AUG 26

This is really interesting, I had no idea. Perhaps I just never thought of it, but either way, this is a sad fact, especially with how often they are needed to be replaced.

Lindsey
http://www.Greenjoyment.com

it turns out that digital music, not radio, is a sound salvation,

And radio figures in how?

(In the larger picture of killing global climate change with a death of a thousand cuts we are talking about a tiny, tiny scratch here, aren't we? ;o)

I wonder if listening to music made by people you're with was analyzed. That probably fails the geek test but I'll bet it passes the eco test. It worked for a pretty long time before electricity was harnessed.

Cool website, like what I have read. Will definitely be back to read again.

Were the energy and resources costs of manufacturing, shipping and disposing of MP3 players taken into account? How about laptops?

Depending on the person, people go through iPods alarmingly quickly - and some own more than one at a time (i.e. iPhone and Nano).

Also: "Don't worry about contacting your local representative urging action about Global Warming (which we need to do something about in the next 2 years, according to the IPCC) - just get a laptop, an iPod, and start downloading digital music. Ta-da! Freshly saved planet."

Sorry, the title was begging for it.

Did the study include the environmental impact of replacing the music player or battery every couple years? CDs environmental impact is relatively fixed.

Could industries be using the "power of science" to turn tides towards more profits?

Some excellent points brought up by your EcoGeek audience Hank. Since I understand the radio reference and am of the generation that couldn't wait to listen Dr. Don Rose and the Emergency Boogie System on KYA each evening, would love to see how radio would do in a similar evaluation. I think of the radio as a bit like a library, except you don't get to choose which book to read, just tune in and see what's playing.

For the analog-philes, unused/unsold vinyl records can be recycled back into new ones, although no recycler would ever accept vinyl records now. But it has better potential than CDs with its polycarbonate base. Impossible to recycle.

Digital Music Can Save the Planet - and kill your ears

Title should be 'digital music can kill the planet more slowly' Im really liking all these articles that are eco-coating our consumerism so that we can continue with our destructive paradigm (notice how the car was the most influential variable...) in a blissfully ignorant way.

Also, opening line about digital vs. radio made me laugh because radio was mentioned nowhere in the study. i bet radio is the best alternative

First, the title of the post is inappropriate-- you need to put all these "green" ideas into perspective and relative importance. The amount of CO2 related to a CD in comparison to most everything else people buy or do is insignificant. A better approach to reporting would be to ask, if we all did this (e.g. buy MP3 players instead of CDs) what percentage of our energy use would be saved?

If you leave a desktop computer on overnight to download music, it could use more energy than making a CD. The difference between a desktop and laptop just during work hours is equivalent to driving to the store every other day and buying one CD (and nothing else).

I read the original report-- it is interesting as an exercise on calculating energy efficiency alternatives, but the amount of energy is insignificant to other things in life, such as the difference in power between 2 TVs or computers.

The most significant problem are assumptions made in the report. Inherently, these could be way off for this kind of example, no matter how good the researchers are. For example, in this report, the energy to drive to the store and buy a CD is the major part of physical CDs. They mostly assume that people make a shopping trip only to buy 1 or 2 CDs, and nothing else. I think people tend to shop for CDs when out shopping anyway, rather than making special single-purpose trips to a record store. Then, what is the alternative? Say a guy without an iPod (probably a social failure as a result-- at least he perceives it) invites a girl on a date to go on a date to cruise the record store, 5 miles away. But the guy that download the music already has it, so he drives 15 miles to makeout point. In this scenario, not going to a record store increased energy use. Maybe downloading video games is a good thing, because guys stay holed up alone at home playing the game instead of driving around and hiking in the mountains.

Another significant cost is the CD case. But people tend to use a zipper case to store a batch of CDs compactly, especially those that burn them, and discard the plastic cases. A lot of energy could be saved by using a cardboard cover-- not just the replacement for the case, but in warehouse and retail costs. Same for software-- huge boxes containing a CD and pamphlet with huge retail, warehouse, and transport costs. How about improving the absurd packaging on software-- that would save more than downloading CDs. (Most software typically re-downloads itself anyway, over and over again when you don't want it to.)

One indirect factoid in the report is the implication that using Netflix is way better than downloading video online. Transmitting a DVD online would use around 50kWh (based on 7kWh/GB in the report). Netfix just uses paper packaging, less than the 1st class one ounce limit, and has low delivery cost/item in postal mail. Now that's how to save the planet-- efficient delivery and avoidance of driving to the movie theater. ;-)

I just came across your blog and sounds interesting read your post and i love music a lot and spend most of my time in listening to music

Your article was very well written, I am very like it, I wish you happy every day!