The Internet Pollutes the Atmosphere More Than India, Says Greenpeace

[willsham45]

It sounds like an excuse to limit the internet. You can see and hear many thing on the internet that some people don't want you to see. Why do i see this as a reason to up the price of the internet.

It is not the problem of the internet it is the problem of the companies using those systems.
If these countries with dirty power is the problem get them to change it. China's coal is ment to be very dirty, but the US's coal is very clean. Make china use scrubbers and the like to clean up there act.

And it is admitted CO2 does nothing to global temperatures, CO2 rises as temperature rises and there is not a global temperature rise as it is. It was all admitted in the climate gate thing. They choose data they like shut down those who say otherwise and use the measuring systems that give the results they want as apoase to the accurate ones.

 

[jim1398]

Ah greenpeace, when are they going to realise that hardly anyone cares?

BTW, I assume they aren't taking into account all the CO2 that the Internet has prevented by allowing people to work, shop, socialise, etc from home and thus reduce the number of car journeys people take?

 

[ShadowsofHope]

While I may be one that takes the issues of Climate Change seriously from a perspective of my own personal self..

..Shut up, Greenpeace. The internet is the one thing I will not reduce for sake of this planet, and I love it that way. LOVE IT!!

It was all admitted in the climate gate thing. They choose data they like shut down those who say otherwise and use the measuring systems that give the results they want as apoase to the accurate ones.

Teehee, someone whom actually thinks Climategate was a valid newstory..

http://factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/
http://mediamatters.org/research/200912010002
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/12/climategate-debunking-get_n_642980.html

Nice try.

 

[derdeutschmachine]

oh well... I still don't care about anything they say. I hope this uses twice the CO2 they thought it would... haha doing my part to destroy the environment one useless post at a time.

 

[thiosk]

1: Greenpeace, my power is hydroelectric and nuclear. So, no CO2.

2: CO2 is harmless. Plants breath it in, see?

3: I can not take anything you say steriously. You've managed to out-bullshit PETA, who I want to remind you asked for people to just donate 20,000 dollar cars because some dime-a-dozen spider was stupid enough to nest in the EVAP canister.

But you see, they stated that it is the server banks and data centers that are the problem, moreso than the hydroelectric and nuclear power (That greenpeace still objects to, incidentally).

They're still full of bullshit but avoid doing an end run and then missing their central argument.

 

[El Poncho]

I have celebrated Earth Day by playing Portal 2 all day...For Science.

 

[CosmicCommander]

Greenpeace are a bunch of Luddites acting under the premise of "environmentalism".

The internet has alleviated millions out of poverty, solidified international infrastructure, and enabled people to experience an infinite amount of experiences, and brought many people together.

Because it emits an amount of CO2 that will (marginally) affect the rate of a (still-disputed) man-made phenomena is irrelevant.

These people should actually go to a place like India, and tell someone who's better off because of advances they hold as "evil" to go back to the slums that said advances helped them crawl out of.

EDIT: To celebrate Earth day, I disregarded my electricity bill and made sure my kettle (one of the most power-consuming appliances around) was running none-stop. Now it's over. And seeing as he kettle is a 2kW appliance, I'm looking forward to being warmed up by all that Carbon I've spewed out.

I think we NEED a warmer planet. It's too damn cold.

 

[Awexsome]

Y'know for containing nearly all of the entire world's information and communication... behind 5 separate countries isn't bad.

 

[Scars Unseen]

Join Greenpeace today on their Facebook page [http://www.facebook.com/greenpeace.international]! Like them to all your friends! Raise awareness and CO2 emissions at the same time!

 

[BlackStar42]

Oh shut up, Greenpeace. Come back when you understand how economics works.

 

[CezarIgnat]

It's good they posted this on their website on the internet which also has integrated Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Flickr and other websites.

I'm all for reducing pollution, they can start by shutting down greenpeace.org, greenpeace.at, greenpeace.pl, greenpeace.hu, greenpeace.ro, greenpeace.de, greenpeace.org.tr, greenpeace.org.lb, greenpeace.nl, greenpeace.ch and you get the idea*.



[small]*I know some are only domain redirects...I'm too lasy to filter those out[/small]

 

[Venereus]

So it isn't the Internet, it's the cheap dirty energy sources. Well that's not news.

Someone's got to come up with a way to get electricity from water or something.

That's the thing, we have that already, and many other clean sources. Governments and their corporate masters are the problem.

 

[LobsterFeng]

Didn't even realize today was Earth day. Didn't even realize there was an Earth day.

 

[olicon]

I believe that Google already made that statistics a while back...not that anybody cared back then either.

Too bad this is a tough one. Data centers can't really choose what power they use--they are at the mercy of existing facilities. And governments are quite adamant about making huge investments in clean tech. Yet if we move away from digital info, we will end up with paper, which is even more polluting.

Oh Greenpeace, some of the things you say makes less sense than the stuff PETA spews on a regular basis.

It's pretty basic. You can see how much electricity the data center use (look at their electricity bill/meter), see the source of energy in that area, find the emission.

1: Greenpeace, my power is hydroelectric and nuclear. So, no CO2.

2: CO2 is harmless. Plants breath it in, see?

Sorry greenpeace but this isn't a battle you could possibly hope to win, the internet would be lining up to throw koalas into a furnace if it meant that they could stay on the internet for even one more day.

I think this kinda news and studies are thrown out there for public to get them to think. You can't make a quick change when it comes to power station infrastructures.

Greenpeace also refers to nuclear energy as "dirty, dangerous, and unnecessary" despite it being emissions free, safer than most other power sources (especially when you consider the 20,000 coal miners that die in China every year), and provides 15% of the world's power. I will never ever believe anything this organization puts out there, no matter how logical it seems. They are officially the environmentalist equivalent to PETA.

Also @TestECull
What do you think went into making the actual grid? How do you think your respective source of nuclear power is mined out, then enhanced? SOME green house gas will be released. Pound per pound, CO2 is actually one of the least powerful GHG there is. Methane is 4 times as strong, and NOx and SOx is about 14 and 23 respectively if I remembered correctly. CO2 is used as the main unit because we just happens to release it a lot more than everything else.
@dnnydllr
The point is that in a catastrophic event, no matter how rare, the result is much more dangerous with nuclear power. It's all about risks. Coal mine collapse sucks, big time. And it happens a fair bit too. But even a single nuclear meltdown, no matter how low the chance, can wipe out a large area--not in an explosion, mind you. Nuclear power plant cannot explode. But it can contaminate a large area for a very long time. While trees and things can still grow near Chernobyl..well..you're welcome to go and live there. I'd bet that the land would be incredibly cheap.
It's not just direct consequence of people dying right then and there. It's the potential land use. The world is slowly tipping towards overpopulation. Desertification is slowly but surely creeping in. Sea level will rise, swallowing our coast line. It probably doesn't matter to you, but it does to me--my home WILL sink within the next 20 to 30 years if we keep going at this rate. Try having that reality in your face--it makes you think in an entirely different way.

Ah greenpeace, when are they going to realise that hardly anyone cares?

BTW, I assume they aren't taking into account all the CO2 that the Internet has prevented by allowing people to work, shop, socialise, etc from home and thus reduce the number of car journeys people take?

I think they know that. They're not saying internet is bad. They're prodding at the government to invest in clean energy.

 

[Tentickles]

I'm not even going to try and argue with this one...

I don't believe you. Sounds like propaganda to get the internet regulated.

 

[silver wolf009]

The words I write... they posin the world.

Soon we will have to retreat into the metro system to avoid the air we can no longer breath and the monsterous abominations that prowl the surface!

Or was I thinking of Metro 2033?