Ditch high definition and new tech to fight climate change

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,522
7,588
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55164410
A report from The Royal Society (the UK’s National Academy of Sciences) says digital technology’s estimated contribution to global emissions ranges from 1.4% to 5.9% of the global total. HD video streaming on a phone generates about eight times more in emissions than standard definition (SD).
https://www.rt.com/sport/506960-cristiano-ronaldo-instagram-energy/
"Every time Cristiano Ronaldo posts an image, let's say an average one, for that image to travel to his 240 million followers, it consumes roughly around 36 megawatt hours. That's the equivalent of adding 10 UK households to the grid for one year. "And that's one person, one post."

To save the planet, we should ditch 8K and 4k and use lower resolution. And we should be changing our phones and gear less frequently.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,782
2,862
67
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55164410
A report from The Royal Society (the UK’s National Academy of Sciences) says digital technology’s estimated contribution to global emissions ranges from 1.4% to 5.9% of the global total. HD video streaming on a phone generates about eight times more in emissions than standard definition (SD).
https://www.rt.com/sport/506960-cristiano-ronaldo-instagram-energy/
"Every time Cristiano Ronaldo posts an image, let's say an average one, for that image to travel to his 240 million followers, it consumes roughly around 36 megawatt hours. That's the equivalent of adding 10 UK households to the grid for one year. "And that's one person, one post."

To save the planet, we should ditch 8K and 4k and use lower resolution. And we should be changing our phones and gear less frequently.
I was going to respond and then realized that would contribute to global warming. Quite the Catch 22.
 

Joules

EOS R
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,359
1,602
Hamburg, Germany
we should ditch 8K and 4k and use lower resolution. And we should be changing our phones and gear less frequently.
Interesting approaches. Simply trying to drain the battery of your phones less (turning the screen off when listening to music, use the lowest resolution looking decent in the small screen) is a nice suggestion, because it isn't really about making people give something up. Though it is also something I imagine a lot of people do anyway, if just to save data and get their charge through the day.

The notion of moving as much compute as possible on to the cloud is also interesting and seems to me more impactful, optimizing the logistics of hardware installation and utilization by centralizing. It's the equivalent of moving from individuals owning cars to car sharing and public transportation services. Just, with much more severe privacy issues and the issues with networking thrown in.

Buying less products especially those made with electronics, is a very different matter. It is not just a simply micro optimization of your behavior. It requires dealing with the hassle of a dying battery and in many cases, software vulnerabilities. In the interest of the planet, holding the manufacturers more accountable to allow easy repair and software security is crucial. It is a big part of what is necessary to make using mobile devices long term more feasible.

It allows devices to enter the used market to allow reducing environmental impact even if the original owner just has to have the newest and most shiny toy at all times.
 

Nemorino

EOS R
Aug 29, 2020
94
107
Another easy way to save energy is to stop auto play and use an ad blocker.

Streaming video to listen to music without watching the video is such a strange behaviour.
The biggest part of the data transfer is not used. With or without the screen turned off.
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
969
996
Greatest invention of mankind in the last 50 years: the battery-powered & LED fitted pepper mill...
But we all know that climate change is a Chinese-communist invention created to kill our economy...:rolleyes:
Alan: thanks for the info !
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
1,955
1,796
Greatest invention of mankind in the last 50 years: the battery-powered & LED fitted pepper mill...
But we all know that climate change is a Chinese-communist invention created to kill our economy...:rolleyes:
Alan: thanks for the info !
It may not be a Chinese communist invention but it IS a fact that they are by far the world's biggest emitter of CO2, over twice as much as the US.

 

Joules

EOS R
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,359
1,602
Hamburg, Germany
It may not be a Chinese communist invention but it IS a fact that they are by far the world's biggest emitter of CO2, over twice as much as the US.

I think the issue that Del Paso was commenting on is that a lot of Chinas CO2 emissions are caused by producing goods that are then exported to the world.

Having looked into it a little just now, this is actually a lesser factor than I would have expected. If I read it correctly, Our World in Data suggests once the goods they import and export are weighted against each other, China produces only 14% more CO2 than it is consumed by the home market.

Nonetheless, they also have a nice map coloring countries who import more C02 than they export red, and blue otherwise. And it shows that for a lot of countries, they just outsource their C02 production.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,522
7,588
It is indeed true
I think the issue that Del Paso was commenting on is that a lot of Chinas CO2 emissions are caused by producing goods that are then exported to the world.

Having looked into it a little just now, this is actually a lesser factor than I would have expected. If I read it correctly, Our World in Data suggests once the goods they import and export are weighted against each other, China produces only 14% more CO2 than it is consumed by the home market.

Nonetheless, they also have a nice map coloring countries who import more C02 than they export red, and blue otherwise. And it shows that for a lot of countries, they just outsource their C02 production.
I find worldometer easier to read for simple numbers. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/
The three largest emitters of CO2 are China, USA and India. However, on a per capita basis China is ~ 1/2 that of the USA and India ~ 1/8. Canada and Australia are worse than the USA per capita, and the highest per capita emitters are surprising. The greenest country for both overall and per capita emissions is, hold your breath and wait for the drum roll, Greenland!
 
