The technology sector has had a tumultuous 2022. The rising cost of living has caused a decline in streaming subscriptions, cryptocurrencies have waned, and Amazon and Twitter have both increased their subscription fees. On top of this, Twitter’s legal battles with Elon Musk have raised questions about the platform’s future.
It wasn’t long ago that these companies seemed invincible, but the latest tech bubble appears to have burst. In this moment of reflection, we must ask: What have these companies offered to the world? They have enabled rapid access to films and TV, fostered global conversations, and perhaps even challenged status quo economics through digital currencies. However, have we considered their environmental impact?
With rising demand for businesses to be more ecologically aware, technology companies must consider not only the physical waste of their products, such as chargers and devices, but also the digital carbon footprint of their services. Research estimates that e-waste could double between 2014 and 2030, and new regulations are beginning to tackle this physical waste.
Cryptocurrencies have been particularly scrutinized for their environmental impact, as their production requires immense amounts of energy. One study found it can take more energy to mine digital currencies than to mine an equivalent amount (by market value) of actual minerals. Furthermore, estimates suggest that buying and trading bitcoin generates 18 million tons of carbon dioxide each year.
However, even those who have not invested in digital currencies may be surprised to learn of their own digital carbon footprint. For example, the energy used to watch Breaking Bad on Netflix is equivalent to driving 27 miles, while the average social media user’s daily scrolling emits the same amount of pollution as driving more than 330 miles in a petrol car.
The type of electricity used to power our devices also affects our individual emissions. Additionally, the emissions of the most popular social media apps vary, with Facebook claiming to be carbon neutral and TikTok and Reddit producing the highest carbon footprints.
Even if tech companies use renewable energy, the amount of energy they consume to power things like data centers places a strain on these resources. So to limit global warming to 1.5℃ above pre-industrial levels, something must change.
Minor changes to our online habits can make a difference. Each digital interaction we have directly affects emissions. For example, if every British adult in England just sent one less “thank you” email, the nation could save 16,433 tons of carbon a year. Additionally, when the choice is between traveling, especially by plane, or sending an email or making a video call, the digital approach is much less damaging.
Tackling big tech’s power consumption and polluting habits requires more than individual efforts, however. The first step is to create regulations that incentivize digital technology powered by renewable energy sources.
The second step is to discourage or reduce emission-intensive activities such as online advertising, which produces 5.4 tons of carbon dioxide per average online ad campaign and encourages more consumption of goods.
The third step is redistributing wealth and encouraging degrowth policies targeting tech companies. This would reduce unnecessary consumption and emissions and ensure that enough renewable energy is available to power digital technologies and the rest of society.
