Slightly off topic, but I often wonder why there is no backlash on print media regarding the environmental aspect of this whole publishing industry. Most books are mass-printed, shipped to warehouses, then shipped to local sellers (or e.g. Amazon, that ships a single book to a buyer) - and the (huge) non-sellable rests are either deeply discounted or completely dumped. If you see a pile of the latest "bestseller" at the local store, its almost guaranteed that only a fraction is sold, the rest will be disposed.

Moreover, most print books, magazines and newspapers aren't even fully read by the buyers, let alone multiple times. Its a huge industry producing, promoting and selling mostly single-use items.

And the used market for most books is virtually non-existent: I had to move a couple of times and the paper weight was one of the biggest hurdles. I dumped lots of books because I couldn't find a buyer on the used market (handling would far exceed the value of the books, some companies buy used books only based on weight and condition) and even libraries and social services like the Caritas declined to take used books.

So, I'm really wondering why we as a society aren't more demanding on the sustainable side of the publishing business, especially the environmental effects. Ebooks could perhaps be a much more environment-friendly alternative, but I agree that publishers and market places have done a lot to make them less attractive, affordable and available for most readers in comparison to printed alternatives.