30 minutes on Netflix, Prime, etc. or a 6 km drive emit the same amount of

, , and other such streaming services have ushered in a new era of entertainment. Such platforms allow us to watch videos at our on at minimal yearly or monthly subscription plans. But every time we use these services on our devices, there is a hidden involved. Confused? Allow us to paint a clear picture for you.


@tuxom I'd imagine that is making a lot of assumptions though, giving that those services use CDNs to deliver the content and depending where those are located and what percentage of users use those the actual value could differ a fair bit.

@tuxom so i wonder if we should all just bittorrent movies to save the environment?

bookmarking this for my trial.

@tuxom I could find no source for the information in that article. I searched AFP's site for it and found nothing.

1.6 kg per half hour sounds extremely dubious to me, back of the envelope I would expect it to be more like .1 kg marginal increase(increase per additional 30 minutes watched)

Yes ... difficult to 'measure' the emission equivalents. But information, mail, TV, broadcast, radio, internet .... need energy. And boosting .. too

The question is: Is the climate effect regarding greenhouse gas pollution worth for all that stuff?

@tuxom probably not. However I don't think streaming video is going to have *nearly* as much impact as, say, using bitcoin or playing a resource-intensive video game.

Any future where Europeans don't constantly wreck the whole world for everyone is going to involve a pretty huge overhaul of how computers work and how they are used.

There is a lot of useful data in that report, idk where they got the 1.6 kg figure from though.

@tuxom "they" being that news story and others. I haven't run the calculations myself, might do it later if I'm bored.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

mastodon.at is a microblogging site that federates with most instances on the Fediverse. Note: This instance will shut down on February 29th, 2020.