Streaming and environmental resources

anuenlil

Wammer
Wammer
Jun 11, 2014
108
11
38
Brussels, Belgium
AKA
Steven
Much has been said about the relation between streaming and cd's or about the relation between streaming and musician's incomes. As I stream more (but still less than playing cd's or vinyl), another question becomes more prevalent for me: what about streaming and environmental resources?

One article suggests that for many music lovers, vinyl and cd may offer better options from an environmental perspective, and even seeks to quantify the difference:

"So, which is the greener option? It depends on many things, including how many times you listen to your music. If you only listen to a track a couple of times, then streaming is the best option. If you listen repeatedly, a physical copy is best – streaming an album over the internet more than 27 times will likely use more energy than it takes to produce and manufacture a CD" (source: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190207-why-streaming-music-may-be-bad-for-climate-change).

Needless to say, streaming also changes listening habits and may thereby aggravate the amount of environmental resources required by modern music 'consumption' ?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Upvote
  • Like
Reactions: DomT and tuga

StingRay

Legend Wammer
Wammer
Apr 27, 2016
13,031
8,522
163
Suffolk coast, UK
AKA
Ray
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Much has been said about the relation between streaming and cd's or about the relation between streaming and musician's incomes. As I stream more (but still less than playing cd's or vinyl), another question becomes more prevalent for me: what about streaming and environmental resources?

One article suggests that for many music lovers, vinyl and cd may offer better options from an environmental perspective, and even seeks to quantify the difference:

"So, which is the greener option? It depends on many things, including how many times you listen to your music. If you only listen to a track a couple of times, then streaming is the best option. If you listen repeatedly, a physical copy is best – streaming an album over the internet more than 27 times will likely use more energy than it takes to produce and manufacture a CD" (source: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190207-why-streaming-music-may-be-bad-for-climate-change).

Needless to say, streaming also changes listening habits and may thereby aggravate the amount of environmental resources required by modern music 'consumption' ?
What about transport costs and use of fuel to transport your cd?

I don’t think streaming uses more energy than playing a cd. What about the materials and all the waste of physical products?

 

anuenlil

Wammer
Wammer
Jun 11, 2014
108
11
38
Brussels, Belgium
AKA
Steven
All of those were factored into the calculation mentioned, if I understand it correctly. Apparently, streaming does use more energy rather rapidly, depending on listening habits. I thought it was very interesting. It turns out, however, that I was highly ignorant -- the point has apparently been made many times over.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Upvote
Reactions: DomT

Lurch

Piss-taker & Gobshite Par Excelle'nce
Wammer Plus
Sep 17, 2016
5,990
7,411
183
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
But on the other hand you have the materials used to construct the servers, some of it pretty vile and difficult to process when the server is upgraded. Then there is the power consummed running server farms 24/7. Atleast with physical media once it is in the buyers hands it will often get played multiple times so whilst there is an initial, cost environmental & resources) for production/distribution the is no ongoing costs other then the power consumed by the cdp which is probably no more than the s eaker. 

 
  • Like
Reactions: DomT

kernow

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 25, 2009
6,907
2,110
158
Devon
AKA
Shaun
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
  2. No
Physical media is likely far worse for the environment than streaming 

 

kernow

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 25, 2009
6,907
2,110
158
Devon
AKA
Shaun
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
  2. No
Back in the 90s, no internet streaming 

One artists album sells 90m copies of printed plastic vs a few servers that can stream thousands of different songs at once to thousands of people for a few quid an hour at the very most..  

 

kernow

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 25, 2009
6,907
2,110
158
Devon
AKA
Shaun
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
  2. No
I don't have the math, but it's pretty obvious that streaming is cheaper than physical media. The manufacturing costs, distribution etc. Not to mention the servers running distribute constant, changing trends of music rather than being static hard copies of physical media. It's obvious 

 

kernow

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 25, 2009
6,907
2,110
158
Devon
AKA
Shaun
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
  2. No
Make cd single copies of every song that is played on Spotify daily and send them out to shops. 

There's your answer 

 
  • Haha
Reactions: DomT

StingRay

Legend Wammer
Wammer
Apr 27, 2016
13,031
8,522
163
Suffolk coast, UK
AKA
Ray
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I'm sorry, but the math in that one sentence is both inconsistent and non-factual on several counts. Please offer something better than rhetoric, if you don't mind.
I Did read some of it but I think their calculations are wrong, they compare a CD player v a hifi system. Of course you need a HiFi system for cd playing. Anyway I don’t believe some of the other costs and as they say you can’t recycle cds. Streamers such as Spotify and Deezer have 100s of millions of users. I use the internet anyway, I don’t see streaming music using more electric, my streamer uses less than a CD player.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: kernow

kernow

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 25, 2009
6,907
2,110
158
Devon
AKA
Shaun
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
  2. No
I can stream music on a device that takes a handful of watts rather than something that drives physical , printed, distributed media. It's not really difficult to work out 

 

tuga

. . .
Wammer
Aug 17, 2007
14,342
7,000
173
Oxen's ford, UK
AKA
Ricardo
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I can stream music on a device that takes a handful of watts rather than something that drives physical , printed, distributed media. It's not really difficult to work out 
The music and video we stream from is stored in massive server farms.

These take up a lot of energy.

‘Tsunami of data’ could consume one fifth of global electricity by 2025

Billions of internet-connected devices could produce 3.5% of global emissions within 10 years and 14% by 2040, according to new research, reports Climate Home News

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/11/tsunami-of-data-could-consume-fifth-global-electricity-by-2025

 
  • Upvote
Reactions: BettisDad and DomT

kernow

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 25, 2009
6,907
2,110
158
Devon
AKA
Shaun
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
  2. No
That's less energy that distributing physical media to that audience .. 

 

kernow

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 25, 2009
6,907
2,110
158
Devon
AKA
Shaun
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
  2. No
And far less waste when they get tired of it 

Physical media is dead 

 

tuga

. . .
Wammer
Aug 17, 2007
14,342
7,000
173
Oxen's ford, UK
AKA
Ricardo
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
And far less waste when they get tired of it 

Physical media is dead 
Download once and stream locally. But if a CD has already been produced then it won't make much difference whether you buy and rip the CD or download the file.

In 10 years time when half of our energy is electric the grid will strugle and we may end up with restrictions. We'll see.

 

kernow

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 25, 2009
6,907
2,110
158
Devon
AKA
Shaun
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
  2. No
Let's just melt loads of plastic discs instead eh 

 

Forum statistics

Threads
113,444
Messages
2,451,263
Members
70,783
Latest member
reg66

Latest Articles

Wammers Online