apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time


The Environmental Impact of a Google Search

Many people don't realize that many of our favorite cyber-spaces have real-life homes, which means that running websites has a real-world environmental footprint. Files are stored on servers, viewed by personal computers, and connected via networks. To operate these components, electricity must be consumed. And to generate much of that electricity, fossil fuels like coal and natural gas are usually being burned. To put it into perspective, 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 revealed in the London Times Online (they would be just the news source to compare CO2 emissions to tea-kettle boiling)...

 
 

We've blogged our concern about the environmental impact of server farms before, but never has anybody actually taken the time to localize the issue and estimate the exact effect our innocent little Google searches have.

While millions of otherwise green-friendly people tap into Google without considering the madre Earth around them, a typical search generates about 7g of CO2; boiling a kettle generates about 15g.

As a consumer of the internets (one or all of them), you can make a difference. Over the years, Internet users have used their powers of persuasion to motivate e-commerce sites to present badges certifying that their credit card processing systems are secure. Savvy users even know to watch for certification that sites they visit are safe from hacker attacks and that have audited privacy policies to protect their identities. Websites now need to be put under pressure to clean up their environmental impacts too and demonstrate that their sites are as green as they can be.

[ Image from World Amazing Information ]

Tags

green ideas, green, energy, CO2, search, electricity, Google, server, emissions, server farms

Related Links

Share

Comments (6)

It's also worth having a look at Google's blog where they give a more conservative figure (obviously!) on the energy consumption of their searches (http://googleblog.blogspot.com/). Given Google's track record, I'm inclined to believe their figures (plus the fact that they actually have access to the equipment they use, whereas the guy who wrote the report presumably doesn't?

posted by mark.brady on January 13th 2009 at 9:25am
view mark.brady's profile

I should've put a link into the actual post - it's Powering a Google search.

posted by mark.brady on January 13th 2009 at 9:28am
view mark.brady's profile

I would leave a comment, but the ramifications for the environment are too costly.

posted by maximumHOTbottom on January 13th 2009 at 1:18pm
view maximumHOTbottom's profile

Thought you might find this interesting. Turns out the article was not very accurate. (Surprize!!) http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/12/revealed-the-times-made-up-that-stuff-about-google-and-the-tea-kettles/

posted by christinesass on January 13th 2009 at 2:00pm
view christinesass's profile

The "research" was not research at all. This post should be amended to reflect that.

posted by wesaturtle on January 13th 2009 at 9:41pm
view wesaturtle's profile

I just tweeted about this. Dumbest research ever, I can't believe it's being picked up by the WSJ and the NYT. Crazy.

Let's compare this to doing the same search at your local, public library... first, get in your SUV to drive down to the... oh... wait... we just dumped 100x more CO2 into the atmosphere than the Google search, and we're still in the driveway.

Arrrgh.

posted by Michael Wendell on January 13th 2009 at 11:05pm
view Michael Wendell's profile