Digital technology weighs almost as much on the climate as heavy goods vehicles

In 2 years, the carbon footprint of our digital activities has almost doubled. But the fault does not lie solely with our bulimia of gadgets of all kinds.

After a first report published in 2022 on the role of digital technology in the French ecological trajectory, the environment agency (Ademe), in partnership with the telecoms policeman (Arcep), just published a new reportfull of new lessons.

An increase of 75%

Based on usage data for 2022 (compared to 2020 for the previous study), the document estimates the carbon footprint of our digital activities at around 29.5 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent. In context, this gives a sector responsible for 4.4% of the national carbon footprint, i.e. “slightly less than total emissions from the heavy goods vehicle sector“.

This new assessment of the digital carbon footprint is almost twice as high as that of 2022 where the total footprint was estimated at 17 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent. But this explosion is mainly due to a change in the calculation method.

Ademe and Arcep have in fact integrated emissions from data centers located abroad, but “which host French uses“. As a result, the sector's carbon footprint is exploding and the share of data centers in the total weight is soaring.

Imported digital broadcasts

Where it was estimated that terminals were responsible for 79% of the digital carbon footprint in 2022, their weight fell to 50% in this new study. The role of data centers, on the other hand, increased from 16% of the total footprint to 46%. The share of fixed and mobile networks remains around 4-5%.

These imported digital emissions are obviously weighed down by the fact that electricity in China and the United States is much less carbon-free than in France. “For a 30% increase in
final energy consumption, there is a 70% increase in CO2 emissions“, notes Ademe.

It should also be noted that this study is based on figures that take very little into account the use of artificial intelligence. The wave of popularity of generative AI actually began around November 2022 with the launch of ChatGPT. Given the importance that AI has taken and of their CO2 gluttonyit is a safe bet that the next study will see the share of data centers increase further.

A growing footprint, even locally

If a good part of this explosion is attributable to the new calculation method, even adopting the same “territorial approach” that in 2020, the meters were raised. Whether regarding the depletion of resources or the release of CO2, our emissions increased on almost all fronts.

This swelling is mainly due to the appetite of the industry and the public for large Oled televisions, more “impactful“than more compact LCD models.”The increase in the share of OLED being responsible for around 1 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year“, notes Ademe.

Haro on AI?

At the individual level, “one person uses 1.7 tonnes of materials per year for their use of digital technology” and emits 434 kg of CO2 equivalent. This represents “22% of sustainable emissions“, since the Paris agreement sets the limit at 2 tonnes per year and per inhabitant.

But tons of CO2 equivalent do not, once again, tell the whole story. The depletion of natural resources (minerals and metals), exposure to ionizing radiation as well as water and air pollution generate problems for our health and our ecosystems which are not immediately quantifiable in CO2 equivalent.

Moreover, the manufacturing, distribution and end-of-life management phase of devices continues to constitute the most polluting stage in the life of our gadgets. The latter represents 60% of their total carbon footprints compared to 40% for use (compared to 80/20% estimated in 2022). A balance which makes Ademe say “that we must continue efforts to increase the lifespan of equipment, and reduce the number of digital equipment!“

Beyond the imperative to consume more responsibly, we must also “increase efforts at the level of uses“, argues Ademe. On AI, the environment agency goes even further by suggesting that there be a direct “questioning the necessity of these uses“. Enough to give food for thought to the all-out promoters of chatbots and other image-generating robots.