3 ms·

I think it still eats up a ton (technical term) of unnecessary energy as we have moved from owning physical objects to digital copies of the same thing. For exa

I think it still eats up a ton (technical term) of unnecessary energy as we have moved from owning physical objects to digital copies of the same thing. For example music, video, etc. Before 2000 you only needed electricity to play content not store it. This question is : did the production of a vinyl record / cd use more electricity than a lifetime of storage of its modern day digital equivalent? Given the absence of scarcity of digital music I would hazard a guess that the number of people that can own a spotify track vs the physical track is so much greater that the energy requirements are exponentially larger.

extra88 5y ago
> did the production of a vinyl record / cd use more electricity than a lifetime of storage of its modern day digital equivalent? Replace “electricity” with “energy” and yes, the manufacturing and distribution of physical media likely does exceed that required for digital only over a lifetime. The details vary, storing and playing files on your phone is more efficient than doing so from a magnetic drive in a desktop computer and more than streaming it over the Internet on every play.
- dougSF70 5y ago
  On a per song basis you are probably correct but on a total volume basis, more people have the opportunity to download and store their own copy of [insert album] vs the limited pressing of the actual physical copy of the album/cd. Per song the lifetime energy costs are lower but with a higher installed base , is it marginal?