Bitcoin isn’t tech’s biggest energy problem
Netflix, Facebook, Google, iTunes… we’re all mining for something in the tech world.
If there is one disruption the last quarter of 2017 might be remembered for, it’s the unicorn rise of Bitcoin. Though most of us may still be struggling to understand how exactly blockchain and cryptocurrencies will change the world, and what exactly it means to ‘mine’ for Bitcoin, undeniably, the modern-day gold rush has begun.
Beyond the rocketing value and get-rich-quick potential (for now) of Bitcoin, the other side of the Bitcoin debate has been the energy consumption profile of Bitcoin mining. Estimates that Bitcoin mining now consumes as much energy as entire countries, coupled with the fact that much of this consumption takes place in countries still heavily reliant on fossil fuels, has consumed the world’s interest almost as much as the question of how and what Bitcoin will do for the world economy.
What has been missing in this discussion is the recognition that Bitcoin just represents a bigger slice of an energy pie that has been growing along with our obsession for and reliance on all things digital.
Every tweet, like, comment and share consumes energy, with estimates that 7% of the world’s electricity go towards servicing the IT sector. For several years, digital, service-based business models have been seen as a low-impact alternative to traditional business, since much of the supply chain, from manufacturing to transportation, is moved online. But as these services scale and gain traction, much like Bitcoin, their energy profile and thus environmental impact moves from minimal to significant. Facebook estimates that in 2016, its services created 299g of CO2 per user, and 72% of this is attributable to the data centers required to run Facebook. With 2 billion users, this quickly balloons to the equivalent of over 85,000 households’ electricity consumption in one year, and as Facebook adds real-time video streaming to its platform, this number will only go up. And this is just what Facebook measures; these estimates don’t consider the significant footprint of another power-hungry player in the system: the end-user PCs.
Greenpeace’s new 2017 Click Clean report outlines the response of the tech world to this growing energy demand. Some companies, like Apple, Google and Facebook, are making significant moves toward improving their energy profiles, focusing on energy efficiency and the use of clean, renewable energy. These companies have chosen to shoulder the responsibility of negating the effects of their operations and the use of their product, whereas others, notably Netflix, have been slower to step up to the plate. With ‘binge-watching’ representing the new normal in entertainment consumption, and estimates indicating that up to 80% of the world’s Internet traffic will be attributed to streaming by 2020, it’s clear that Bitcoin isn’t the only energy guzzler we should be concerned about.
As our lives and business models move further and further into the digital space, we will need to rethink how we measure the footprint of these activities on the system level. For example, previously innocuous Skype calls with a business partner across town may now need to stack up against an old-school face-to-face meeting, based on carbon emission calculations that go beyond mere transportation. For the average person, choices like eating less meat or taking public transportation have long been favorites for reducing carbon footprints. Perhaps now, the number of photos we upload or the minutes of video we stream should also come under closer scrutiny. Similarly, in the digital business world, the scope with which we assess a business’ impact will need to be broadened — particularly when they are aiming for fast growth.
