Do You Really Want a Greener Planet? Be More Efficient.

While old, the carbon bigfoot Second Life avatar meme is still making the rounds in various guises. Considering that my office in Second Life is on Etopia Prime (141,60,32), a simulator in Second Life used to broaden the message of renewable energy and sensitivity to the environment, I of course end up in many discussions about renewable energy though I do try to avoid them.

Why do I try to avoid them?

Unlike many people who talk the talk, I walk the walk. The computer system I log into Second Life on is solar powered. The lighting I use at night while working is solar produced. Many people like to talk about nice warm fuzzy feelings but they aren't willing to do much - and the fact that a Second Life avatar consumes so much electricity is a counterpoint to what a lot of people even within Second Life say. Promoting awareness, though, is good.

So in one discussion I could not avoid, I ended up mentioning that the more load on a simulator in Second Life, the more electricity it uses. In essence, the more objects and scripts running on a simulator, the more power it uses - the processor has upper and lower limits where it operates at peak efficiency, but it is unlikely that peak efficiency for electrical use is what the Second Life servers are designed for. This isn't really a Linden Lab issue, though, and I do not mean it to be one - but this is where the trail of thought began.

Going from there, the same holds true for your home computer. The more it is doing, the more electricity it is using. And let us go from there: the larger a document, the more energy your computer needs to process it. The more processing your computer does for formatting data on your screen, the more energy your computer uses.

Let us take it a step further: The longer it takes for you to download a file, the more energy your computer uses in conjunction with every server that relays it. With me so far?

OK. Now tell me that a podcast weighing in at 30 megabytes is better for the environment than a web page that has the same content in less than 100 kilobytes. Tell me that using software that creates larger files than necessary, such as Microsoft Office, is better than the environment. Tell me that sending large emails is better for the environment than simply posting a link. Explain to me how interoffice emails or instant messaging that transits the globe before hitting the office next door is good for the environment. Tell me about how twittering silly one liners across the internet is going to beat out the global warming theory.

Tell me.

Can you? Sure you can, but you wouldn't be right. Some may say that I am splitting hairs, and yet - it all adds up.

If you really want a greener planet - if you really want to reduce your carbon emissions - if you really want to walk the walk, think of efficiency in transmitting data across a vast network. Think about the size of the files. Think of how inefficient a Flash web can be when it is relayed to your computer via 30 other servers/routers.

If you want a greener planet, be more efficient with your data.

Send plain text emails. Don't forward long emails, shorten them or even post links instead of the text. And know that when you force other people to use bloated document structures that you're one of the little axes left clicking on the Amazon forest. Alone, it is not much.

But together? A lot, more than likely. And with only 20% of the global population online right now, its only going to get worse. Throwing more hardware at problems only creates long term landfill issues (bottled water? Hint, hint) and creates more electricity demand on power stations regardless of the green sticker that came with your system or not.

Be efficient. Walk the walk, don't just talk the talk. A few watts here and there across a network of billions of people and hundreds of billions of systems can make a significant difference.