have done a proper LCA. Maybe there’s a new, truly biodegradable material out there.
But all the ones I’ve seen? They’re made of PVA or PVOH (same thing, different acronym), and they are NOT as good as they claim.
Oh, and they don’t work.
So, detergent tablets are super convenient.
However, they have downsides:
They didn’t rank in the top three in the Consumer NZ test, but they’re not terrible.
Powdered detergent is arguably the staple in most households—and for good reason.
Studies also show that producing powder detergent is more energy-efficient compared to liquids.
But powder isn’t perfect:
Luckily, most modern detergents are phosphate-free, but it’s still worth checking.
Liquid detergent is one of the most popular options—and honestly? I don’t understand why.
Yes, it’s effective:
BUT.
Basically, it’s middle of the road.
Better than strips—but honestly, a rock would be better than those.
Still, not as good as powder.
🏆 Winner: Powder detergent
👎 Worst: Liquid detergent
🚨 Avoid: Strips & liquid pods
📌 Tablets?
So there you have it.
📖 Read your books on your phone.
🖐 Dry your hands using a hand dryer.
👕 Wash your clothes with powder detergent.
And enjoy the fresh, powdery scent of your eco-friendly laundry.
(That was hard to fit into one sentence.)
Hope that was helpful. Hope it was enjoyable.
And remember—if some of this doesn’t apply, let it fly.
It’s all about progress, not perfection.
Now that you know better, you can do better.
Have a wonderful week.
See you next time.
And there you go.
I hope you learned something and realized that being green isn’t about having everything in your pantry matching those silly glass jars or living in a commune.
If that’s your jam—fabulous.
But sustainability, at its heart, is just using what you need.
If you enjoyed this episode, please don’t keep it to yourself!
Drop me a rating and hit subscribe.
Kia ora, and I’ll see you next week.
.png)
.png)
