When It Comes To IT, There Shouldn't Be A Conflict Between Efficiency And The Environment

from the two-sides-of-the-same-coin dept

Speaking at a conference, an analyst at Gartner prodded the IT industry to take the environment more seriously, as he noted that information and communication technology contributes as much carbon dioxide as the airline industry does. This has become a pretty big topic of late, as many companies have announced measures to reduce their environmental footprint, while funding for green technology has soared. Still, the analyst's concern seems a little bit misplaced. It's totally meaningless to say that IT produces the same amount of carbon dioxide as airplanes, since IT is a much bigger component of the overall economy, as evidenced by the relative size of IT firms and airlines. Also, this ignores the fact that the whole point of IT is to make things more efficient. You can't talk about the resources a piece of technology uses up without talking about the resources that it saves. The real problem is that by fretting about the industry's power consumption, it assumes that this is not already an issue being taken seriously. Environmental concerns notwithstanding, companies have always been interested in ways to reduce their electricity bill. The key thing to recognize is that the goals of reducing environmental impact and becoming more efficient not only go hand in hand, they're basically the same thing.
Hide this

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


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    dorpus, 26 Apr 2007 @ 10:16am

    The CO2 smoke screen

    The real issue is the toxic elements, including lead, arsenic, mercury, chromium, and cadmium, that are inside computers. They pose a persistent threat to the environment, both during their manufacture and disposal. When the US decides to become like the EU/Japan and start charging $300 disposal fees for PC's, the vast majority of the computer industry will go bankrupt.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      MissingFrame, 26 Apr 2007 @ 11:14am

      Re: The CO2 smoke screen

      Interesting point. A lot of the toxic elements are being eliminated (lead, for instance), but it does bring up a point about replacing hardware for more efficient versions.

      What we really need to do is buy the most efficient and then keep it for as long as possible.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Araemo, 26 Apr 2007 @ 11:20am

        Re: Re: The CO2 smoke screen

        "and then keep it for as long as possible."

        Depends on your definition of 'possible'. It's certainly possible to keep it long past the point where its power inefficiency is worse than the production wastes of a new computer(which will likely be more power efficient).

        Laptops are a perfect example.. While individual components of computers tend to get smaller and use less power, they are constantly being upgraded in ways that use more power. However, laptops are still forcing more computing power into devices with lighter batteries(Less batteries) and longer battery life(Lower power usage)... And now the same technologies to lower battery usage are moving to desktops, to lower overall energy usage.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased), 26 Apr 2007 @ 11:30am

      Re: The CO2 smoke screen

      They collect the $300 fee and still dump into the same place as the rest of the garbage, into the earth (or sea).

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Norman, 26 Apr 2007 @ 2:17pm

      Re: The CO2 smoke screen

      Oh yes real genuis there. Sorry but the comouter industry will never go under. What do you think runs the world? Computers. LOL!!! How are you posting this message? I am willing to venture a guess that you are not using messenger pigeons nor smoke sugnals... Why is it that people love to villify the very technology resp for improving life of our species? The technology which has most likely saved countless lives. Even though China is supposed to surpass the US in polution output this year I am willing to bet people will not be calling the China to stop it's growth and curse thier very existance. No that will still be reseved for the US. Oh and please keep in mind that the EU and Japan signed the Kyoto accord and yet most of the nations who signed will yet again not be in compliance. This includes Japan. Why is this? BEcause the Kyoto agreement is unrealistic.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Overcast, 26 Apr 2007 @ 10:46am

    Considering the reduction in travel from online conferencing alone, it should be clear that in spite of some nuances, computers dramatically help the environment.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Hmm..., 26 Apr 2007 @ 11:03am

    But wait...

    But without using their toxic spewing computers the pundits wouldn't have been able to figure out the numbers...it's a vicious cycle.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 26 Apr 2007 @ 11:22am

    what about the airline IT departments?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Bryan, 26 Apr 2007 @ 11:57am

      Re:

      I'm in that group. My work computer was outdated years ago. I'm still happy to have it though. My company just upgraded the computers a year go. It's nice to finally have XP and rid my self of the P3. My Airline is great about keeping computers around well past there usefull life. In fact 2 years ago we still had some P2s lying around.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Overcast, 26 Apr 2007 @ 12:30pm

    Someone has to be making a TON of $$$$ off all this environment/global warming stuff.

    Everytime you turn around, it's something else...

    Politicians never make a big deal out of anything unless it's adding cash to their bank accounts.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    mermaldad, 27 Apr 2007 @ 3:57am

    Not Up to the Usual Standards

    While Joe has a point here, he makes several arguments that sound more like the kind that Techdirt usually makes fun of. To wit:

    "It's totally meaningless to say that IT produces the same amount of carbon dioxide as airplanes, since IT is a much bigger component of the overall economy". Why does that make it meaningless? If carbon emissions is a problem, then we want to look at the biggest contributors. Sure, the IT industry may be more pollution-efficient than other sectors of the economy, but due to its great size, any inefficiencies are magnified and should be examined.

    "The key thing to recognize is that the goals of reducing environmental impact and becoming more efficient not only go hand in hand, they're basically the same thing." I think this is a bit of an overstatement. I certainly agree that they do go hand in hand, but left to their own devices, businesses will focus on cost-efficiency, not environmental-efficiency. That's why computers are packed in so much styrofoam and other packing materials. It's cheaper, due to the costs of repairing/replacing items damaged in transit, but more environmentally damaging.

    Not up to the usual Techdirt standards, guys.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.