Vestitor:I was chatting to some guy from Sweden yesterday who was seething against the anti-paper culture. He said modern paper production is a sustainable operation from 'farmed' trees and many trees (and boughs from trees) cut down as part of tree management. The rest being from recycled paper...which has a re-use limit of course.

I think he may have point. I like my e-reader, but I like books better.

I understand. There are times when I just like to sit in my easy chair with gentle classical music on the radio and read a physical document. (Back when I had a cat, it was even nice for the cat to curl up in my lap, although I could sometimes had to adjust the document around her.)

However, with "dead tree" books (or other documents) there is the issue of longevity. I have access to the Library of Congress in the city of Washington, the world's largest library. They have extensive holdings in auxiliary languages, although I suppose that there are libraries in Europe with even larger holdings. Some of these holdings are in Esperanto, and some about other auxiliary languages.

One unfortunate aspect is that many of the older works were printed on high-acid wood pulp paper and are badly yellowing, almost to the point of physically deteriorating. Yes, again, I myself often prefer to read a physical book / essay / document at leisure, but we have to recognize that many modern paper documents in the long run may be almost ephemeral and subject to loss.

Old books yes, but unless someone is specifically into antiquarian books and first editions, it doesn't matter if their copy of Great Expectations was printed in 1861, 1961 or last week. Printed on new acid-free paper no less.

I have a paper copy of Wells's Esperanto dictionary and I consult it far more than any electronic versions - e-books, online, whatever. Electronic dictionaries really don't have either the same convenience or ease-of-use. They're like trying to see a landscape through a letterbox.