Does streaming really pollute more than the good old TV?

Not so long ago, Netflix, Disney+ and other streaming services were all pointed out For their responsibility in the climate crisis. The storage and distribution of very high quality content were perceived as being particularly consumer of resources. If, since then, the attention has turned more towards our overproduction of gadgetsstreaming keeps this image of polluting and very energy -consuming practice.

But what about? Is video on demand fundamentally more energy-consuming than classic TV? Arcom and Arcep, the two authorities responsible for audiovisual and telecoms, tried to find out more and precisely quantify the carbon footprint of our audiovisual uses.

TNT, more economical network

In an imposing report published in late 2024there is an infographic listing the CO2 equivalence emissions of each of our uses. You can see notable differences depending on the device and the network used.

If we put aside the use of radio and audio streaming (which logically win the palms of the least polluting practices), Internet TV actually seems to be one of the most consuming practices. But not streaming precisely. And not for the reasons you might think.

The real leap in emissions is more between the use of TNT or IPTV, either between linear TV with a good old antenna and the one going through the Internet. Watching an hour of content on France 2 via TNT will reject 39 grams of CO2 equivalent, while the same content captured by the Internet using a decoder will reject 53 grams of CO2 equivalent.

This difference is less explained by the network used than by the devices necessary to capture the flow. As the report explains, “For almost all use cases, the majority of emissions come from terminals, and in particular their manufacture“. In the case of Internet TV, it is therefore the addition of a carbon debt of a TV box which is especially inflating the figures.

Note all the same that the TNT remains less energy -consuming, because “The overall impact of Broadcast networks infrastructure is the same, regardless of the number of users, so they are particularly effective when they are used by a sufficient number of users“. But the impact is still less.

Streaming not frankly more polluting

In this carbon jungle, streaming is actually not frankly more polluting than linear TV by internet. Whether replay or video on demand, the impacts are generally similar to that of linear TV. The majority of the imprint being due to the manufacture of the TV itself, the use which is made of it does not only influence marginal on its carbon footprint.

Much more than streaming, it is therefore the fierce renewal of televisions and boxes that participates most in the carbon footprint of our audiovisual uses. The race for power and especially to grandeur could push the emission of audiovisual uses to inflate from 30 % by 2030. The size of the screens also influences a lot with the smaller diagonals which are “less impacting on all environmental indicators“Note the report.

Want to save even more? Discover Our promo codes Selected for you.