Not Quite The Full Story On The Environmental Impact Of Google Searches
from the think-it-through dept
It appears that one of the big stories over the weekend was some research that apparently explained the carbon footprint of a Google search. Basically, each search is the same as boiling a cup of tea. Of course, what's left out of the article is the fact that this is rather meaningless unless compared to what the alternatives are -- and whether or not those searches also end up increasing or decreasing carbon footprints in other ways. So, if by doing searches on Google, I don't need to drive all over town to find information or buy something -- then that would be a net positive. If a Google search helps me gain additional information that later lets me decrease my carbon footprint, that's also a net positive. Alternatively, doing Google searches could also increase my carbon footprint by making me do something else -- but looking at just the carbon footprint alone seems a bit meaningless. Furthermore, this seems to be taking a (mostly) fixed cost and assuming it's a marginal cost, which leads to some dangerous thinking. Yes, if fewer people did searches, Google wouldn't need so many computers, but not doing a search isn't going to suddenly save on the carbon footprint. Update: The author of the study is pretty surprised about how much attention the study is generating, noting that the original article took the results totally out of context. The study itself never even mentions Google (or cups of tea) at all. In fact, he suggests that whoever wrote the article had some sort of axe to grind with Google.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: carbon footprint, environmental impact, searches
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The article says
Performing two Google searches from a desktop computer can generate about the same amount of carbon dioxide as boiling a kettle for a cup of tea, according to new research.
There, I just reduced it by half, does that help ?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Just more of the same...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
His Article is the Cause!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/powering-google-search.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
junk science
This could be accomplished in many ways, each producing a different amount of byproduct.
It could be accomplished without any byproduct, using a parabolic mirror and a sunny day.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
#@%$*#@ hippies
2) They admit to not knowing how much carbon Google emits. The servers themselves don't emit carbon, maybe Google has solar power.
3) They even take into account booting a PC. Why not count shutting it down, or playing a game that spurs the Google search?
4) They are posting on the Internet to bitch about the carbon emissions of the Internet. Is that not the true meaning of irony?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Quit worrying about how much energy I use....
Want to be green? Go pick up all those plastic Wal-Mart bags that clog each and every city in this nation. Stop drinking plastic bottled water. Quit buying things in those ridiculous impossible to open plastic packages.
Big companies put out so much PLASTIC and garbage..but everyone is worried about the carbon footprint of a stupid SEARCH? Give me a break....
Its all just another way for someone else to CONTROL what you do and how you think. Grow up...buck the trend...think for yourself.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Google's Reply
http://timesonline.typepad.com/technology/2009/01/googles-respons.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
New widget or option
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Websearch Trivia
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
a kettle for a cup of tea, according to new research."
Just boiling keetle of tea seems a bit flimsy evidence, if they don't give an accurate representation of the amount of tea, temp, how much carbon it produces over a period of time, ect.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
irks my chain
No one* knows how much processing power Google is using
No one* knows what hardware Google is using
No one* knows what algorithms are used (ie: cached searches draw less power because it's repeatable? more because it's faster?)
* means no one "publicly"
I can go on, but you get my point. No one knows, these are all guesses. All fine and good when you're playing Memory or Battleship but...pah, it's not a study until I see some SOLID references. At this point it just seems like FUD.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: New widget or option
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Absurd Google saves carbon by me
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Just more of the same...
HEY, you should write for Fox News!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
and the other fairytale...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: #@%$*#@ hippies
If you want to indulge in fantasies, then how about the one that says that Google is pigeon powered?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I Hate Green
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Just more of the same...
Actually, there is evidence.
HEY, maybe he should, because his bullshit detector is obviously better than yours!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: and the other fairytale...
Global warming and the theory of evolution are both big lefty lies.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Back to Basics
Enough Said.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: and the other fairytale...
Yes, because releasing billions of metric tons of greenhouse - buzz word, I know, but they are in fact real - gases into the atmosphere couldn't possibly have an effect on the climate... But more importantly, carbon footprints aren't just about global warming/climate change. They're also a measure of how energy efficient we are (or aren't). As their name implies, non-renewable energy sources won't last forever. Until someone comes up with some more practical alternatives, we need to start limiting our consumption of fossil [carbon-based] fuels.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Research?
and I though research was the facts, not the cr*p.
Cut their research grant.....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Just more of the same...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Research?
An research that goes against my notions is just plain "wrong" and should be banned.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Just more of the same...
Google has replied with their estimate as well, and given reasonable arguments to support it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Just more of the same...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: His Article is the Cause!
/yes, I know he didn't invent it or even really claim to have invented it
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Don't know about carbon footprints
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
How much does a Yahoo search cost? Do they offer more "green" searches than Google? What a rediculous idea.
Farting causes more problems than doing a Google search. Call it a "carbon ass-print."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: irks my chain
You know...the Al Gore-ithm.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
To be accurate, they would have to calculate how much *more* energy they would use to do one more search. As Mike said, fixed vs variable. But then again, maybe that is what they are doing already.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Websearch Trivia
[ link to this | view in thread ]