The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution

The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution is an analysis of game distribution that draws the counterintuitive conclusion that in many cases, digital distribution requires more energy and creates more pollution that boxed games (thanks MCV). Here's a bit:
Contrary to findings in previous research on music distribution, distribution of games by physical BDs results in lower greenhouse gas emissions than by Internet download. The estimated carbon emissions from downloading only fall definitively below that of BDs for games smaller than 1.3 GB. Sensitivity analysis indicates that as average game file sizes increase, and the energy intensity of the Internet falls, the file size at which BDs would result in lower emissions than downloads could shift either up- or downward over the next few years. Overall, the results appear to be broadly applicable to title games within the European Union (EU), and for larger-than-average sized games in the United States. Further research would be needed to confirm whether similar findings would apply in future years with changes in game size and Internet efficiency.
View : : :
16 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  ] Older
16.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 4, 2014, 18:44
16.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 4, 2014, 18:44
Sep 4, 2014, 18:44
 
What about the fecal footprint of bigfoot? At least Bigfoot has more proof than global warming, so so lets get researching!
Yours truly,

Axis
Avatar 57462
15.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 4, 2014, 11:45
15.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 4, 2014, 11:45
Sep 4, 2014, 11:45
 
Probably can trace this article back to GameStop.

It's long, too long for me to care that much. But yeah hard to put your head around thinking digital being less green than things that require the chopping of green trees. Then all the time sitting on a display, is that factored?
Avatar 17232
14.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 4, 2014, 05:41
14.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 4, 2014, 05:41
Sep 4, 2014, 05:41
 
Grokk wrote on Sep 3, 2014, 20:31:
Just imagine what "The Fappening" has done to the environment. I mean all that uploading/downloading over such a short period of time, I'd be shocked if that alone hasn't killed off 93 different species in the Amazon or something.

Not to mention all that heat generated by fapping has likely raised the temperature of the planet a couple degrees.
13.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 3, 2014, 20:35
13.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 3, 2014, 20:35
Sep 3, 2014, 20:35
 
F**k the planet. I may go out and pollute tomorrow just because of this article.
12.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 3, 2014, 20:31
12.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 3, 2014, 20:31
Sep 3, 2014, 20:31
 
I can't wait to see where they take this new information.

Next it will be that working from home isn't as 'green' as sitting in gridlocked traffic for an hour each way when working from an office!

Just imagine what "The Fappening" has done to the environment. I mean all that uploading/downloading over such a short period of time, I'd be shocked if that alone hasn't killed off 93 different species in the Amazon or something.
Avatar 6672
11.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 3, 2014, 20:28
11.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 3, 2014, 20:28
Sep 3, 2014, 20:28
 
I'm not going to click on the article, because it's likely crap. But it seems besides the somewhat bogus claims, it is trying to reinforce something which is true elsewhere...size matters.
10.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 3, 2014, 18:17
Prez
 
10.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 3, 2014, 18:17
Sep 3, 2014, 18:17
 Prez
 
Phasenoise wrote on Sep 3, 2014, 16:00:
I wish you guys would just say what you really think once in a while.

LOL! I will try in the future!
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Avatar 17185
9.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 3, 2014, 16:07
9.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 3, 2014, 16:07
Sep 3, 2014, 16:07
 
First, there are some holes in this study.

A. He doesn't account for the fact that most disk-based games need massive patches out of the gate, patches which must be DOWNLOADED via the internet, the size of which is usually a large % of the game itself.

B. He doesn't address the impact of unsold games on the carbon footprint of disk-based games. A very large % of games go unsold, adding that % as overhead in his one-to-one (disk to download) comparison.

Second, he makes some assumptions which could be wildly off the mark. On the difficulty of estimating the flow of electricity over the internet:

First, much of the data are proprietary... Second, network devices show little marginal effect of changes in data flows on electricity use... Third, because of the rapid changes in such networks over time... the validity of any analysis of this type deteriorates rapidly as time passes from the actual data of estimation or measurement. Internet networks are continually upgraded to handle increased data rates and volumes, resulting in substantial changes to, and uncertainty over, their future electricity use.

On his assumptions about consumer behavior (that gamers consolidate shopping when buying games so the impact of driving is spread among all products) the max download size swells from 1.3 GB to 20 GB if gamers go buy the game and nothing else:

Consumer behavior can have a significant impact. If consumers were to increasingly drive just to buy “must have” or new launch games and no other purchases (as with the case where stores open at midnight to sell new launch games), then file sizes between 5.50 and 19.9 GB would account for carbon equivalent emissions in the same range as that for downloading.

