in the technology and with production on a larger
scale.
A second potential is related to the concept of
books as durable objects. When it becomes possible
to create a book using the new digital paper that can
be turned into any book by means of an electronic
update, the potential for a more sustainable
medium presents itself—one that does not require
the cutting of trees. But, the durability of the digital paper book can only match that of the ordinary
notion of a book if the other attributes that make
ordinary books enduring
objects in general are also
matched or even exceeded.
A third potential is
based on the possibilities
for making displays that
are more portable, cheaper,
smaller, and more pervasive. From a sustainability
point of view, pervasive,
small, inexpensive displays
may be an advantage to the
degree that they build an
infrastructure of modularity. If upgrading a display
on an interactive device
such as a cell phone, PDA,
MP3/video player, or lap-
top becomes as viable as upgrading the storage
capacity of a device by substituting a memory card
such as an SD card, this could have the effect of
making digital artifice last longer. On the other
hand, if the possibility of making more portable,
cheaper, smaller, and more pervasive displays ends
up driving a practice of even more disposability and
premature disposal due to frequent obsolescence
with respect to display devices—for example, on
product packaging—the consequences could be
devastating from an environmental point of view.
Even if the substrates are made of recyclable materials, recycling is not as environmentally sustainable
as reuse. And, if the substrates are not made of recyclable or biodegradable materials, the effects on the
e-waste stream may possibly augment the toxicity of
the present-day e-waste stream [ 3]. In any event, the
negative social impacts of adding to the e-waste
stream and even of certain recycling practices are
also a global sustainability issue [ 1, 2].
For digital paper to be better than ordinary paper
from a user experience point of view, it will need to
properly address at least these four interactivity
issues: resolution—the quality of the text will need
to be as good or better than paper; control—the use
of digital paper and labels will need to be as easy and
straightforward in use as ordinary paper and labels;
portability—digital paper will need to be as
portable or more portable than ordinary paper at
the same resolutions; authenticity—the experience
of using these displays will need to be as aesthetically authentic and tangible as holding a physical
piece of paper. If these user experience concerns can
be adequately addressed together with some of the
other concerns described here, the potentials of
organic display technologies to enable choices for a
sustainable future can be realized. c
REFERENCES
1. Iles, A. Mapping environmental justice in technology flows:
Computer waste impacts in Asia. Global Environmental Politics 4,
4 (Nov. 2004); www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdfplus/
10.1162/glep.2004.4.4.76.
2. Schmidt, C. Unfair trade e-waste in Africa. Environmental Health
Perspectives 114, 4 (2006): A232–A235; www.pubmedcentral.nih.
gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1440802.
3. Townsend, G. et al. RCRA Toxicity Characterization of Computer
CPUs and Other Discarded Electronic Devices. Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, 2004.
ELI BLEVIS ( eblevis@indiana.edu) is an assistant professor of
informatics at Indiana University, Bloomington.
© 2008 ACM 0001-0782/08/0600 $5.00