  • Like
Reactions: gruhl28

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
1,955
1,796
It is indeed true

I find worldometer easier to read for simple numbers. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/
The three largest emitters of CO2 are China, USA and India. However, on a per capita basis China is ~ 1/2 that of the USA and India ~ 1/8. Canada and Australia are worse than the USA per capita, and the highest per capita emitters are surprising. The greenest country for both overall and per capita emissions is, hold your breath and wait for the drum roll, Greenland!
Actually the interesting comparison would be CO2 per billion dollars GDP. Who manages to produce wealth with the least generation of carbon?
 

Nemorino

EOS R
Aug 29, 2020
94
107
Two more points to save energy and make this forum more readable:
Stop full quotes! (espacially with large pictures)

Post thumb nails!
It is not necessary to download the same picture several times if you read an new post on it's page.
And my firefox has problems to show the last post if to many pictures are posted.;)
 

Joules

EOS R
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,359
1,602
Hamburg, Germany
Two more points to save energy and make this forum more readable:
Stop full quotes! (espacially with large pictures)

Post thumb nails!
It is not necessary to download the same picture several times if you read an new post on it's page.
And my firefox has problems to show the last post if to many pictures are posted.;)
Or switch to dark mode (if you're using an OLED phone and are somehow still using the bright mode).
 

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
CR Pro
Nov 7, 2013
3,135
1,261
Germany
It may not be a Chinese communist invention but it IS a fact that they are by far the world's biggest emitter of CO2, over twice as much as the US.
Please keep in mind that China has 4.27 times the population than the US, so one should calculate all down per citizen.
So an US citizen does emit more than 2.1 times CO2 than a Chinese citizen does.
 

YuengLinger

Sufficiently Pixelated
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,377
1,740
USA
I think the issue that Del Paso was commenting on is that a lot of Chinas CO2 emissions are caused by producing goods that are then exported to the world.
As one who lived and traveled in China for an extended period of time, I understand to an extent the devil's bargain the Chinese have made. The pollution from manufacturing, and from building population centers too quickly (without sufficiently improving underlying water-treatment and surface-traffic infrastructures), has created an environmental catastrophe. If one considers only the resulting cancers and birth defects borne by so many powerless souls in China, the sense of shame and failure can almost extinguish hope.

Here in the USA, we now have many regions with less pollution than 40 years ago, especially in waterways, because we have closed factories involved in manufacturing solvents, alloys, plastics, and so on. This has cut back CO2 emissions directly, and also dispersed populations from the regions which no longer have the factories, further reducing the typical pollution in those areas caused by sewage, traffic, construction, and use of electricity. While many of "our" coastal areas have been significantly cleaned up, Asia, having become the world's manufacturing center and cesspool, now dumps more toxins directly into the world's oceans than can be calculated.

I am not an apologist for China, but I do get frustrated by generally well intentioned environmentalists who crow about progress in the USA, while never mentioning that in many cases, we have simply moved our mess to other places around the globe---out of sight, out of mind, no more problem--thus adding to the mass delusion that our world is not a single, fragile, self-contained ecosphere traveling around and around in space, but some kind of virtual reality that can be managed with politics and ideology. For too many, science is just another belief system, or its a set of tools for manipulating opinion to achieve power.

If you live in the USA, and you are able to go take photographs of wildlife and natural spaces, after being grateful for the experience, the privilege, the joy, consider occasionally the costs other nations have accepted and paid to make it possible.

And I sometimes despair, here in the USA, that I and my friends and family feel as if we have done something significant, something noble, by simply voting against the other guy.

I'm not sure how effective agonizing over whether or not to post a photo will be in the long run. But I do know that real change is hard as hell. One example of what seems like common sense, but is in fact a maddening battle, is trying to convince homeowners' associations to stop insisting every yard is a picture perfect example of manicured landscaping. This uniform beauty can only be achieved by using massive amounts of pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, and water. But homeowners alone aren't guilty of conspiring to poison ourselves and wildlife! People lucky enough to live in lovely apartment complexes with the same ideas about landscaping are just as much a part of the problem. I see so many well educated folk, who believe they are enlightened, gleefully going along with HOA mandates. They don't even recognize the hypocrisy--or they bury it because work and family are overwhelming enough.

Martin Luther King's famous quote may have been a response to racial tensions, but it applies just as poignantly to our global environmental crisis:

martin_luther_king_jr_quote_we_must_learn_to_live_together_as_brothers_or_perish_together_as_f...jpg
 
Last edited:

gruhl28

Canon 70D
Jul 26, 2013
111
32
It is indeed true

I find worldometer easier to read for simple numbers. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/
The three largest emitters of CO2 are China, USA and India. However, on a per capita basis China is ~ 1/2 that of the USA and India ~ 1/8. Canada and Australia are worse than the USA per capita, and the highest per capita emitters are surprising. The greenest country for both overall and per capita emissions is, hold your breath and wait for the drum roll, Greenland!
Interesting. I was a little surprised to see Canada and Australia worse than the USA, and many of the other countries are large petroleum producers, but Estonia, Montenegro, and Trinidad and Tobago? Some quick googling shows that Estonia is quite high because of oil shale production, but other sources give a value for Montenegro that is only about one seventh as high as what worldometer shows. Not quite sure why Trinidad and Tobago is so high.
 

