SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Shift Project has released a report pointing the finger at online video as a significant, and growing, cause of greenhouse gas emissions.
From New Scientist:
The transmission and viewing of online videos generates 300 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year, or nearly 1 per cent of global emissions. On-demand video services such as Netflix account for a third of this, with online pornographic videos generating another third.
[...] The authors call for measures to limit the emissions from online videos, such as preventing them from autoplaying and not transmitting videos in high definition when it is unnecessary. For instance, some devices can now display higher resolutions than people can perceive. The report says regulation will be necessary.
No word on the carbon footprints of HTTPS, JavaScript, or advertising.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 14 2019, @12:30PM (1 child)
45% of the so-called "emissions" aren't from streaming video at all, but instead the emissions generated during the production of consumer electronics, because no one bought TVs before streaming video. More than 1/3 of the rest is the electricity used by the TV itself, which no one ever watched before streaming video. Streaming probably saves energy there since people might turn the TV off when they're done instead of just wandering away and leaving it on like with broadcast TV.
Most of the rest is from data centers would be turned on anyway. Internet and data center power consumption is not linear with data usage, at all.
All this is assuming the "report" is credible, which it absolutely is not. The Shift Project is an explicitly anti-technology group dedicated to the elimination of technology from everyday life, and while the report does contain a bibliography, it does not contain actual methodology or data, only summaries. It is exactly as credible as a report from Philip Morris saying "smoking doesn't cause cancer, trust us." I figured they'd be environmentalist wackos, but they're actually Luddite wackos.
I guarantee that streaming video produces less CO2 than driving to the video store or the movies.
And if a typical person watches two hours of streaming video per day, that's about 12% of their awake time. If that only produces 1% of emissions, it seems like streaming video is one of the best ways to spend time.
(Score: 2) by Farkus888 on Sunday July 14 2019, @07:07PM
A large part of the green contingent is religion for the non religious. Meaning that what they really want is an excuse to say they are better than you and to regulate away your fun. Streaming may use some energy but it is obvious that it is better than the alternatives for carbon use. I'm a fan of doing things efficiently for multiple reasons, green interests among them. These people damage the legit green cause by chasing away so much of the population with their shameless hatred for the happiness of others. I blame them and their type for coal rolling and Tesla vandalism.