Just watched Chris Adams talk at about "Reducing Carbon in the Digital Realm" and found the attached slide very interesting.

It shows 's in 2018 for its products and you can see that 79% is due to manufacturing and transportation - and only 19% for its actual use.

Try to keep this in mind next time you think about replacing your device with a new one - or to keep using your current device for a little bit longer.

@3rik In "sustainability of safety, security and privacy" Ross Anderson talked about the same problem of cars.

"embedded CO2 costs…often exceeds its lifetime fuel burn".

It remains to be shown for which _thing_ "buying the more efficient next version" ever pays off. #ReboundEffect

In which "pays" has totally the wrong connotations: "¥€$" instead of "actually not harming or even protecting our ecosystem".

@katrinleinweber thanks for the pointer, very interesting talk, indeed. Also the point Anderson is making how software obsolescence can and will define life-time of cars (and other machines/devices).

One smart solution for this would be the compulsory publication of source code under a free license after the end of its official support. It is not a solution in itself but enables third-party actors (eg. communities) to maintain and sustain embedded software, thereby extending product lifetimes.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!