Joules

EOS R
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,359
1,602
Hamburg, Germany
If you live in the USA, and you are able to go take photographs of wildlife and natural spaces, after being grateful for the experience, the privilege, the joy, consider occasionally the costs other nations have accepted and paid to make it possible.
I guess that applies regardless of the place on earth you live in. And the aspect of being greatful can't be understated, as it is not only other nations who bear these costs long term. There is little reason to expect the joys of today to remain unchanged in the future - especially when it comes to nature.

One example of what seems like common sense, but is in fact a maddening battle, is trying to convince homeowners' associations to stop insisting every yard is a picture perfect example of manicured landscaping. This uniform beauty can only be achieved by using massive amounts of pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, and water.
Great point. Living in a big city, I am under the impression that it is easier for people to accept that the energy and products they consume gradually poison the air. But while climate change is this slow and hard to observe aspect, degradation of the local water and insects has such far reaching and drastic consequences.

In a way, the city I live in is built around its water. It is split into many fragments by the river Elbe and the streams that feed it. So much of it has grown around water that among all European cities it is the one with by far the most bridges (also the 23. most populated one). Despite being situated quite far inland, the port of Hamburg is the largest one in Germany, moving as many goods as the next five smaller ones combined.

But when the shape and size of ships changed to ever bigger vessels over time, the river became too shallow and threatened to impact the role of the city. And so the river had to change.

It was dug out multiple times now, beginning in 1818 and going on into the present. To make it deeper and maintain the desirable economic position of being the main access point to the sea in an export nation. Needless to say, the damage it has done to the life in and around the water is extensive.

In the context of international competition, it is all too easy to sacrifice a piece of nature. A short term, local benefit is all it takes to make a decision worthy.
They don't even recognize the hypocrisy--or they bury it because work and family are overwhelming enough.
I feel like that is the core of many issues. You don't get products produced with clean manufacturing techniques, sustainable or renewable resources and proper labor conditions without paying accordingly - and often such options aren't even offered. How realistic or fair is it to expect the general masses to investing effort into finding and money into purchasing them (or willpower to refrain altogether)?

On the subject of suitable quotes:

"Erst kommt das Fressen, dann kommt die Moral" - Bertolt Brecht
Which can be translated to "First comes the feeding, then comes the moral", where moral is the basis of ethical behavior.

Originally illustrating that you can't expect a person to act according to a certain standard unless their basic needs are met - it also perfectly extends beyond those basic needs to desires and cravings of modern society.
 

cayenne

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,436
435
This is definitely more political than Canon/Photography related.

I'm thinking it belongs more on Reddit or the like.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,782
2,862
67
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
As one who lived and traveled in China for an extended period of time, I understand to an extent the devil's bargain the Chinese have made...but it applies just as poignantly to our global environmental crisis...
Thoughtful post. One thing that has always troubled me is how we in the first world are so anxious to restrict development in other countries.

I certainly understand the concerns about deforestation in the Amazon, for example, but I also recognize that it is easy for us to lecture about environmental protection while we enjoy the benefits that have been brought about by converting most of our natural areas to agriculture. Or, lecturing African nations about protecting wildlife, when we aren't the ones trying to eke out a living on land that is shared with large and potentially deadly mammals.

I am an environmentalist, but I am also a humanist and I appreciate your comments because they help illustrate the challenges that we face. We need to protect the environment, but we also need to recognize that the price should not be that we deny people the opportunity to improve their standard of living.
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
969
996
My intention was NOT to criticize China.
Not at all!
But those who invent stupid environmentally harmful gadgets, as well as those who still believe climatic change doesn't exist.
And the politicians who discharge their own responsibility on other countries.
And the CO2 per capita is indeed what matters certainly as much as the global amount produced by a country...
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,522
7,588
Thoughtful post. One thing that has always troubled me is how we in the first world are so anxious to restrict development in other countries.

I certainly understand the concerns about deforestation in the Amazon, for example, but I also recognize that it is easy for us to lecture about environmental protection while we enjoy the benefits that have been brought about by converting most of our natural areas to agriculture. Or, lecturing African nations about protecting wildlife, when we aren't the ones trying to eke out a living on land that is shared with large and potentially deadly mammals.

I am an environmentalist, but I am also a humanist and I appreciate your comments because they help illustrate the challenges that we face. We need to protect the environment, but we also need to recognize that the price should not be that we deny people the opportunity to improve their standard of living.
There is a huge difference between past mistakes and present ones - the benefit of hindsight and new knowledge. We now know the consequences of our actions on the environment. There is absolutely no excuse now for strong arm political heads of state who ignore climate change.