Posted on 07/14/2019 5:19:50 PM PDT by Impala64ssa
Democrats have grand plans to jackhammer Americans for consuming energy in transportation and heating our homes — will they set their sights on this massive culprit?
We use energy to heat our homes — that’s hardly an ‘optional’ use of energy.
We use energy to commute to work and in trucks to ship goods around the country. Also, hardly ‘optional’.
But both of those energy uses will feel the blunt end of environmentalists’ pool cue.
Even COWS are apparently a problem, as we saw with the original Green New Deal rollout.
But what about massive drains of energy that are entirely voluntary… like pornography?
Watching adult films accounts for over 4 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions associated with digital technologies, says a new study.
“Climate crisis: The unsustainable use of online video”, a report published by French think-tank The Shift Project, highlights that pornography makes up 27 per cent of all videos viewed online.
Furthermore, online videos – one of the most common forms of online entertainment – are said to generate 60 per cent of world data traffic, based on 2018 estimates.
In other words, it means that they account for 300 million tonnes of CO2 emissions per year (resulting from energy consumption), with porn ‘emitting’ just under 100 million tonnes – nearly as much as Belgium and Kuwait.
The authors point out that “viewing pornographic videos in the world in 2018 generated carbon emissions of the same magnitude as that of the residential sector in France”. Source: SN
Don’t think we’ve forgotten about the roles Netflix, Amazon and Google’s YouTube play in this problem, either.
Meanwhile, video-on-demand services such as Netflix or Amazon Prime reportedly generated the same volume of greenhouse gas emissions as the entire economy of Chile.
Digital technologies are estimated to be consuming 9 per cent more energy every year, but the situation is only going to get worse with the wider spread of ever-higher-resolution videos. Source: SN
It will be interesting to see whether Climate Change protesters will tell people they can’t stream dirty movies anymore.
Interesting to see whether they’re going to tax the snot out of the Multi-Billion dollar porn industry, Google, and Netflix. And if they’re not… why not?
Shouldn’t it be easier to give up naughty movies than it would to give up, say, steak?
You’d think it was low-hanging fruit. If the Climate Crisis is such an urgent issue, shouldn’t attention be placed on the things nobody really needs?
What do you think the left would do if Trump called for a massive tax on these ‘big offenders’ to ‘carbon-free’ changes — using those revenues to fund research into alternative energy sources — commercial fusion reactors, for instance?
If Climate Change is such an important and imminent issue, shouldn’t the urgency be on limiting the unnecessary use of our consumption, and harnessing some of those untapped billions that porn rakes in rather than solving it on the backs of hardworking American people?
…’IF’ it’s such an important issue, that is.
Streaming movies and albums online is a wasted burden on the web traffic.
But it is saving Big Media billions of dollars in overhead, inventory, distribution, middlemen, etc and increasing their profit margin.
There are other articles that say that local playback of music (on your own harddrive or even a CD) is better for the environment.
The only tax-free streaming allowed will be CNN, MSNBC, NPR, DU, and Huffington Post. Everybody else will be taxed through the nose.
heard much energy used to mine for bitcoin. (IHNIHTW)
They film “Better Call Saul” near where I work. Filming of a 30-second scene takes several hours, with set-up and take-down, the entire 20-second scene takes four days to film. An entourage of about 100 people, at least 30 vehicles and large trucks. Generators running 24-7 to support it all. And they have the chutzpah to lecture me on my energy use.
You are correct -- the people who author such studies never take full account of how things used to be manufactured and distributed. Making and moving physical product to the end-customer is very expensive.
For example, how many entire town landfills were filled up with AOL's crap sent through the mail?
Also the overpaid A listers who are oh so concerned about rising ocean levels don’t seem to be in much of a hurry to abandon their oceanfront mansions.
What a damn joke.
So does bringing millions of families to first world resource utilization
While all true, the climate alarmists will argue that the only reason there is a large carbon footprint from any and all online activity has to do with the modes of electricity generation, which should be “fixed” by shifting to “100%” “renewable” sources. LOL Like that’s going to happen and if it happens going to work - NOT.
Well that will kill watching porn anyway, ‘cause the sun don’t shine (and make solar power) at night when most porn is watched. /sarc
I call bs.
Unused bandwidth has the same cost as used bandwidth. Zeros have the same cost as ones.
The only cost is infrastructure capacity.
Pricing, however, is not set up that way.
Color TVs were big glass bottles, with the earlier sets full of tubes, all requiring power for their filaments and high-voltage power supplies. As semiconductors replaced some of the tubes, you still had the big one and a handful of smaller ones. Projectors for private viewing used 1000-1500 watt lamps.
The progression continued as computer screens and TVs transitioned to plasma, then LED, and now OLED. Big power drop as the trend continues. (Ever tried to give away an old glass-bottle TV recently?)
All the recent depictions of porn watchers have them viewing the stuff on laptops, tablet, and smart-phones. Yes, Pitch Perfect scene with port showed it on an LCD screen in the frat house, but Beca watched The Breakfast Club on her laptop. Lower power. Battery powered devices, that serve multiple purpose other than porn-gazing.
How about them server farms? As Intel and AMD roll out their new chip-sets, the power consumed by those chip-sets plateau at about three watts each, and the increase in computing power drives the joules/cycle further down. Long-distance cabling is moving faster and faster to fiber, with the transmitters and receivers sipping power, when compared to the microwave base station power.
It's too bad stories like this don't put all aspects of the issue in perspective.
I used to receive those all of the time in the mail, I used them for targets.
Liberals need porn because they can’t get the real thing.
“” “” Watching adult films accounts for over 4 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions associated with digital technologies, says a new study.”” “”
Did they include masturbation-related emissions? Or it is not smart to give them ideas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.