Paris (AFP)
Watching his favorite series at home on his computer or in transport on his laptop is less polluting than a DVD made at the other end of the world and delivered by courier as did Netflix in its infancy? Not so simple answer experts face the explosion of streaming.
THE SITUATION
Video streaming now accounts for 60.6% of overall Internet traffic, according to the latest report (September 2019) from Canadian network equipment specialist Sandvine. Of this total Google (with YouTube) accounts for 12%, Netflix 11.44%.
But if digital broadcasting seems dematerialized, it is not immaterial: terminals, storage and broadcasting networks, all consume energy.
According to the calculations of the Shift Project, a French research group that published a report in July on "the unsustainable use of online video", the annual equivalent for the sole streaming of CO2 emissions from a country like Spain, or 1% of global emissions.
It's video on demand - with its giants Netflix or Amazon and soon Apple or Disney - dominating, accounting for 34% of the total (Shift Project). CO2 equivalent tonnes equivalent: 102 million, roughly the annual emissions of Chile, the country hosting in December the big COP 25 conference on climate!
Then come pornographic videos, 27% of the total, the "tubes" internet (21%) and "other" uses (18%), including the booming sector of social media videos.
THE PROBLEM
"Digital video is very heavy files that grow with each generation of higher definition," says Gary Cook, who follows the sector for Greenpeace in the United States. Ultra HD, 4K, 8K announced ... the manufacturers compete. But "more data equals more energy to maintain a system ready to stream this video to your device in the second".
Because streaming is "a resource used for a customer watching a video", unlike conventional TV where a transmitter waters all viewers, said Laurent Lefevre of the National Institute (French) research in digital sciences. This puts a lot of pressure on three areas: terminal equipment, networks and data centers.
Especially since the consumer wants a fast service without hiccups. As a result, "everyone is overdimensioning the equipment with the consequent waste of resources at all levels," says the researcher, who is also deputy director of the CNRS EcoInfo group.
TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS OR "REBOUND EFFECT"?
Hosting companies and / or broadcasters work a lot on the search for technical improvements, for example for the cooling of data centers or encoding to make video less "heavy".
But experts warn against the famous "rebound effect", which means that improvements in resource use techniques actually increase overall consumption.
"The technological improvement created new uses and these uses" influence "products themselves, as the video on social networks that has spread in marketing, says Maxime Efoui-Hess, author of the study of Shift Project.
Not to mention that the technophile culture of the unlimited (pipes or contents) as recommendation algorithms or modes "autoplay" encourage the "binge watching".
The ecological footprint of streaming should therefore grow exponentially, especially as the use of the Internet is spreading more and more around the world.
TRACKS FOR THE FUTURE
A technological backtracking is excluded, the researchers recommend including awareness.
For Gary Cook of Greenpeace "the exercise of collective responsibility, by requiring internet giants to quickly switch their data centers to renewable energy has been the main driver of change so far".
We can also ensure consumption at least possible impact, suggests Laurent Lefevre: "The worst is to watch on a mobile phone 3G It is better to look at home with a fiber optic connection".
The ShiftProject, which pleads for a debate on "digital sobriety", has on its side put online the "carbonalyser", an extension of internet browser that translates into CO2 equivalent your activities on the web. "We must put ourselves in the position to question uses that for now have not been discussed as a collective," said Maxime Efoui-Hess.
© 2019 AFP