The Environmental Impact of Streaming

Hmm. I’m not a climate change skeptic by any definition, but this one is making my spidy sense tingle. 
 

a few news articles linked to a blog article linked to the original data (possibly) here - https://mediaenviron.org/article/17242-streaming-media-s-environmental-impact

I’d absolutely love to know the truth on this one, so I’m going to dig a bit. What I see so far seems to stretch the narrative really far. 

This recommendation kind of makes me chuckle. 
 

“Resist the temptation of immediacy. I love to watch films on MUBI. However, many of them are available at the video store or the public library, if I’m willing to wait a couple of days.”

I’m unsure if we all return to driving to the video store or library (the inter-library driving to bring videos to the local branch too) and all the movies are delivered to the video stores like the 1990s, that the carbon footprint would be better than streaming. 
 

It’s really hard to quantify the environmental cost of streaming. Undersea cables, boats, fiber, hard drives, servers, support workers, etc… and using a fraction to split off the other uses of these items, etc… it’s really hard. 

21 minutes ago, DuckToller said:

don't we go by bycycle to the local library ? ;-p

Not when it’s a a mile away and it’s below 0° F with a couple feet of snow on the ground 🙂

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

Not when it’s a a mile away and it’s below 0° F with a couple feet of snow on the ground 🙂

come on ...

39 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Not when it’s a a mile away and it’s below 0° F with a couple feet of snow on the ground 🙂

...you gotta get to Longfellow/Seward more often!

3 minutes ago, ssh said:

...you gotta get to Longfellow/Seward more often!

Used to live in Prospect Park, by the witches hat tower. Loved it! Went across the bridge to Seward Coop often. 

6 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

As I sit on my heated seat, drinking my hot coffee, in my warm vehicle, I always wonder what the heck those bicycle riding people are thinking as they ride by in a snowstorm.

".. snowflakes ... "

19 minutes ago, DuckToller said:

".. snowflakes ... "

I have become soft in my  old age...

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Hmm. I’m not a climate change skeptic by any definition, but this one is making my spidy sense tingle. 
 

a few news articles linked to a blog article linked to the original data (possibly) here - https://mediaenviron.org/article/17242-streaming-media-s-environmental-impact

 

I’d absolutely love to know the truth on this one, so I’m going to dig a bit. What I see so far seems to stretch the narrative really far. 

I'm happier looking at the math used by the people paying the electric bills, Spotify in this case (this is from a Rolling Stone article referenced at the link in the original post):

Quote

 

On the listener’s device, streaming uses double the amount of battery life as playing a song that’s been downloaded. On the DSP side, streaming a song activates the servers where the songs live on the cloud. These servers require power, massive cooling systems, internet connectivity, buildings, and land. Spotify’s 2020 Sustainability Report explains that these carbon intensive activities produce over 70,000 tons per year of CO2 — carbon dioxide, the most prevalent greenhouse gas.  The report notes that “the second largest source of emissions is the user phase,” meaning you, the listener, “making up 42 % of our emissions.” That’s another 70,000 tons or so of CO2.

  

However, the listener emissions come mostly from streamers, not downloaders.  If all songs were downloaded instead of streamed, there would be an 80% reduction in CO2 emissions after the first listen. In other words, nearly all of the carbon intensive activities would be mitigated after the initial download (approximately 70,000 tons eliminated). Plus, listening to downloaded songs uses half of the battery life as streaming them (an additional 47,000 tons eliminated). The math here is not perfect as it can’t take into account server emissions associated with downloads as separate from streams, but the basic concept holds up.

 

Let’s look at an example: “Bang!” by my band AJR, has more than 265 million streams on Spotify. If all of the plays were streamed from the cloud, “Bang!” would have generated at least 3 ⅓ tons of greenhouse gas. This is the same as driving a car from New York to L.A. three times over. If all of the plays were downloads, “Bang!” would have generated less than ⅔ of a ton. 

 

[Emphasis added.]

I think there are two takeaways here, both reasonably common sense:

1. There's a small amount of electricity usage in each individual case, but when a lot of people stream it eventually adds up to something significant.
2. The less you make the "cloud" do the work, and the more you shift that work to your home systems that are less resource intensive, the less electricity you'll use.

I don't personally need tremendous precision about exactly how much less electricity I use, just general guidance about what is the better way to go.

1 hour ago, AudioDoctor said:

 

I have become soft in my  old age...

that can happen with old age 🙄

7 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

I'm happier looking at the math used by the people paying the electric bills, Spotify in this case (this is from a Rolling Stone article referenced at the link in the original post):

[Emphasis added.]

 

I think there are two takeaways here, both reasonably common sense:

1. There's a small amount of electricity usage in each individual case, but when a lot of people stream it eventually adds up to something significant.
2. The less you make the "cloud" do the work, and the more you shift that work to your home systems that are less resource intensive, the less electricity you'll use.

I don't personally need tremendous precision about exactly how much less electricity I use, just general guidance about what is the better way to go.

 

Jud, is environmental impact a critical factor in your decision whether to stream or play local files ?

I much prefer playing local files but I confess it has little to do with environmental impact considerations. Perhaps it should. My Mephisto amplifier probably sucks a lot of energy, so my bad once again. Then again, I produce up to 100kW of solar electricity  per day

1 hour ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

 

that can happen with old age 🙄

Why the eye roll?

2 hours ago, AudioDoctor said:

 

Why the eye roll?

a playful way to highlight double entendre 🙂

5 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

Jud, is environmental impact a critical factor in your decision whether to stream or play local files ?

Nope. 🙂 It just happens to coincide with a liking for purchasing the recordings I want to listen to most.

5 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

I much prefer playing local files but I confess it has little to do with environmental impact considerations. Perhaps it should. My Mephisto amplifier probably sucks a lot of energy, so my bad once again. Then again, I produce up to 100kW of solar electricity  per day

I’m very happy with my Class D amp’s sound, which is by far the main criterion, and also pleased it’s only about 15 pounds (lighter than the transformer alone in my last amp), and that it uses quite a bit less electricity and throws off less heat than my previous amp, a heavy, solid Class A piece.

Our solar array is smallish (3.75kW, 11 panels), and was so well sized by the installation company that it has made just a few tenths of a percent above 100% of our electrical usage in the years we’ve lived here.

3 hours ago, Jud said:

I’m very happy with my Class D amp’s sound, which is by far the main criterion, and also pleased it’s only about 15 pounds (lighter than the transformer alone in my last amp), and that it uses quite a bit less electricity and throws off less heat than my previous amp, a heavy, solid Class A piece.

The Mephisto at 240 pounds is not light weight but its soo toasty warm in winter saving us power bills (lets not talk about summer)

It sounds organically warm too but absolutely accurate. I say this with absolutely no bias whatsoever 😊

With many folks buying vinyl, perhaps one day the youngins will also feel it is cool to drive to the store to rent VHS tapes for that “analog” experience too! 😎

15 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

 

that can happen with old age 🙄

That is what Viagra is for, no??