The biggest advantage disk-based usage has is re-use, but companies of course hate that, so are doing everything in their power to eliminate it.
If Russia stops fighting, the war ends. If Ukraine stops fighting, Ukraine ends. Slava Ukraini!
Avatar 22024
8.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 3, 2014, 16:00
8.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 3, 2014, 16:00
Sep 3, 2014, 16:00
 
I wish you guys would just say what you really think once in a while.
Avatar 57213
7.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 3, 2014, 15:46
Prez
 
7.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 3, 2014, 15:46
Sep 3, 2014, 15:46
 Prez
 
I had to check to see if this article was on The Onion. What a stupid, stupid article.
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Avatar 17185
6.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 3, 2014, 13:02
6.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 3, 2014, 13:02
Sep 3, 2014, 13:02
 
I'm not even gonna click on that trollbait article.

According to some dipshit, the environmental cost in electricity of downloading 1.3GB of data EQUALS the cost of creating a box, printing a DVD / Blu-Ray, printing three cards of advertising shit, wrapping the box in fucking plastic, and shipping it BY FUCKING SEMI TRUCK to a local store. (which isn't even taking into accounts things such as the production process for creating the DVD in the first place, oceanic shipping, and the even more arduous task of disposing of these physical items when they are no longer wanted.)

Congratulations onlinelibrary.wiley.com for having the most retarded fucking opinion ever posted on the internet. The earth is now more polluted because of it. Dildo.

This comment was edited on Sep 3, 2014, 14:01.
Avatar 15604
5.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 3, 2014, 12:50
5.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 3, 2014, 12:50
Sep 3, 2014, 12:50
 
Whoever is computing the carbon footprint of games downloads needs to enter the real world. I am tired of absolute idiots trying to ruin peoples lives with their rants. The only footprint they should be worried about is mine up their ass!
4.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 3, 2014, 11:30
4.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 3, 2014, 11:30
Sep 3, 2014, 11:30
 
Atomic wrote on Sep 3, 2014, 10:07:
Digital distribution generally circumvents taxation. Justify an "environmental" tax on digital distribution, problem solved.

Because taxing things makes them environmentally so much better Rolleyes Especially when based off biased corporate propaganda internet articles.
Perpetual debt is slavery.
Avatar 23321
3.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 3, 2014, 11:00
3.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 3, 2014, 11:00
Sep 3, 2014, 11:00
 
In this study, they are considering distribution only in the UK, and Sony has a mastering facility in Austria. This strikes me as pretty much as best-case scenario for physical distribution. The authors think the results for the U.S. would be similar, though they do say that the physical distribution costs could be triple based on the U.S.'s geographical size.

If I read this and some of the supporting documents correctly, I think the two takeaways are that faster speeds benefit everyone because energy consumption does not scale with speed. I.E., A 1Gb/s connection does not use 100 times as much energy as a 10Mb/s connection.

Second is that improving energy efficiency at the terminal locations will help. Does the PS3 really need to consume 93Wh when downloading? Are there energy savings to be found in modem/routers?

And as noted, some of these folks work/worked for Sony DADC (disc makers) at the time this study was conducted, so, yeah.
2.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 3, 2014, 10:07
2.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 3, 2014, 10:07
Sep 3, 2014, 10:07
 
Cutter wrote on Sep 3, 2014, 09:49:
I call bull**** on this one. So having a master shipped to a production facility in China, having all the assets produced than shipped here via tanker, then train and truck is more green than me downloading a file from across the country? And it says nothing of the waste that has to be picked up and removed for recycling or landfill. Bull****.

Digital distribution generally circumvents taxation. Justify an "environmental" tax on digital distribution, problem solved.

But it could even be more simple than that. It seems the chief researcher works for Sony, and this could simply be an attempt to justify the continuation of BD as a preferred distribution method.
"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing."
-George Bernard Shaw
Avatar 2718
1.
 
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution
Sep 3, 2014, 09:49
1.
Re: The Carbon Footprint of Games Distribution Sep 3, 2014, 09:49
Sep 3, 2014, 09:49
 
I call bullshit on this one. So having a master shipped to a production facility in China, having all the assets produced than shipped here via tanker, then train and truck is more green than me downloading a file from across the country? And it says nothing of the waste that has to be picked up and removed for recycling or landfill. Bullshit.
"Van Gogh painted alone and in despair and in madness and sold one picture in his entire life. Millions struggled alone, unrecognized, and struggled as heroically as any famous hero. Was it worthless? I knew it wasn't."
16 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  ] Older